How is there only a single new subclass!?! Especially since the play tested Mystic class and its respective subclasses were scrapped, the variable subclasses from Strixhaven were scrapped, and now Spelljammer won't be including any new subclasses whatsoever. Subclasses are the most substantive aspect of new content, and we've been starved for them for the past few years, subsisting on mere morsels from Theros and Tasha. It definitely feels like Wizards of the Coast has senioritis with respect to Fifth Edition and they're just phoning it in until the Sixth Edition comes out.
There's three subclasses (Barbarian, Druid, and Wizard) in the Giant UA, and a Sorc (lunar somethingorother) in the Dragonlance one. I don't exactly think we're starved for them. Plus, you seem to have completely forgotten the two from Van Richten and the two from Fizban. There's been a pretty steady drip.
I was gone for a week, and a new UA dropped. Nice.
Just took a quick look through.
Yeah, seems like Planescape is confirmed. There's a "not Modron" player race, new Cleric subclass based around fate, the "Planar Gate Warden" and "Planar Philosopher" backrounds, and what look like feat chains for the Planescape Factions. I'm not a fan of the Great Wheel Cosmology (especially 5e's version), but I'm definitely buying whatever book(s) this content is planned for.
The Giant stuff is probably for a different book, hopefully one of the new settings we haven't heard anything about.
Or it could just be another Tasha's-style player options book.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I was gone for a week, and a new UA dropped. Nice.
Just took a quick look through.
Yeah, seems like Planescape is confirmed. There's a "not Modron" player race, new Cleric subclass based around fate, the "Planar Gate Warden" and "Planar Philosopher" backrounds, and what look like feat chains for the Planescape Factions. I'm not a fan of the Great Wheel Cosmology (especially 5e's version), but I'm definitely buying whatever book(s) this content is planned for.
The Giant stuff is probably for a different book, hopefully one of the new settings we haven't heard anything about.
Or it could just be another Tasha's-style player options book.
I don't want Planescape. Because they'll give each plane a single page and stuff in a whole bestiary and make it like the travesty that Spelljammer is going to be when people realise that WotC couldn't fit any setting information in their overpriced splat-book set.
I don't want Planescape. Because they'll give each plane a single page and stuff in a whole bestiary and make it like the travesty that Spelljammer is going to be when people realise that WotC couldn't fit any setting information in their overpriced splat-book set.
Planescape and Spelljammer are very, very different settings and the approach to updating them both to 5th Edition will be very different.
First off, I really don't care if the Spelljammer book has information on Realmspace or the other "spaces" in the setting. 2e Spelljammer never gave much information on playing in those realms, so 5e Spelljammer ignoring them would be on par with previous edition's versions of the setting. Spelljammer is and always has been the "transitory setting", where you travel from one world to another, and exploring the adventures you can find there. It's never tried to explain the worlds of the multiverse, that's for other setting books to do. Expecting 5e Spelljammer to do that is expecting too much of it. All a Spelljammer book needs to do is explain the rules for gonzo space adventures and give some examples, not simultaneously also be the campaign setting book for 20+ different planets that have never been covered in the history of D&D before.
Secondly, Planescape usually focused on Sigil and its factions more than it did on the Outer Planes. Sure, a 5e Planescape does need to give some advice on how to do adventures in the various planes of the Great Wheel, which it will do, but it will probably be something more akin to Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft than Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus. (Also, it's way easier and more fun to run an adventure with the factions of Sigil or in the slums of Sigil than it is on the paradise of Mount Celestia or in boring greyness of Hades.)
Third, the Spelljammer bookset really isn't overpriced. It includes a DM screen (which is normally at least $10 on its own), and inflation over the past 8ish years has driven the price required to print a book up a lot. Increases in prices are expected. Blame inflation, not WotC.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I don't want Planescape. Because they'll give each plane a single page and stuff in a whole bestiary and make it like the travesty that Spelljammer is going to be when people realise that WotC couldn't fit any setting information in their overpriced splat-book set.
