D&D 5E Do you care about setting "canon"?

[Shasarak]

Lol. You realize that this also defeats misty step right?

A blindfold defeats misty step.

And why in heck do you have ground level arrow slits?

Duh, so you can misty step through it.

 

[chaochou]

Do you care about canon in RPG settings?

Nope, couldn't give two hoots!

But I run almost nothing in a published setting. About the only thing I'll use is maps (for example, sector maps in Traveller). It's not that I'll repurpose existing information. I won't read it in the first place.

 

[Imaro]

Nope, couldn't give two hoots!

But I run almost nothing in a published setting. About the only thing I'll use is maps (for example, sector maps in Traveller). It's not that I'll repurpose existing information. I won't read it in the first place.

See now this is what I think of when someone says they don't care about canon...

 

[Shasarak]

Sometimes it's hard to tell if your posts are serious or just joking.

In this case joking because of how ridiculous it is to tell someone how easy it is do do something.

 

[Jer]

The line between God and 'Arch-fey' isn't that clear, anyway.

No kidding. The Prince of Frost became a major character in my 4e game and the distinction between him and a god ended up being mostly "angels dancing on the head of a pin" academic. (Also the difference between Demon Lords and gods, and Elemental Princes and Archfey, but that's all probably a bit more campaign specific).

The Astral was much looser conceptually as a metaphical 'Sea' with Domains floating around in it, than as a 'Plane' permeating the more static/complete Great Wheel. I do also have to admit that I liked the Feywild and Shadowfell a lot better than the old Ethereal (which seemed like it had potential as spirit world or otherworld but was always pretty blah, just a bunch of mist, mostly), Plane of Shadow, or positive/negative elemental planes.

Yeah, I like the conception of the Astral in 4e more than any of the prior versions of it personally. The "Astral Sea" vibe has always kind of been there - I swear I remember some older Dragon articles about "mindjammer" ships to sail the Astral Sea sometime after Spelljammer became a thing - but I like how the concept was implemented in 4e quite a lot. (I also prefer the Feywild and Shadowfell over the Ethereal. I'm not a huge fan of Ravenloft being subsumed into the Shadowfell though - that's an idea that I continue to ignore).

Though on the subjects of nothing being too orignal, the Feywild/Shadowfell planes were a lot like the WoD Umbra (Dreaming/Shadowlands, once Changeling & Wraith were out), and, of course, all that clearly drew from the tradition of Faerie or the 'Otherworld' and, more obscurely but pervasively, the Theosophic vision of the afterlife.

Absolutely. I think it was the 3e Manual of the Planes that introduced the Feywild and I immediately thought of the the Celtic "otherworld" when I first read it there. I've had a few campaigns with an "otherworld" inspired parallel world next door (modern and D&D actually) so maybe that's why I've always liked the Feywild so much. The Shadowfell has grown on me over the years too - the Raven Queen was a minor player in one of the 4e campaigns I ran and I keep thinking about bringing her back into the 13th Age campaign that I'm running now (though I'm not sure she'd fit - maybe in the next game I run).

 

[Elderbrain]

Because you already have all that material? Did your books spontaneously combust when 4e came out?

- No... but that's completely missing the point. My old books work just fine, if I'm playing using 2nd edition rules! But if I want to use my old material with 4e, there's a major problem because many monsters have been changed or eliminated, and the cosmology is different. Hell, I might just as well be trying to play Planescape using the rules from Vampire: The Masqurade, it's about as easy. Or maybe GURPS. A new edition of a game - any game - should not put up roadblocks making it difficult to continue your game from a previous edition. That's just bad customer service and PR.

 

[Corwin]

Or maybe GURPS. A new edition of a game - any game - should not put up roadblocks making it difficult to continue your game from a previous edition. That's just bad customer service and PR.

So you believe we should still have Thac0 and demihuman level limits?

 

[Maxperson]

So you believe we should still have Thac0 and demihuman level limits?

THACO really remained for 3e. It was changed to +s and high AC, but the progression remained the same, and for people decent at basic math, THACO really wasn't hard or confusing.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Personally I would argue that having a setting frozen in time like Eberron is much worse then any of the Realm Shaking Events that FR has gone through.

How?

The Realms is genuinely unusable for a lot of people now, or usable only by outright rejecting large swathes of changes that were made. If you liked Ebberon when it came out, I can't imagine how or why that would have changed from then to now.

 

[Corwin]

THACO really remained for 3e.

Clearly untrue. And that misses the point anyway. Wanting things to never change is pretty clearly wanting things to never change. Getting rid of Thac0 was a change.

It was changed to +s and high AC, but the progression remained the same...

Didn't remain the same, actually. There *are* differences. The math did change. Subtly, so I can see how some people might have missed it. But it changed none-the-less.

...and for people decent at basic math, THACO really wasn't hard or confusing.

Also this is a bit condescending. Hopefully, not intention.