D&D and the Implied Setting

[Ciaran]

My question wrt Raise Dead is this: How common are 5000 gp diamond? What is a 5000 gp diamonds? If it's a perfect 1 ct diamond there are plenty of them. If it's a 10 ct diamond there is a large but finite supply. If it's a 50 ct diamond there might have been 20-50 in the history of the world.

That only applies to the real world. In your game world, 50 carat diamonds may be sold by the bushel.

 

[Lucias]

Doesn't that depend, more or less completely, on the specific group of player's specific set of expectations?

I agree with your statement, in theory. But it doesn't jive with what I've experienced in practice. People find ways to make a of wide variety of worlds work for D&D. Attribute that to whatever you will; gamer creativity, ignorance, pure mule stubborness.

Take a look at some of campaign worlds described in the Story Hours, created with D&D 3.x. SepII's Wyre, Destan's Valus, my own beloved CITY.

I can see how extrapolating a world out of the ruleset can be enjoyable (thought its not my thing). But you shouldn't overstate the case regarding the difficulty of "shoehorning" all manner of wildly different campaign worlds into some reasonable facsimile of the current D&D rules.

But that's just it, there are problems with shoehorning campaign worlds to work with D&D. Don't get me wrong, the variations on the implied setting are numerous and there is a lot to be explored (look at Dark Sun, Planescape, Birthright), but any setting you use the rules with has to find some way to coexist with the the baggage D&D brings with it.

Sure you can run a very low magic campaign, but you're going to have to ignore CR from printed monsters and rebalance encounters in any published adventure since they're created assuming standard magic. This can be a lot of work and it is certainly not worth the work, in my case, as I have systems that can bend to my will with minium work.

Prime example: A Game of Thrones. You can't emulate the source material well with straight D&D. It just doesn't mesh with the implied setting. That's why it's OGL, the implied setting had to be stripped out and replaced. Same with Conan.

Don't get me wrong. D&D is flexible as long as you don't start breaking the assumptions that are ingrained into the system. There's a lot you can do with D&D but it has to be done within a framework for it to work without problems.

 

[Mercule]

I've managed to crunch and crimp many editions into working with my view of a fantasy setting. 3.x is the hardest to do that with. Hard enough that I am seriously considering using Fantasy Hero for my next "serious" game.

I say "serious" because I'm also quite capable of grabbing an Adventure Path and having some real low-impact fun. But, if I'm going to really try to create my own setting, I want a system that'll work.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

What is a 5000 gp diamonds?

A multitude thereof. It doesn't have to be a single stone to bet the poor bugger back into this incarnation. You can use several small ones.

 

[Fenes]

I do not consider it too much work to refit D&D to low/rare magic. I rarely use published adventures anyway, most of them are far too combat-centric for my campaigns, and even if they were not, I'd have to rework them to make them fit my characters, who rarely are of the "let's go kill stuff for treasure" adventuring nature.

Also, CR is just a guideline, not a strict system. Depending on the party-makeup, you have to adapt monsters too.

 

[Gold Roger]

I've found that it's hard to change the rules to fit a setting, but it's easy to keep the rules and "fake" things to make many settings work. Considering that every D&D world would break down if you applied all PC rules to all NPC's (just consider how many 20th+ level had to be around if everyone could go up to level 20 in one year and how fast economies would break down), it's a simple matter of choosing which rules apply to NPCs.

If you have a grimm and gritty low magic setting, just put up mostly low level demographics, cheat a bit on magic items (giving single items the abilities of many different items), reduce the number of NPC casters and say that certain spells just aren't granted to/affect NPC's (like raise dead). Nothing changes for the PC's, but the world is kept intact.


That being said, I eventually chose to mostly stick to a generic implied setting because I don't have any preconceived notion of fantasy, with the implied setting everyone knows what we are playing and the implied setting makes for the fastest and easiest plug and play game.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Spot on! There is a limited range of worlds you can run in D&D. So you might as well make/pick one that fits with the system. Otherwise, use another system.

