Talk:Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings
|WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
- 1 Articles merged
- 2 Points of Light
- 3 Ghostwalk
- 4 Non-Official Settings
- 5 Ravenloft
- 6 Al-Qadim
- 7 Warcraft RPG
- 8 Kingdoms of Kalamar
- 9 Topic cleanup and reevaluation
- 10 Formatting
- 11 Points of Light
- 12 Mystara category
- 13 Supported/Unsupported Campaign Settings
- 14 Conan & Historical
- 15 Nentir Vale/points of light
- 16 Blackmoor
- 17 Merger proposal 1
- 18 Merger proposal 2
- 19 Orphaned references in Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings
- Article merged: See old talk-page for Council of Wyrms here. -Drilnoth (talk) 22:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Article merged: See old talk-page for Jakandor here. -Drilnoth (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Article merged: See old talk-page for Hollow World here. -Drilnoth (talk) 22:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Article merged: See old talk-page for Pelinore here. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Article merged: See old talk-page for Savage Coast here. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Points of Light
-Moved to bottom of page; things at the top of the page are usually older-
There's no publisher details listed for Ghostwalk and there's a disproportionately large amount of detail compared to the other entries. If someone agrees me with, can it be pruned back and citations added?DustFormsWords (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Two months later and no dissent, I've gone ahead and made the edit. The section's been brutally trimmed. Revert if you feel it's necessary but what would be better is for someone who knows the setting to add publisher info, notability, and some citations, please. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to add a list of non-offical campaign setting that are designed for use with D&D, would anyone like to help? Avador 20:54, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- If you're thinking of adding fanmade settings, I would suggest only listing notable publisdhed settings. -Sean Curtin 04:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well I was actually thinking of notable 3rd party settings like Scarred Lands, or Lone Wolf. Avador 22:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- wasn't scarred lands under the OGL and, therefore official?
- No. The "OGL" (Open Game Licence) is a licence which allows publishers to use the System Resource Document. Using this licence does not make a product a Dungeons and Dragons campaign setting. The same applies to the d20STL, which is a licence that allows you to put the "d20 System" logo on a product. This trademark indicates compatibility with the d20 System (and therefore D&D), but does not make a campaign setting a D&D setting.
- This stuff needs to be removed from this article and put into a separate d20 System article. Big Mac 21:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Ranveloft was not liciensed to White Wolf, it was liciensed to Arthaus Games, which has all of its works published under White Wolf's Sword & Soccery Label. The article should refelct this fact. Avador 17:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Unlike Kara-Tur and Maztica, Al-Qadim was not published under the Forgotten Realms label. So while Zakhara is located on Toril, shouldn't Al-Qadim be listed as its own campaign setting? If the argument is made that it's on the same world, then one could also try to argue that all settings should be listed as sub-settings of Planescape, which doesn't strike me as appropriate. But what do others think?
Please sign your comments. My personal view would be to group all of the campaigns on particular worlds, so I would put Al-Qadim with Forgotten Realms. It is a separate setting, but is partly based on the Forgotten Realms setting. As for the Planescape comments, I think that Planescape and Spelljammer are both special cases. Big Mac 21:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The original Warcraft RPG has the Dungeons & Dragons logo, though the revised World of Warcraft edition doesn't. I reckon that makes Warcraft a proper D&D setting, at least as good as KoK. Any opinions? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/1588460711/ref=dp_image_0/104-3146894-8595951?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
- Agreed - I don't see the harm in a heading, a brief mention of this fact, and then a link to the Warcraft page. DustFormsWords (talk) 07:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Kingdoms of Kalamar
Kalamar wasn't/isn't released under the OGL as the article implies, but is an official lisenced product released with the D&D logo. The section should be updated to reflect this. --Huyderman 22:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Topic cleanup and reevaluation
First of all, the readability of the article is very low due to the clattered look it has.
Furthermore, a more concise listing should be made.
Finally, how on Earth is "Masque of the Red Death" a high magic setting? -- RaspK FOG 19:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
At this time there is some formatting inconsistencies in the article; I plan to fix these within the next few days, although if anyone else wants to merge the shorter setting articles into this one first, please feel free to. -Drilnoth (talk) 20:39, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Points of Light
I raised this issue on the WP: Wikiproject Dungeons and Dragons talk page, but this actually seems like the best place for it now. Points of Light is the official core campaign setting of 4th edition, and therefor merits a fair bit of coverage in my opinion. it of course doesn't have 1/100th the extant content of Greyhawk, but it is an interesting concept that has required a fair bit of explanation (to my surprise) even to people i have met who are seemingly quite familiar with roleplaying games and world-design. should i add a section here about it? it would really just be on the essentially vague and indeterminate nature of the campaign setting, what few elements of it ARE spelled out in the core rulebooks, and what various features it takes from eberron, greyhawk, the forgotten realms, and as of this month, ravenloft. What makes a man turn neutral? (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- You can, or I can put something in once I'm done with the merging in a little while. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've added a section; feel free to expand and modify it as you see fit. -Drilnoth (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
This article has been put into the Mystara category, but not categories for any of the other campaign settings. It should really either be in categories for every setting or the Mystara category should be pulled. I'm not sure which of the two options would be the most appropriate thing to do. Big Mac (talk) 23:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- Since this is now the primary source for Hollow World and Savage Coast information on Wikipedia, it makes sense to have the Mystara category on this article. I'm not sure about the other campaign settings. If this article contains important information not presented on each setting's own page, then presumably we need the category label for that world.
