pawsplay said:
I don't understand your viewpoint at all.
In your cleric example, all three of the different cleric types are all still fighting a cult dedicated to raising an evil deity. None of the three setting contexts changed the fact that all of those clerics are holy warriors that go out and do stuff like that. The context isn't really changing.
Now, if in one of thsoe settings the nature of clerics would
prevent them from taking action agaisnt the cult, then we're talking impact.
As for the orcs, the variances can affect the "orc baby" question, but the only time I've ever had to deal with orc babies is on web fora.
If your rationale for the nature of orcs doesn't change the fact that they are still those brutish humanoids you have to kill in order to get the pie, then I don't see that it really matters, and I can see why Joe Player isn't really going to care.
pawsplay said:
The only sense I can make of your statement is that either way, a cleric has the same number of spells/day, BAB, etc. But we were talking about differences in setting, not differences in character statistics.
My point is that if the setting has no effect on those stats, it's a tick in the "doesn't really matter" column. Situation is the other aspect I mentioned above.
Please keep in mind that I am NOT saying that settings are wholly irrelevant unless they meet the criteria I've lain out above. Color can make all the difference to some people.
E.g., the DM of my AoW campaign has changed all of the place names to Spanish. Our PCs have names like "Gonçalo" and "Sandoval," and the campaign starts in "Lago Diamante." This has had virtually no impact whatsoever on how the campaign actually plays. BUT, it's added a layer of fun. I whipped up a big, boisterous Portuguese-ish family for my halfling rogue, and I get to talk in a wild accent.
Did every player go this far? No, but that's okay, as it's not a meaningful change, and thus didn't really demand everyone's attention. It's just fodder for us actorly types.