D&D 5E Does D&D Next need a Core Setting?

[Shemeska]

I really liked 4E's Points of Light setting, and I feel it made a great default setting that was at both times unintrusive and sparked the imagination.

It was many things, but unintrusive was one thing it was not. It forced massive changes to FR, dropped primordials, eladrin, and various other PoL core concepts into Dark Sun... it even shamelessly altered the history/nature/origins of a huge number of classic D&D creatures and concepts. It was anything but unintrusive.

If Nentire Vale / PoL is the default setting for 5e with a similar level of saturation and intrusion into other campaign settings, it's a deal breaker for me.

 

[avin]

It was many things, but unintrusive was one thing it was not. It forced massive changes to FR, dropped primordials, eladrin, and various other PoL core concepts into Dark Sun... it even shamelessly altered the history/nature/origins of a huge number of classic D&D creatures and concepts. It was anything but unintrusive.

Couldn't agree more.

POL pushed primordials vs gods everywhere. A quick Flipping through 4E pages, in special Monster Manuals, will make you think that every single thing is related to it.

That was an intrusion you won't find on earlier Monster books.

 

[Zaukrie]

Then alter the settings they put out to be like you want, that is what you would be doing if stay in your current game, how is that a deal breaker

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[avin]

Then alter the settings they put out to be like you want, that is what you would be doing if stay in your current game, how is that a deal breaker

(DISCLAIMER: I like 4E, as I like other D&D editions)

Not a deal breaker to me, but I'm looking for good fluff, nothing like unispiring poor text from 4E where gods vs primordials was everywhere.

Homebrews and specific settings must be respected.

 

[Lord Zack]

Then alter the settings they put out to be like you want, that is what you would be doing if stay in your current game, how is that a deal breaker

Sent using Tapatalk 2

Wizards of the Coast wants my money and the way their going to get it is by releasing a version of D&D that retains what makes D&D unique instead of almost being the developers' personal fantasy heartbreaker that is only called D&D because they have the copyright, like 4th edition was. I don't want to have to rewrite half the races chapter of the Player's Handbook and half the Monster Manual to play classic settings like Greyhawk and Planescape.

 

[Zaukrie]

Rewrite what? If you already have your fluff, all you need is stats workable in the new system. I do not understand how fluff in a book impacts a game like your game. I am genuinely curious why you would rewrite anything, if you already have your own fluff. If you get no fluff, or get fluff and ignore it, that is the same thing, is it not?

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[the Jester]

Rewrite what? If you already have your fluff, all you need is stats workable in the new system. I do not understand how fluff in a book impacts a game like your game. I am genuinely curious why you would rewrite anything, if you already have your own fluff. If you get no fluff, or get fluff and ignore it, that is the same thing, is it not?

The difference is, if a 256 page rulebook contains 80 pages worth of fluff I'm not using, it's only really a 176 page rulebook for me.

Additionally, it's kind of a pain to have to explain how the fluff doesn't apply- no Nentir Vale, no Bane, no primordials- whenever a new player enters the campaign. Much easier and better to have 256 pages of "I can use all of this!" and save the setting stuff for, you know, actual setting books.

 

[bringerofbroom]

as far as i see it, the best way for them to go is to provide a section of the dmg, or even a seperate 'Campaign builders guide' with tons of simple campaign tropes with mechanics to support them. Effectively campaign lego blocks. you put them together as you see fit, and use the mechanics that go with them. The only assumptions in common are the absolute core assumptions of the game.

That way, there is no default setting, but there are some example situations you can present rule examples against. It would be up to the GM to either throw together these campaign modules to support his/her campaign idea, or get a seperate campaign guide that will set a bunch of modules as the standard for that setting and expand on them.

BoB

 

[Lord Zack]

Rewrite what? If you already have your fluff, all you need is stats workable in the new system. I do not understand how fluff in a book impacts a game like your game. I am genuinely curious why you would rewrite anything, if you already have your own fluff. If you get no fluff, or get fluff and ignore it, that is the same thing, is it not?

Sent using Tapatalk 2

Because if Wizards of the Coast decides that halflings are river dwelling wanderers or archons are elemental warriors, the mechanics are going to reflect that.

 

[Zaukrie]

The archon thing, isn't that true of any monster? The issue is that they changed the fundamental monster, regardless of the fluff. Just as other monsters have been changed over time.

As for fluff decreasing the "net" page count, I am somewhat sympathetic to that argument. But, I think monster fluff is one of the most crucial things to New dms.....so we will likely disagree on that. The planescape manuals were mostly fluff, but many are big fans of that campaign, including you.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2