Planescape and Spelljammer are very, very different settings and the approach to updating them both to 5th Edition will be very different.
First off, I really don't care if the Spelljammer book has information on Realmspace or the other "spaces" in the setting. 2e Spelljammer never gave much information on playing in those realms, so 5e Spelljammer ignoring them would be on par with previous edition's versions of the setting. Spelljammer is and always has been the "transitory setting", where you travel from one world to another, and exploring the adventures you can find there. It's never tried to explain the worlds of the multiverse, that's for other setting books to do. Expecting 5e Spelljammer to do that is expecting too much of it. All a Spelljammer book needs to do is explain the rules for gonzo space adventures and give some examples, not simultaneously also be the campaign setting book for 20+ different planets that have never been covered in the history of D&D before.
Secondly, Planescape usually focused on Sigil and its factions more than it did on the Outer Planes. Sure, a 5e Planescape does need to give some advice on how to do adventures in the various planes of the Great Wheel, which it will do, but it will probably be something more akin to Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft than Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus. (Also, it's way easier and more fun to run an adventure with the factions of Sigil or in the slums of Sigil than it is on the paradise of Mount Celestia or in boring greyness of Hades.)
Third, the Spelljammer bookset really isn't overpriced. It includes a DM screen (which is normally at least $10 on its own), and inflation over the past 8ish years has driven the price required to print a book up a lot. Increases in prices are expected. Blame inflation, not WotC.
I won't argue too heavily, I'll just say that:
1) Inflation is not relevant as far as I see it, considering similarly sized books are printed for much cheaper even today, 2) I'd be thrilled if it was assembled like VRGtR, I just think Planescape will be assembled like Spelljammer instead, and have terrible formatting as well, 3) You're getting less page content than even TCoE from Spelljammer, and the DM Screen and "three books" are actually just lumped in to make the package look worthwhile, while ramping up the price - it is a known marketing ploy. Its both "Inflation" and "Shrinkflation" at the same time - in other words, its almost a grift.
1) Inflation is not relevant as far as I see it, considering similarly sized books are printed for much cheaper even today
Examples? Because if you mean novels, that's a whole different beast. The only really valid comparisons are other TTRPG books. An official D&D book needs art, official playtesting, months of game design, an entire writing/development team that needs to be paid for over a year of work, and much more that would make it more expensive than a novel.
If you mean a Pathfinder book or something like that, I could see how it would be a valid example, but just bringing up "books" in general is really vague and not a good source of comparison.
2) I'd be thrilled if it was assembled like VRGtR, I just think Planescape will be assembled like Spelljammer instead, and have terrible formatting as well,
How? Why? Based on what evidence? Because even though I do think Planescape being split into 3 different small books is likely, I don't see any reason why they couldn't just make one of the smaller books be the "gazetteers" for the different planes in the setting.
And "terrible formatting" is just unfounded speculation. And if the rest of the book was good, it being formatted poorly or split into 3 smaller books seems like a pretty small complaint.
3) You're getting less page content than even TCoE from Spelljammer, and the DM Screen and "three books" are actually just lumped in to make the package look worthwhile, while ramping up the price - it is a known marketing ploy. Its both "Inflation" and "Shrinkflation" at the same time - in other words, its almost a grift.
Uh, no. It's the same amount of pages as Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. Which has the base price of $50. So, same amount of pages, but also with a double-sided poster map, and a DM screen. The main 5e DM screen has the base price of $15.
So, yes, WotC finally decided after 8 years it was a good time to slightly raise the price of their main 5e D&D products because of inflation and the paper shortage caused by the pandemic. That does seem justifiable.
Now, I don't like having to pay more for the product. If I could continue paying the same amount I was before, I would happily go back to that. But prices everywhere are increasing, WotC haven't increased the price of their books in 8 years, and the bookset also includes a DM screen. WotC does need to keep making money in order to keep making the game, so price increases are inevitable and expected, and it not increasing for almost a decade when average prices have gone up 25% in the past 8 years is pretty abnormal.
It's not a grift (or "almost one") because you know what you're buying, you can get your money back if you're not happy with the delivered product (on Amazon, anyway), and price increases are normal.
