I think the Magic settings usually are less fully-forested [typo, but I'm leaving it because of the pun] adventure settings, and more convincing facades. I mean, that's all they need to be -- why develop things you don't need? The world design teams aren't thinking "what's the Ulvenwald like," and creating lore for the Ulvenwalde that they can then design their cards around. They're writing "Ulvenwald - Green cards?" on a chalkboard along with 50 other fake words that sound right for the setting, and then they're slapping those on cards that don't already have better names. We have a green hydra, what do we call it? Look at the chalkboard, Gary. Ulvenwald Hydra!
It works great for Magic, but I'm not sure it's as simple as just "reuse the creative work for D&D," because in reality most of that work is surface-level.
Yurei describes a truly inspired vision of the possible future. I wonder if she's aware that duel disks are a Yu-Gi-Oh thing, and a stack of land cards is... Flesh and Blood? Not sure. That sounds hilarious though. They'd have to do a lot of culture work to get D&D players to be as anti-proxy as Magic players are, though -- D&D isn't a tournament game, so there's no means of ensuring players only use officially printed material, and that's very much by design. They can't lock content behind collectibles. The internet would just collate the rules into a digital document.
To be honest, I prefer as fleshed out settings as possible. I can always chuck out what I don't like. It's always much easier to get rid of something than to invent it.
If grognards don't like what I do? They can get their own table and do what they like, if they don't understand the point of it being a game and not a film.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm willing to say that even if one considers the M:tG deluge of half-random nonsense to be a fountain of awesome worldbuilding rather than a firehose of half-baked crap? Making the decision to turn D&D into M:tG - to turn all PCs into Planeswalkers, given them duel discs and a stack of land cards, sell new book content as "Bookster packs" where you might get one or two of the new class features for that subclass that released three months ago but which you still haven't collected all the features of yet so you can play it despite spending four hundred dollars on bookster packs - I would stop playing in this system pretty much on the spot. I'm not sure I can think of a single decision that would burn me on the property faster than turning it into just another M:tG gimmick. Just...no thank you, please and kindly.
Wow, thats the most bad-faith reply i ever heard. But this was expected.
You realize that the setting info and the MTG gameplay element are not related in any of the content for MtG settings yet? No colored mana, no planeswalking. Just information about cool planes, cool monsters, and a dive deep into not yet looked into mechanics.
And wasn't it said earlier that forgotten realms is too detailed? MtG settings are detailed in a narrow scope, sure, but having the rest open to DM interpretation is great. Take ravnica, you get a lot of info about all the important bits, and one of the many districts. And the rest of the plane is what you want.
If you need handholding and informations on EVERYTHING in making your own adventures in the setting, DMming might not be for you outside of running prewritten adventures
Besides that, I almost entirely agree with Yurei. The main point where I don't is the appreciation for gimmick.
As a former Magic-adict, I'm pretty confident in saying that Mtg is all gimmick in D&D, but there's value in it. Not in planeswalking, not in deck building, nor even the colours of mana, but in the settings. Mtg is huge and it provides the most famous game-world setting to match that flavour.
Excuse me while I stumble through this simile, but the generic fantasy world is like a potato chip. Tons of other companies make Potato Chips, but Wizards of the Coast's Dungeons & Dragons are "Lay's Classic Potato Chips". Pathfinder might be Zapp's, and other companies are Jay's, Cape Cod, and Boulder Canyon (if you don't know who those companies are, then you're proving my point). Theros is the "Lay's Barbecue Chips" of Greek settings. Amonkhet is the most recognizable Egyptian Flavour. Ixalan the most recognizable Columbian Era Meso-American flavour. Ravenloft is the best horror Georgian to Victorian-Period flavour, based upon which adventure you play.
I see no issue in making subclasses based around the colours of mana (like Pyromancer from Kaladesh). My point however is that they should treat Mtg as a setting gimmick. Not a full-blown adventure (Stryxhaven), but just a funny flavour for D&D.
Video game settings are fun too if you're willing to butcher mechanics and flavor the hell out of everything.