Depends on your definition of the "D&D system," I guess. Given the number of house rules and campaign tweaks I had in my 1e/2e games, I feel like most d20 heroic fantasy variants are basically as "D&D" as my previous-edition games were "D&D" games. It's hard for me to see games like Iron Heroes as stand-alones so much as rules variants.

Lucias: Your thoughts reflect a pretty common set of themes discussed on these boards. There certainly appear to be all kinds of approaches; some people house rule around the bits of D&D that conflict with a gritty/sword and sorcery/swashbuckling/Stone Age/etc setting, some people go out and buy a different d20 variant (or even a different game!) that helps them approximate their desired setting more closely, and others craft their setting to fit the mechanics (or use a published setting like Eberron that accomplishes the same).

I agree with Fenes that it's quite easy to run the Realms (or Greyhawk, BTW) with a lower magic quotient than in standard D&D; I too find it more appropriate to juggle all the campaign factors using Iron Heroes than with standard 3e. It keeps the high magic of Netheril, the Southlands, Thay, and so on more mysterious and rarer, and leads to a stronger suspension of disbelief regarding conflicts between the Realms' high-ups.

 

[Evilhalfling]

That's something I've kinda wondered about, the commonality of "Back from the dead" magic. There are 2 spells that might be commonly used to bring back the dead (barring every hamlet having a 17th level cleric) reincarnation and Raise dead.

My question wrt Raise Dead is this: How common are 5000 gp diamond?
What is a 5000 gp diamonds? If it's a perfect 1 ct diamond there are plenty of them.

yes - IMC PCs can get them in any Metropolis (although I have only 2 of theses)
1% chance of any gem being 50% of gem being worth 5k, and 5 of seven gems listed are diamonds. They are nicknamed Lifestones in some circles.

If it's a 10 ct diamond there is a large but finite supply.

This would be the upper end of the value listed in DMG, they exist but can be bought only by auction or special arrangement.

If it's a 50 ct diamond there might have been 20-50 in the history of the world.

yup my PCs are looking for one of these baby's now - one is held by the Achromental of earth
1 is in the crown jewels of a friendly kingdom, a third is owned by ethergaunts.

If Reincarnation is your common back from the dead magic then this problem goes away but you do wind up with lots of fuzzy oddness, where the village mayor is a lemur and the blacksmith has been having issues ever since he came back as badger.

3.5 cut way back on strange reincarnations, but IMC a former archdruid, an evil high priest and a queen have all gone from human -> halfling due to the efforts of the PC druidess
and one PC had a cohort become a Gnoll, (gnolls make bad mayors for human towns btw.)

 

[Mallus]

But that's just it, there are problems with shoehorning campaign worlds to work with D&D.

Never said there wasn't.

...but you're going to have to ignore CR from printed monsters and rebalance encounters in any published adventure since they're created assuming standard magic.

That isn't a problem for me, since I rarely use material from published adventures. And I hear you should take CR with a grain of salt...

This can be a lot of work and it is certainly not worth the work, in my case, as I have systems that can bend to my will with minium work.

Out of curiosity, which systems? I'm tempted to adapt/run my homebrew using different rules (T20 and M&M 2nd ed. are mighty tempting), but neither project strikes as less work than using D&D. Just different work. Plus, I sorta like when D&D doesn't fit my homebrew, when its built-in assumptions knock up against or flat-out intrude on my conception of the setting. The results of the collision have proven interesting, like a Reece's peanut butter cup.

Prime example: A Game of Thrones. You can't emulate the source material well with straight D&D.

With the right group of players, willing to accept the mass excising of core magical abilities (plus liberal use of NPC-only plot magic), I don't see it as *that* difficult. Of course, I haven't tried...

There's a lot you can do with D&D but it has to be done within a framework for it to work without problems.

I'd edit your statement into "...if done within the framework of the players collective expectations it can work without problems".

 

[Nightfall]

Spot on! There is a limited range of worlds you can run in D&D. So you might as well make/pick one that fits with the system. Otherwise, use another system.

It's only finite as your imagination. So I guess your stops a good bit. Me I'll keep with Scarred Lands.

Btw Kae'yoss is right, anyone that can "depower" spellfire, for starters, is on a good track.