I can understand wanting the books to be longer or the book set to just be one single book like Eberron or Ravenloft. I want that too. I would love it if every setting book was as long and high quality as Eberron or Wildemount. But you can vote with your wallet, and, to me, the increased cost and disappointing format is a price I'm willing to pay to get official 5e Spelljammer with its amazing art and options at my table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
A lot of that is misreading my meanings, but that's my fault.
Per 1) You've got a point.
Per 2) Based on Ray Winninger's statement that they are ALL in formats we have never seen before. And since Dragonlance is an adventure, I think its not one of the three settings, but rather the one they'll revisit.
Per 3) It's a few pages less as each book probably has a credits page - that's 3x the credits pages of Tasha's. But also, if we just ignore the prices going up - the prices of the other D&D books or the Paizo or other RPG books aren't going up much, so its not a fully valid argument - but why should you HAVE to buy a DMs Screen if you don't need one? As per formatting, one word: Strixhaven.
That being said, I am being extremely pessimistic because that's how my brain works. I'm more than happy for you guys to be excited, I'm merely stating how I'm feeling about it all. They're not mutually exclusive.
I don't want Planescape. Because they'll give each plane a single page and stuff in a whole bestiary and make it like the travesty that Spelljammer is going to be when people realise that WotC couldn't fit any setting information in their overpriced splat-book set.
Planescape and Spelljammer are very, very different settings and the approach to updating them both to 5th Edition will be very different.
First off, I really don't care if the Spelljammer book has information on Realmspace or the other "spaces" in the setting. 2e Spelljammer never gave much information on playing in those realms, so 5e Spelljammer ignoring them would be on par with previous edition's versions of the setting. Spelljammer is and always has been the "transitory setting", where you travel from one world to another, and exploring the adventures you can find there. It's never tried to explain the worlds of the multiverse, that's for other setting books to do. Expecting 5e Spelljammer to do that is expecting too much of it. All a Spelljammer book needs to do is explain the rules for gonzo space adventures and give some examples, not simultaneously also be the campaign setting book for 20+ different planets that have never been covered in the history of D&D before.
Secondly, Planescape usually focused on Sigil and its factions more than it did on the Outer Planes. Sure, a 5e Planescape does need to give some advice on how to do adventures in the various planes of the Great Wheel, which it will do, but it will probably be something more akin to Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft than Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus. (Also, it's way easier and more fun to run an adventure with the factions of Sigil or in the slums of Sigil than it is on the paradise of Mount Celestia or in boring greyness of Hades.)
Third, the Spelljammer bookset really isn't overpriced. It includes a DM screen (which is normally at least $10 on its own), and inflation over the past 8ish years has driven the price required to print a book up a lot. Increases in prices are expected. Blame inflation, not WotC.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't 2e release a book for Greyhawk, Krynn and Toril in the first boxed set? Later on they released the Wildspace boxed set if memory serves. And as 5e is afraid to release setting books apart a starter book...
While it's true that we didn't get more than one book for the settings released in 5e, apart from Exandria, what we did get is enough to at least build a foundation for a multi-world adventure imo.
Exandria used to be third party, WoTC has now gone a step further I think? I don't know really how I would describe it? Approved/preferred Contributor? I know it's official, but I mean in view of what WoTC itself can write about it. But one of the reasons Spelljammer worked was that it linked the three main settings, back in the day. Now we only have one of them in detail. Greyhawk and Dragonlance have nothing but 1 adventure for Greyhawk. Eberon is not connected to the rest of the DnD universe. Ravnica and Theros are MtG settings that are interconnected, but not with the larger DnD settings. And Ravnica's world gate is closed. Ravenloft was normally not linked to the phlogiston, yes they did away with that I know. So how do you see to link all of this together with the material we have now?
While it's true that we didn't get more than one book for the settings released in 5e, apart from Exandria, what we did get is enough to at least build a foundation for a multi-world adventure imo.