- Confusing, I know, but this is what happens when minor sub-settings are confined to this main page. Thorf (talk) 04:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Supported/Unsupported Campaign Settings
I added a blurb in each section stating if the campaign setting is currently supported. I think this is kind of clunky, so would any object to me (or others) reordering the format like this?
- Currently Supported Campaign Settings
- Unsupported Campaign Settings
The above format could also be used to include companies/settings other than TSR/WOC, such as Judges Guild's City State of the Invincible Overlord and others. Comments anyone? Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think it's necessary to reorder the campaign settings by whatever is currently going on, nor is it necessary to state "this is no longer being supported" in every such case. However, I do think it's worth noting which ones are being currently supported, either by a single blurb in the article lead, or a note under each one like you have now. I think the list should stay in alphabetical order, although I don't object to you separating the non-TSR/WotC settings into an "other publishers" section for example. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, then, when I get a chance, I'll simply add two new sections; one for TSR/WOC settings, and one for "other". Thanks for the input. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 23:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I understood. I thought about making the distinction in this article, but decided against it since, given how Underdark came to be, it would take up too much space. So, maybe I'll add it to the actual article on Underdark (if it's not already there) when I get a chance. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 05:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Conan & Historical
I recall reading somewhere about official TSR Conan supplements for AD&D. Also I remember some books describing historicals settings for AD&D (e.g. Celts, Crusades...) anybody got any info on those? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DNEP (talk • contribs) 18:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- You are correct on both counts! For Conan, there was a series of modules such as Conan Against Darkness!, Conan the Buccaneer, Conan the Mercenary, Conan Triumphant, and Conan Unchained!. There was a series of historical-based sourcebooks, but unfortunately I don't have the time to look them up at the moment. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Nentir Vale/points of light
Isn't the Nentir Vale just a portion of the new default setting? Most of the books use the term "points of light" (usually unofficially) or even just "Dungeons & Dragons".--Ragestorm (talk) 02:08, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The OD&D Blackmoor supplement could arguably be for it's own world or one shared with Greyhawk. There was a Blackmoor release by the orginal author through a non-TSR publisher (as part of the Judge's Guild setting) and then as part of Mystara. That's three different ways it was presented. Now it exists on it's own as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Merger proposal 1
I propose that Hollow World Campaign Set be merged into Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Hollow World. It seems like the article was created back in 2010. However, there had been a previous move regarding merging for the now redirect Hollow World back in 2008; all article information was moved from Hollow World to Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Hollow World, making Hollow World a redirect to Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Hollow World. For this reasoning, I believe this merge should happen. Steel1943 (talk) 08:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- That article is more of a description of the boxed set's contents than of the actual campaign setting, so I am unsure that it should be merged here. We do have one solid indpendent source but there don't appear to be any reviews so I am neutral on this one; I will trust your judgment. Do try to retain the image if you do merge. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose and counter proposal of dermerge: The Hollow World, that got merged into the Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings article was a stub that should have been expanded. Merging it was a mistake, IMO, as it has helped to make an already long Dungeons & Dragons campaign setting article even longer. It would have been better if the Hollow World Campaign Set article was merged into the Hollow World article, so that things were more logical. If that was done, there could be a larger Hollow World article that explains more about the campaign setting, without the Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings article getting made to be any longer than it already is. Restoring that Hollow World page, pulling any other Hollow World content into it and then shortening this page would make for a better experience for readers. Big Mac (talk) 03:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Merger proposal 2
I propose that The Savage Coast be merged into Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Savage Coast. It seems like the article was created back in 2010. However, there had been a previous move regarding merging for the now redirect Savage Coast back in 2008; all article information was moved from Savage Coast to Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Savage Coast, making Savage Coast a redirect to Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings#Savage Coast. For this reasoning, I believe this merge should happen. Steel1943 (talk) 08:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- I have to oppose this one because that article is about an adventure module, not a sourcebook about the (much later) Savage Coast setting. If it was going to be merged anywhere at all, it should not be merged here. 17:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose and counter proposal of creation of an article about the Savage Coast/Red Steel Campaign Setting: The Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings article is getting too long. It would be better if campaign settings that have more than one product could get their own articles, so that the content here could be transferred elsewhere and the sections here can then be made into a shorter summary of the setting (or even just a Further information line that links to the main article. Big Mac (talk) 03:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "mackay2001":
- From Dungeons & Dragons in popular culture: Mackay, Daniel (2001), The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New Performing Art, Jefferson, N.C: McFarland, pp. 18–19, ISBN 0-7864-0815-4.
- From Forgotten Realms: Mackay, Daniel (2001). The fantasy role-playing game: a new performing art. McFarland. p. 6. ISBN 0-7864-0815-4.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC)