D&D 5E The Writing Style and Tone of 5E

Mark CMG · Jan 15, 2012

Obviously, the individual designers of 5E each have their own style of writing but with this interest in honoring or being inclusive of all past editions of the game, what sort of writing style and tone might we see with a 5E?

(No poll, just have at it!)

Traken · Jan 15, 2012

Why have only one writing style? To be all-inclusive, the rulebooks must be translated into all the writing styles.

JamesonCourage · Jan 15, 2012

I'd suggest something without much feel to it, honestly. Something a little warmer than clinical. That is, I don't think infusing the books with much feel will capture the "inclusiveness" motif that they're going for very well. It doesn't need to be all numbers and mechanics. It shouldn't be. But the material they do have should be varied in style, and should be sparing, in my opinion. Maybe a little flavor at the beginning of each chapter, or fairly heavy in optional mods you can switch on or off, to help capture the feel of those mods.

My RPG is pretty toolkit, and is presented with "you get this ability, as long as it makes sense." That means you fill in the flavor (think Mutants and Masterminds 2e). You get an entangling power and attach it to your spider silk power, obviously it's because it's sticky; if you get it while you're in natural undergrowth, it's because plants are grabbing at someone's ankles.

If the new edition of D&D is going to be as inclusive as possible, I think that it shouldn't be infused with any particular feel to it, other than generic fantasy. That way, the reader can "fill in the blanks" that are left in his imagination with his/her ideal version of the game. As always, play what you like

rounser · Jan 15, 2012

Please no more purple prose of this type:

My ways are of darkness, rogue. If you knew that, you might still be alive in your next breath, but for the shadow of my blade. - Drebbin Drax, Endarkenator

...as an intro to the new Endarkenator class. It started in 3E, and it's just awful.

Also no more Razorfang Stormcallers or Spellblight Graveborn and the like for naming monsters, please.

Bringing back the unpatronising tone of AD&D 1E, which treated players like equals and co-conspirators couldn't hurt either.

McTreble · Jan 15, 2012

I'd like to see the opposite, actually. Real evocative language designed to capture a feel of adventure. Mordenkeinen's Emporium vs. the AV boooks. I was just flipping through the 2e Player's Hanbook, and that stuff just popped off the page, inviting me to dive in and... adventure. 1e stuff is even better in that regard. The cold mechanical language in early 4e was part of what kept (drove) people away. I don't see it returning in any comparable way.

mmadsen · Jan 15, 2012

rounser said:
Please no more purple prose of this type: [...]
Bringing back the unpatronising tone of AD&D 1E, which treated players like equals and co-conspirators couldn't hurt either.

McTreble said:
I'd like to see the opposite, actually. Real evocative language designed to capture a feel of adventure.

I suppose the real problem is bad evocative language that doesn't really match what it's describing, like many of the "colorful" explanations of 4E's powers.

Mallus · Jan 15, 2012

I'm not sure I'd want the tone of the 5e rules to go "Full Gygax", but I want personality, humor, lightness, and yes, even a few healthy dollops of purple prose, undercut with the humor I mentioned.

These things are as "core" to D&D as AC (can you tell I started w/AD&D?).

keterys · Jan 15, 2012

I'd kinda like 3 styles... fun evocative prosey jump in and play style for the intro/basic stuff, more cooperative/serious here's how we're building the game style for the expected/advanced rules options...

And just flat technical for the most advanced optional rules element, so there is the least confusion.

Mustrum_Ridcully · Jan 15, 2012

I want some evocative, flavorful text introducing the implied fantasy world.
I want a very clear and precise language in the rules section. Don't get too flowery. Maybe take all the rules text and put it in a separate booklet, and put these rule sections also between the "flowery" text. I don't want the rulebook to read like an instruction manual or field handbook, until I am "in the field" (the game table) and need instruction.