D&D General Joe Manganiello: Compares Early 5E to BG 3 . How Important is Lore?

[Remathilis]

While I agree with your broader point...anyone who tried to change that part would be a verifiable lunatic, since iambic pentameter is still how English functions verbally.

It mimics English speech closely, but there are other meters that can be used. Which is why poetry can sound funny.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Dragonlance is a setting for the D&D game. It is not an independent IP that has been adapted to use the D&D system. (such as Star Wars using the Storyteller system). As a supplement to D&D, the setting supports the game, not vice versa.

If you say so.

 

[Remathilis]

If you say so.

No one would expect that a 5e D&D supplement would adhere to dwarves having class restrictions or level limits. We wouldn't demand that monsters have upwards and downward scaling ACs. We assume a modern sourcebook would adhere to the modern version of the rules. Why is a setting supplement any different?

 

[Parmandur]

It mimics English speech closely, but there are other meters that can be used. Which is why poetry can sound funny.

Iambic blank verse (without rhymes, as Shakespeare usually did) sounds smooth and natural, actually: Iamibc rythem is normal to everyday speech, though obviously we don't speak in lines per se: normal speech is usually more Iambic trimeter or tetrametee, but non-Iambic speech sounds clunky.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No one would expect that a 5e D&D supplement would adhere to dwarves having class restrictions or level limits. We wouldn't demand that monsters have upwards and downward scaling ACs. We assume a modern sourcebook would adhere to the modern version of the rules. Why is a setting supplement any different?

Lore should set the tune for rules IMO. When lore has nothing to say on a subject, feel free to be creative. If that's too restrictive for you, make a new setting with new lore that fits whatever rules you want to use.

I'm not budging on this.

 

[Remathilis]

Lore should set the tune for rules IMO. When lore has nothing to say on a subject, feel free to be creative. If that's too restrictive for you, make a new setting with new lore that fits whatever rules you want to use.

I'm not budging on this.

The issue of course is most people take silence as a pocket veto. For example, no version of Greyhawk has ever used the word "Dragonborn" in it, but that hasn't stopped grognards from screaming until they are hoarse that dragonborn should not exist on Oerth. Further, when the IS updated later to include new elements (3e Athas brought in psionic races like elan and dromite, 4e brought in tieflings and genasi) people again scream that it doesn't count because it wasn't done in 1994, it doesn't count.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The issue of course is most people take silence as a pocket veto. For example, no version of Greyhawk has ever used the word "Dragonborn" in it, but that hasn't stopped grognards from screaming until they are hoarse that dragonborn should not exist on Oerth. Further, when the IS updated later to include new elements (3e Athas brought in psionic races like elan and dromite, 4e brought in tieflings and genasi) people again scream that it doesn't count because it wasn't done in 1994, it doesn't count.

To me it matters how it's done. Does the new stuff interfere with the history, or the geography? Does its presence run contrary to the setting's themes? If not I don't see an issue with it.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Really the first apparition of the dragonborns as PC specie was in "Races of Dragon", whose origin was humanoids from different races chosen by Bahamut as his new champions against Tiamat. And 3rd sourcebooks were set in Greyhawk.

The settings some times need some "retcons" to can "update" to allow space for new crunch elements as new classes and PC species.

Now WotC would rather to avoid risks, and they only publish something to can unlock in the DMGuild. Like this they avoid troubles about what is coherent with the previous continuity.

 

[TheSword]

And the ease of remakes which are usually worst, are coming at the cost of originality. Write new stories for the 'modern sensibilities' and let the legacies stay what they were. Theres so much available now that every single old thing redone feels like a cash grab.

So I think this is pretty controversial thing to say.

• The Temple of Elemental Evil was never set in the realms before so isn’t invalidating anything.
• The Tomb of Horrors was never set in the realms before and ToA is an entirely new layout and setup
• Curse of Strahd has nothing to do with the realms (and is pretty damn amazing)
• Ghosts of Saltmarsh has nothing to do with the realms.

Everything else is original. How on earth are reprints cash grabs or lacking originality? Curse of Strahd, Saltmarsh, and Tomb of Horrors are the best campaigns I’ve played in for 5e. They dramatically expand the original adventure and bring it up to date. I couldn’t face a re-run of Elemental Evil because the 3e one was so mentally scarring. Some things need a reprint!

 

[Zardnaar]

So I think this is pretty controversial thing to say.

• The Temple of Elemental Evil was never set in the realms before so isn’t invalidating anything.
• The Tomb of Horrors was never set in the realms before and ToA is an entirely new layout and setup
• Curse of Strahd has nothing to do with the realms (and is pretty damn amazing)
• Ghosts of Saltmarsh has nothing to do with the realms.

Everything else is original. How on earth are reprints cash grabs or lacking originality? Curse of Strahd, Saltmarsh, and Tomb of Horrors are the best campaigns I’ve played in for 5e. They dramatically expand the original adventure and bring it up to date. I couldn’t face a re-run of Elemental Evil because the 3e one was so mentally scarring. Some things need a reprint!

I think it's more how things are updated vs update or not.

I don't expect races for example to follow racial restrictions from back in the day.

But one shouldn't drop a Dwarven magocracy into Greyhawk either. Haven't seen a Dwarf wizard in 24 years anyway.