I am starting this in the early Winter of 2025, but I suspect it will take me a bit to finish it. I want to set up some reasons why the newest edition of Dungeons & Dragons, called the 2024 Edition by Wizards of the Coast and the 5.5 edition by me really needs it's own new campaign world.
I have spent most of this year talking about how you can, and maybe should, try out other games besides D&D 5.5. But I get why many would not.
Today I want to take a different track. That D&D 5.5 (2024 edition) should have it's own game world and embrace the changes they have made.
D&D is Becoming Creatively Stagnant
Let’s face it. Wizards keeps returning to the same old wells: the Sword Coast, Ravenloft, Planescape, Greyhawk. Some of it’s great, a lot of it, even. But the nostalgia engine is starting to sputter. At what point does reverence for the past become a chokehold on the future?
Look, I get it. There is 50 years' worth of lore and backstory and things people can do in D&D that rest on what has come before. It would be foolish to think D&D would abandon all of that. That would be the same as DC saying they are rolling out a new comic line that has nothing to do with Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
But. The overreliance on nostalgia is becoming creatively thin, if not stagnant. I can buy into Iggwilv saying the hell with it all and running off to hide in Feywild. I get that. I can sorta see Bigby being transformed into a gnome or whatever. Hey, the world is weird and weird things happen. Though would it not be better to just make a new gnome character? I don't know.
I will say this by way of example. A while back, I had a 20-something explain to me who Kas was and his importance to Vecna's lore. Instead of being a dick and saying shit like "don't quote the deep magic to me..." I just let them be excited and share something that was obviously new and exciting for them. Maybe that is why we keep going back to the Keep, the Sword Coast, and Wild Space.
Sure, it’s fun to reimagine Bigby or retcon Kas and Vecna’s ancient grudge. And I love that new fans are discovering these stories and making them their own; that’s part of the magic. But do we really need to keep dragging the same characters through the multiverse like Weekend at Bernie’s NPCs?
Where’s the creative risk? The bold new mythology? The chance to start over without decades of canon stacked like bricks around the game?
The Grogs who loved those settings will puff out their chests (and then cough a lot because, well, we are getting up there aren't we) and loudly proclaim they don't buy "WotC D&D." Fine. Then D&D should be made for the people who do buy it.
A new setting, unburdened by layers of TSR-era geopolitics and decades of novels, would give writers, designers, and players room to breathe.
Human-centric is No Longer the Norm
When D&D began, the assumption was largely a human-centric worldview with some elves, dwarves, and maybe some halflings thrown in. Each edition expanded the selection of species choice. This has largely been a benefit to the game since people can play what they want. But, many of these new options are not well mapped onto the worlds in use. The Forgotten Realms has made some strides to explain why there are dragonborn and tieflings and for the most part that works for me. But it is harder to see all of these folk in, say, Greyhawk. Interestingly enough, this is exactly the sort of thing I feel Mystara does well.
D&D’s playable species have exploded since 1974. We now have playable angels, rabbitfolk, genasi, tieflings, dragonborn, and more. The world of the player is no longer a human one with some elves and dwarves in the margins. It’s a multicultural multiverse and that is a good thing.
And yet, the game keeps returning to campaign worlds built for that older paradigm.
I am playing a my first ever tiefling in Baldur's Gate 3 now. It is interesting. There are dialog choices that were not there before, most around "will I be accepted as a tiefling?" Larian Studios at least gets some of the issue with adding some new species in lands with a ton of lore that doesn't include them. But again, maybe the Forgotten Realms was just better at this than say Greyhawk.
A new setting could make this diversity the foundation, not the patch job.
Look how Star Wars does it. Aliens everywhere and each one is more interesting than the last. In movies and TV shows, humans are cheaper to do obviously (no CGI or makeup) but RPGs should not have that limitation.
D&D 5.5 is Brighter than Previous Editions, And Its World Should Be, Too
The tone of the game is more hopeful. You are not really murder hobos, you are heroes. The art is brighter, too. The world is more escapist fantasy where the Grim Dark is now found in the Non-fiction and Current Events sections of the library.
Characters aren’t just delvers of dungeons or looters of crypts, they’re agents of change, defenders of ideals, aspirants to legend.
You can see it in the art. It’s vibrant, inclusive, and dynamic. You can see it in the rules, as well with an emphasis on collaboration, character backstory, and narrative arcs.
But many of the older campaign settings were built on a darker foundation. Political cynicism, gritty realism, moral ambiguity. That’s great for some stories. But it’s not the dominant tone of 5.5.
I am running an AD&D 1st Ed game on Tuesday nights set in the Forgotten Realms. I mentioned that at the time of the game's writing (1987 CE) and the time I am setting it in (1357 DR) that there were not a lot of the species running around. I said I wanted to keep the spirit of the original rules for this. I compromised and allowed a "good" Drow and a Kitsune. This is what the new players want and why should anyone tell them no?
Let’s give this new era a world that fits its heart and implied vision.
A New Setting Would Be a Statement
The release of a new setting wouldn’t just be a product; it would be a signal. A declaration that this isn’t just another iteration of D&D. That D&D is evolving and ready to explore new myths, new cultures, and new stories, in new ways. Yeah, if you want, you can still go out and commit orc ethnic cleansing if that is your desire. I'll point out that you should stick to the older editions because, honestly, they do that better than the current one.
It wouldn’t negate the old settings. Greyhawk will always be there. So will Eberron and Mystara and the Realms. But just like 3e had Eberron, 4e had the Nentir Vale, and even 2e had Birthright, 5.5 deserves a world it can own.
Something new. Something bright. A place where all these design choices of the last 15 years can come home and say "this is our world."
I’m not saying Wizards must make a new setting to make 5.5 a success. But if they want to inspire a new generation the way Greyhawk inspired Gygax’s table or the Realms inspired Ed Greenwood’s then they might consider lighting a new torch instead of holding onto the old ones.
Next time I'll talk about what this would could be.