Exandria used to be third party, WoTC has now gone a step further I think? I don't know really how I would describe it? Approved/preferred Contributor? I know it's official, but I mean in view of what WoTC itself can write about it. But one of the reasons Spelljammer worked was that it linked the three main settings, back in the day. Now we only have one of them in detail. Greyhawk and Dragonlance have nothing but 1 adventure for Greyhawk. Eberon is not connected to the rest of the DnD universe. Ravnica and Theros are MtG settings that are interconnected, but not with the larger DnD settings. And Ravnica's world gate is closed. Ravenloft was normally not linked to the phlogiston, yes they did away with that I know. So how do you see to link all of this together with the material we have now?
As for the M:tG settings, anywhere the Weatherlight could have gone could be accessed by other Spelljammers.
While it's true that we didn't get more than one book for the settings released in 5e, apart from Exandria, what we did get is enough to at least build a foundation for a multi-world adventure imo.
Exandria used to be third party, WoTC has now gone a step further I think? I don't know really how I would describe it? Approved/preferred Contributor? I know it's official, but I mean in view of what WoTC itself can write about it. But one of the reasons Spelljammer worked was that it linked the three main settings, back in the day. Now we only have one of them in detail. Greyhawk and Dragonlance have nothing but 1 adventure for Greyhawk. Eberon is not connected to the rest of the DnD universe. Ravnica and Theros are MtG settings that are interconnected, but not with the larger DnD settings. And Ravnica's world gate is closed. Ravenloft was normally not linked to the phlogiston, yes they did away with that I know. So how do you see to link all of this together with the material we have now?
As for the M:tG settings, anywhere the Weatherlight could have gone could be accessed by other Spelljammers.
So not Ravnica as MtG says clearly you can't travel there. Theros I'm not that familiar with. This of course if the Weatherlight is a Speljammer. The firdt mention was around Ice Age or Mirage? So that's a lot of worlds. A lot of them are not compatible withD nD as we know it.
Ellywick is expressly NOT A PLANESWALKER in the MtG sense - this was confirmed in an official article for magic way back. Ellywick Tumblestrum and all the other D&D planeswalkers are not true planeswalkers, and MtG and D&D are not and are likely never going to be connected.
Also I have seen Strixhaven mentioned as another D&D-MtG tie - you mean the Strixhaven that the D&D sourcebook gutted, removed all the lore and known characters from, and changed just enough so that Strixhaven could be just any other magic school? No. D&D Strixhaven was not designed to be connected to the set for MtG, its just to fulfil Harry Potter fantasies some players might have. The name "Strixhaven" is mostly just there because WotC wanted a neat bow with which to tie the book to Magic the Gathering, even if any tie between the set and the setting book is almost entirely removed from the book.
So no, as per Official rulings, MtG and D&D are not connected and cannot be travelled through with Spelljammers (there's a reason why the Weatherlight is such a massive part of the lore, guys, if other Spelljammers existed in MtG the ship would be forgettable and useless), however you're the DM. Whether MtG and D&D are connected is your choice - I've even connected Ravenloft to Innistrad before, and it worked fine. Totally it is cool. But if we pressure WotC to make the connection official, suddenly the careful calculations found in MtG and D&D lore will break apart - how on earth did Sorin Markov's dad become the first Vampire in the Multiverse if Strahd was a vampire first? Why on earth did Ellywick Tumblestrum, The literal greatest bard in the multiverse, not help in War of the Spark? Why is the story of Strixhaven so massively warped and confusing? Where was Nicol Bolas actually exiled after War of the Spark, if there is one Spirit plane in MtG, but multiple (Positive Energy Plane, Shadowfell, etc.) in D&D? It wouldn't ever work from an official standpoint or lore standpoint. But from a homebrew one? Its fine.
Tumblestrum is meant to be an enigma to the player characters. In truth, she is a savvy planar traveler who has visited and entertained folks on countless worlds. In some corners of the multiverse, she is what’s known as a Planeswalker—a fiercely independent and extremely powerful entity not to be trifled with.