Even without going to the Kirkbridian fanfic ends of the setting, there's still lots of fun to be had in Tamriel. Only downside is that the only 3rd party conversion I know honestly kinda sucks. But I'm sure you could substitute classic TES monsters for a generic MM entry -- e.g. Erinyes without flight = Dark Seducers, wight = draugr, et cetera.
Skyrim's gravest sin (other than simply being a crappy game) was convincing people that Tamriel was some generic cookie-cutter western fantasy world.
I think the Magic settings usually are less fully-forested [typo, but I'm leaving it because of the pun] adventure settings, and more convincing facades. I mean, that's all they need to be -- why develop things you don't need? The world design teams aren't thinking "what's the Ulvenwald like," and creating lore for the Ulvenwalde that they can then design their cards around. They're writing "Ulvenwald - Green cards?" on a chalkboard along with 50 other fake words that sound right for the setting, and then they're slapping those on cards that don't already have better names. We have a green hydra, what do we call it? Look at the chalkboard, Gary. Ulvenwald Hydra!
It works great for Magic, but I'm not sure it's as simple as just "reuse the creative work for D&D," because in reality most of that work is surface-level.
Yurei describes a truly inspired vision of the possible future. I wonder if she's aware that duel disks are a Yu-Gi-Oh thing, and a stack of land cards is... Flesh and Blood? Not sure. That sounds hilarious though. They'd have to do a lot of culture work to get D&D players to be as anti-proxy as Magic players are, though -- D&D isn't a tournament game, so there's no means of ensuring players only use officially printed material, and that's very much by design. They can't lock content behind collectibles. The internet would just collate the rules into a digital document.
To be honest, I prefer as fleshed out settings as possible. I can always chuck out what I don't like. It's always much easier to get rid of something than to invent it.
If grognards don't like what I do? They can get their own table and do what they like, if they don't understand the point of it being a game and not a film.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Wow, thats the most bad-faith reply i ever heard. But this was expected.
You realize that the setting info and the MTG gameplay element are not related in any of the content for MtG settings yet? No colored mana, no planeswalking. Just information about cool planes, cool monsters, and a dive deep into not yet looked into mechanics.
And wasn't it said earlier that forgotten realms is too detailed? MtG settings are detailed in a narrow scope, sure, but having the rest open to DM interpretation is great. Take ravnica, you get a lot of info about all the important bits, and one of the many districts. And the rest of the plane is what you want.
If you need handholding and informations on EVERYTHING in making your own adventures in the setting, DMming might not be for you outside of running prewritten adventures
I should look into Birthright.
Besides that, I almost entirely agree with Yurei. The main point where I don't is the appreciation for gimmick.
As a former Magic-adict, I'm pretty confident in saying that Mtg is all gimmick in D&D, but there's value in it. Not in planeswalking, not in deck building, nor even the colours of mana, but in the settings. Mtg is huge and it provides the most famous game-world setting to match that flavour.
Excuse me while I stumble through this simile, but the generic fantasy world is like a potato chip. Tons of other companies make Potato Chips, but Wizards of the Coast's Dungeons & Dragons are "Lay's Classic Potato Chips". Pathfinder might be Zapp's, and other companies are Jay's, Cape Cod, and Boulder Canyon (if you don't know who those companies are, then you're proving my point). Theros is the "Lay's Barbecue Chips" of Greek settings. Amonkhet is the most recognizable Egyptian Flavour. Ixalan the most recognizable Columbian Era Meso-American flavour. Ravenloft is the best horror Georgian to Victorian-Period flavour, based upon which adventure you play.
I see no issue in making subclasses based around the colours of mana (like Pyromancer from Kaladesh). My point however is that they should treat Mtg as a setting gimmick. Not a full-blown adventure (Stryxhaven), but just a funny flavour for D&D.
Video game settings are fun too if you're willing to butcher mechanics and flavor the hell out of everything.
Even without going to the Kirkbridian fanfic ends of the setting, there's still lots of fun to be had in Tamriel. Only downside is that the only 3rd party conversion I know honestly kinda sucks. But I'm sure you could substitute classic TES monsters for a generic MM entry -- e.g. Erinyes without flight = Dark Seducers, wight = draugr, et cetera.
Skyrim's gravest sin (other than simply being a crappy game) was convincing people that Tamriel was some generic cookie-cutter western fantasy world.