I have never seen the term "Planeswalker" be used to describe anyone else in 5e, and definitely not in that way. Not Tasha (even as Zybilna), not Mordenkainen, not Zariel, and so on. Only Ellywick has gotten that kind of description so far. I knew the other planeswalkers in the Forgotten Realms sets don't have sparks and had no connection to the Blind Eternities, which is why I didn't mention them.
I will also clarify that I'm not claiming they're trying to merge the D&D and MtG multiverses together. What I am claiming is that they have written setting books for some MtG worlds as D&D settings that leave out just enough details about them to allow them to be used as worlds in their own right. And from that position, they can better fit as worlds you connect to in a Spelljammer campaign. The Ravnica setting book for example doesn't account for the fact that Isperia is now dead as knit, nor it does make mention of Kaya becoming the new leader of the Orzhov guild. It doesn't mention Niv-Mizzet being the new Living Guildpact, nor does it mention anything at all that took place in the War of the Spark. And from what I understand, WoTC plans their products a long time in advance, so they would have known where they were headed with the Ravnica storyline while planning the Ravnica setting book.
I think that the next UAs should begin to outline much more clearly what 5.5 is going to be.
It is true that we are already seeing things in this regard in the last UAs, but I would like something more concrete.
For example, if they are really going to eliminate short rests as has been rumored, I would like to start to see how they are going to solve the problems that this entails (mainly in warlocks, but also in fighters, etc...).
By the way, for the rumored 5.5, do you think they are going to release a renewed PHB? Or will it be in a Tasha's type expansion?
I think that the next UAs should begin to outline much more clearly what 5.5 is going to be.
It is true that we are already seeing things in this regard in the last UAs, but I would like something more concrete.
For example, if they are really going to eliminate short rests as has been rumored, I would like to start to see how they are going to solve the problems that this entails (mainly in warlocks, but also in fighters, etc...).
By the way, for the rumored 5.5, do you think they are going to release a renewed PHB? Or will it be in a Tasha's type expansion?
Revamped PHB, DMG, and MM for 5.5E, but it'll possibly be like how VGtM and MToF were replaced by MP: MotM, in that it serves as a "paid errata" for the current content, rather than replacing it. Basically, the optional class features from TCoE will be added to all classes in place of the features they replace or similar, and the spellcasting, rests, and other rules will change, but WotC will claim "you can still play with 5E Legacy content if you want", despite the fact that nearly everyone will switch to 5.5E over 5E as it is now, because... that's what people do. Even if 5.5E is worse. 4E was a weird exception to the rule, I think. But yeah, 5.5E's core rules will be an alternative set of core rules, using nearly exactly the same mechanics as 5E, but with a few basic changes that could have been done much cheaper for players in a supplemental product like TCoE.
Plus, it's probably going to be 11% more expensive, just 'cause life.
I think that the next UAs should begin to outline much more clearly what 5.5 is going to be.
It is true that we are already seeing things in this regard in the last UAs, but I would like something more concrete.
For example, if they are really going to eliminate short rests as has been rumored, I would like to start to see how they are going to solve the problems that this entails (mainly in warlocks, but also in fighters, etc...).
By the way, for the rumored 5.5, do you think they are going to release a renewed PHB? Or will it be in a Tasha's type expansion?
Revamped PHB, DMG, and MM for 5.5E, but it'll possibly be like how VGtM and MToF were replaced by MP: MotM, in that it serves as a "paid errata" for the current content, rather than replacing it. Basically, the optional class features from TCoE will be added to all classes in place of the features they replace or similar, and the spellcasting, rests, and other rules will change, but WotC will claim "you can still play with 5E Legacy content if you want", despite the fact that nearly everyone will switch to 5.5E over 5E as it is now, because... that's what people do. Even if 5.5E is worse. 4E was a weird exception to the rule, I think. But yeah, 5.5E's core rules will be an alternative set of core rules, using nearly exactly the same mechanics as 5E, but with a few basic changes that could have been done much cheaper for players in a supplemental product like TCoE.
Plus, it's probably going to be 11% more expensive, just 'cause life.
I’ll probably switch over unless the new rules are egregiously bad.
Well, presumably the new rules will be better. They will clarify things, fix others that don't work, etc...
In my experience, AD&D 2.5 improved AD&D 2.0 and D&D 3.5 made D&D 3.0 playable (I'm still amazed that we even played 3.0. I don't know how we managed such a feat).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's three subclasses (Barbarian, Druid, and Wizard) in the Giant UA, and a Sorc (lunar somethingorother) in the Dragonlance one. I don't exactly think we're starved for them. Plus, you seem to have completely forgotten the two from Van Richten and the two from Fizban. There's been a pretty steady drip.
Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, that they didn't stop to think if they should.
I just watched that movie last night.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I was gone for a week, and a new UA dropped. Nice.
Just took a quick look through.
Yeah, seems like Planescape is confirmed. There's a "not Modron" player race, new Cleric subclass based around fate, the "Planar Gate Warden" and "Planar Philosopher" backrounds, and what look like feat chains for the Planescape Factions. I'm not a fan of the Great Wheel Cosmology (especially 5e's version), but I'm definitely buying whatever book(s) this content is planned for.
The Giant stuff is probably for a different book, hopefully one of the new settings we haven't heard anything about.
Or it could just be another Tasha's-style player options book.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I don't want Planescape. Because they'll give each plane a single page and stuff in a whole bestiary and make it like the travesty that Spelljammer is going to be when people realise that WotC couldn't fit any setting information in their overpriced splat-book set.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Planescape and Spelljammer are very, very different settings and the approach to updating them both to 5th Edition will be very different.
First off, I really don't care if the Spelljammer book has information on Realmspace or the other "spaces" in the setting. 2e Spelljammer never gave much information on playing in those realms, so 5e Spelljammer ignoring them would be on par with previous edition's versions of the setting. Spelljammer is and always has been the "transitory setting", where you travel from one world to another, and exploring the adventures you can find there. It's never tried to explain the worlds of the multiverse, that's for other setting books to do. Expecting 5e Spelljammer to do that is expecting too much of it. All a Spelljammer book needs to do is explain the rules for gonzo space adventures and give some examples, not simultaneously also be the campaign setting book for 20+ different planets that have never been covered in the history of D&D before.
Secondly, Planescape usually focused on Sigil and its factions more than it did on the Outer Planes. Sure, a 5e Planescape does need to give some advice on how to do adventures in the various planes of the Great Wheel, which it will do, but it will probably be something more akin to Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft than Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus. (Also, it's way easier and more fun to run an adventure with the factions of Sigil or in the slums of Sigil than it is on the paradise of Mount Celestia or in boring greyness of Hades.)
Third, the Spelljammer bookset really isn't overpriced. It includes a DM screen (which is normally at least $10 on its own), and inflation over the past 8ish years has driven the price required to print a book up a lot. Increases in prices are expected. Blame inflation, not WotC.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I won't argue too heavily, I'll just say that:
1) Inflation is not relevant as far as I see it, considering similarly sized books are printed for much cheaper even today,
2) I'd be thrilled if it was assembled like VRGtR, I just think Planescape will be assembled like Spelljammer instead, and have terrible formatting as well,
3) You're getting less page content than even TCoE from Spelljammer, and the DM Screen and "three books" are actually just lumped in to make the package look worthwhile, while ramping up the price - it is a known marketing ploy. Its both "Inflation" and "Shrinkflation" at the same time - in other words, its almost a grift.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Examples? Because if you mean novels, that's a whole different beast. The only really valid comparisons are other TTRPG books. An official D&D book needs art, official playtesting, months of game design, an entire writing/development team that needs to be paid for over a year of work, and much more that would make it more expensive than a novel.
If you mean a Pathfinder book or something like that, I could see how it would be a valid example, but just bringing up "books" in general is really vague and not a good source of comparison.
How? Why? Based on what evidence? Because even though I do think Planescape being split into 3 different small books is likely, I don't see any reason why they couldn't just make one of the smaller books be the "gazetteers" for the different planes in the setting.
And "terrible formatting" is just unfounded speculation. And if the rest of the book was good, it being formatted poorly or split into 3 smaller books seems like a pretty small complaint.
Uh, no. It's the same amount of pages as Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. Which has the base price of $50. So, same amount of pages, but also with a double-sided poster map, and a DM screen. The main 5e DM screen has the base price of $15.
So, yes, WotC finally decided after 8 years it was a good time to slightly raise the price of their main 5e D&D products because of inflation and the paper shortage caused by the pandemic. That does seem justifiable.
Now, I don't like having to pay more for the product. If I could continue paying the same amount I was before, I would happily go back to that. But prices everywhere are increasing, WotC haven't increased the price of their books in 8 years, and the bookset also includes a DM screen. WotC does need to keep making money in order to keep making the game, so price increases are inevitable and expected, and it not increasing for almost a decade when average prices have gone up 25% in the past 8 years is pretty abnormal.
It's not a grift (or "almost one") because you know what you're buying, you can get your money back if you're not happy with the delivered product (on Amazon, anyway), and price increases are normal.
I can understand wanting the books to be longer or the book set to just be one single book like Eberron or Ravenloft. I want that too. I would love it if every setting book was as long and high quality as Eberron or Wildemount. But you can vote with your wallet, and, to me, the increased cost and disappointing format is a price I'm willing to pay to get official 5e Spelljammer with its amazing art and options at my table.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
A lot of that is misreading my meanings, but that's my fault.
Per 1) You've got a point.
Per 2) Based on Ray Winninger's statement that they are ALL in formats we have never seen before. And since Dragonlance is an adventure, I think its not one of the three settings, but rather the one they'll revisit.
Per 3) It's a few pages less as each book probably has a credits page - that's 3x the credits pages of Tasha's. But also, if we just ignore the prices going up - the prices of the other D&D books or the Paizo or other RPG books aren't going up much, so its not a fully valid argument - but why should you HAVE to buy a DMs Screen if you don't need one? As per formatting, one word: Strixhaven.
That being said, I am being extremely pessimistic because that's how my brain works. I'm more than happy for you guys to be excited, I'm merely stating how I'm feeling about it all. They're not mutually exclusive.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't 2e release a book for Greyhawk, Krynn and Toril in the first boxed set? Later on they released the Wildspace boxed set if memory serves. And as 5e is afraid to release setting books apart a starter book...
Exandria used to be third party, WoTC has now gone a step further I think? I don't know really how I would describe it? Approved/preferred Contributor? I know it's official, but I mean in view of what WoTC itself can write about it. But one of the reasons Spelljammer worked was that it linked the three main settings, back in the day. Now we only have one of them in detail. Greyhawk and Dragonlance have nothing but 1 adventure for Greyhawk. Eberon is not connected to the rest of the DnD universe. Ravnica and Theros are MtG settings that are interconnected, but not with the larger DnD settings. And Ravnica's world gate is closed. Ravenloft was normally not linked to the phlogiston, yes they did away with that I know. So how do you see to link all of this together with the material we have now?
I like all the different settings. I can always homebrew connections between them if I want.
As for the M:tG settings, anywhere the Weatherlight could have gone could be accessed by other Spelljammers.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So not Ravnica as MtG says clearly you can't travel there. Theros I'm not that familiar with. This of course if the Weatherlight is a Speljammer. The firdt mention was around Ice Age or Mirage? So that's a lot of worlds. A lot of them are not compatible withD nD as we know it.
Ellywick is expressly NOT A PLANESWALKER in the MtG sense - this was confirmed in an official article for magic way back. Ellywick Tumblestrum and all the other D&D planeswalkers are not true planeswalkers, and MtG and D&D are not and are likely never going to be connected.
Also I have seen Strixhaven mentioned as another D&D-MtG tie - you mean the Strixhaven that the D&D sourcebook gutted, removed all the lore and known characters from, and changed just enough so that Strixhaven could be just any other magic school? No. D&D Strixhaven was not designed to be connected to the set for MtG, its just to fulfil Harry Potter fantasies some players might have. The name "Strixhaven" is mostly just there because WotC wanted a neat bow with which to tie the book to Magic the Gathering, even if any tie between the set and the setting book is almost entirely removed from the book.
So no, as per Official rulings, MtG and D&D are not connected and cannot be travelled through with Spelljammers (there's a reason why the Weatherlight is such a massive part of the lore, guys, if other Spelljammers existed in MtG the ship would be forgettable and useless), however you're the DM. Whether MtG and D&D are connected is your choice - I've even connected Ravenloft to Innistrad before, and it worked fine. Totally it is cool. But if we pressure WotC to make the connection official, suddenly the careful calculations found in MtG and D&D lore will break apart - how on earth did Sorin Markov's dad become the first Vampire in the Multiverse if Strahd was a vampire first? Why on earth did Ellywick Tumblestrum, The literal greatest bard in the multiverse, not help in War of the Spark? Why is the story of Strixhaven so massively warped and confusing? Where was Nicol Bolas actually exiled after War of the Spark, if there is one Spirit plane in MtG, but multiple (Positive Energy Plane, Shadowfell, etc.) in D&D? It wouldn't ever work from an official standpoint or lore standpoint. But from a homebrew one? Its fine.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Then what is this about:
I have never seen the term "Planeswalker" be used to describe anyone else in 5e, and definitely not in that way. Not Tasha (even as Zybilna), not Mordenkainen, not Zariel, and so on. Only Ellywick has gotten that kind of description so far. I knew the other planeswalkers in the Forgotten Realms sets don't have sparks and had no connection to the Blind Eternities, which is why I didn't mention them.
I will also clarify that I'm not claiming they're trying to merge the D&D and MtG multiverses together. What I am claiming is that they have written setting books for some MtG worlds as D&D settings that leave out just enough details about them to allow them to be used as worlds in their own right. And from that position, they can better fit as worlds you connect to in a Spelljammer campaign. The Ravnica setting book for example doesn't account for the fact that Isperia is now dead as knit, nor it does make mention of Kaya becoming the new leader of the Orzhov guild. It doesn't mention Niv-Mizzet being the new Living Guildpact, nor does it mention anything at all that took place in the War of the Spark. And from what I understand, WoTC plans their products a long time in advance, so they would have known where they were headed with the Ravnica storyline while planning the Ravnica setting book.
I think that the next UAs should begin to outline much more clearly what 5.5 is going to be.
It is true that we are already seeing things in this regard in the last UAs, but I would like something more concrete.
For example, if they are really going to eliminate short rests as has been rumored, I would like to start to see how they are going to solve the problems that this entails (mainly in warlocks, but also in fighters, etc...).
By the way, for the rumored 5.5, do you think they are going to release a renewed PHB? Or will it be in a Tasha's type expansion?
Revamped PHB, DMG, and MM for 5.5E, but it'll possibly be like how VGtM and MToF were replaced by MP: MotM, in that it serves as a "paid errata" for the current content, rather than replacing it. Basically, the optional class features from TCoE will be added to all classes in place of the features they replace or similar, and the spellcasting, rests, and other rules will change, but WotC will claim "you can still play with 5E Legacy content if you want", despite the fact that nearly everyone will switch to 5.5E over 5E as it is now, because... that's what people do. Even if 5.5E is worse. 4E was a weird exception to the rule, I think. But yeah, 5.5E's core rules will be an alternative set of core rules, using nearly exactly the same mechanics as 5E, but with a few basic changes that could have been done much cheaper for players in a supplemental product like TCoE.
Plus, it's probably going to be 11% more expensive, just 'cause life.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
I’ll probably switch over unless the new rules are egregiously bad.
Well, presumably the new rules will be better. They will clarify things, fix others that don't work, etc...
In my experience, AD&D 2.5 improved AD&D 2.0 and D&D 3.5 made D&D 3.0 playable (I'm still amazed that we even played 3.0. I don't know how we managed such a feat).