D&D 5E MTOF: Elves are gender-swapping reincarnates and I am on board with it

[Yaarel]

Heh, a post from an other thread that I accidentally came across.

Now, I'll agree that the flavor and certainly the cosmology is going to be an issue. I'm actually right behind you on this one.

I think 5e has gone too far in hard wiring too much flavor into the game, but, frankly, that ship has sailed.

 

[Riley37]

Dwarves in your setting are 7 feet tall and hate conflict? That is going to get push back.

Hundreds of people play, and thousands have played, a fantasy game in which dwarves are 7 feet tall.

http://kol.coldfront.net/thekolwiki/index.php/7-Foot_Dwarf

 

[Eltab]

a fantasy game in which dwarves are 7 feet tall.

Would a Mul (6-to-7 foot tall dwarf-human hybrid, in the Dark Sun setting) count as half?

 

[Hussar]

Heh, a post from an other thread that I accidentally came across.

My point has always been about the Monster Manual. I'm right there with you if you want to say that they've gone too far in the Monster Manual for flavor. But the PHB? Nope, sorry, not seeing it. Particularly given the fact that the PHB stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME as what came before. You're complaining about flavor that has been part of the game since day 1. I'm complaining about stuff that has been added specifically in 5e.

 

[Parmandur]

There's consensus on what "people" - all seven billion of them - want from the game?

Whether by "the game" you mean 5E, or all the editions through 5E, I disagree. Many people have wanted many different things from D&D. Many of them have achieved the things they wanted, often by creating variations, such as Spelljammer. Others created separate games, such as Empire of the Petal Throne, or Tunnels and Trolls.

There are things I want from TRPG, and things I want from D&D, and things I want from 5E. If what I want, isn't what you say people want from the game... does that mean I'm not in the category of "people"?

(shrug) This is a bigger question than the OP. I'm happy that the Blessing is available, in a WotC publication, for those who choose to use and include it. Meanwhlle, I'm free to pursue different and divergent things, using as much of the 5E chassis as suits me and my goals. If I want Vancian magic, or if I want Hogwarts style magic, then I'll change the interaction of spell preparation and spell slots; I'm okay with that.

My point was that 5E is not nearly so setting-neutral as a dictionary, nor as Fantasy Hero, nor many other books. (If you don't want to consider books by publishers other than WotC, then leave the dictionary out of this thread, eh?)

"People" being "the supermajority of customers." About a quarter of D&D players use the Forgotten Realms, a quarter use another TSR/WotC setting, and a quarter Homebrew bit use official fluff as desired. The last quarter is stict homebrewers, who would might want a HERO style universal system with no setting. Based on what WotC has said, this quarter is perhaps best described as "the folks who don't buy books." Not the main audience.

Calling a setting free, universal system an "innovation" assumes that it is a desireable goal.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

3e supports nonpolytheistic settings and nonpolytheistic clerics. 3e clerics can fit seemlessly into most settings. The 4e cleric was the problem that got extirpated. Even so, the rest of 4e is very easy to build campaigns like lego pieces.

I literally have no idea what distinction you think you're making. The relation between cleric and god has been identical through all these editions, as far as I can see. Why can't you do whatever you did in 3E and/or 4E in 5E?

 

[Yaarel]

I literally have no idea what distinction you think you're making. The relation between cleric and god has been identical through all these editions, as far as I can see. Why can't you do whatever you did in 3E and/or 4E in 5E?

It is the amount of material that needs to be REMOVED from the 5e core rules, that makes using the rules nonviable for individualized material.

I prefer to have rules written in a way that the DM or the player can *opt in* to some specific assumption, rather than spending weeks of aggravation just trying to OPT OUT.

I need rules that avoid getting in the way of different settings.

 

[Parmandur]

It is the amount of material that needs to be REMOVED from the 5e core rules, that makes using the rules nonviable for personalized material.

I prefer to have rules written in a way that the DM or the player can *opt in* to some specific assumption, rather than spending weeks of aggravation just trying to OPT OUT.

I need rules that avoid getting in the way of different settings.

The 5E Cleric rules, as written, make fewer polytheistic assumptions than the 3E rules do.

 

[Yaarel]

I literally have no idea what distinction you think you're making. The relation between cleric and god has been identical through all these editions, as far as I can see. Why can't you do whatever you did in 3E and/or 4E in 5E?

The 3e core rules support nonpolytheistic and nontheistic clerics. Core rules for the cleric class description state: ‘If a cleric is not devoted to a particular deity, he still selects two domains to represent his spiritual inclinations and abilities.’ And similar statements occur elsewhere. In 3e, it is normal for a player to choose a nonpolytheistic or nontheistic cleric character.

For the DM, the 3e SRD as well as other resources make it easy to avoid unwanted setting assumptions.

 

[Sacrosanct]

It is the amount of material that needs to be REMOVED from the 5e core rules, that makes using the rules nonviable for individualized material.

I prefer to have rules written in a way that the DM or the player can *opt in* to some specific assumption, rather than spending weeks of aggravation just trying to OPT OUT.

I need rules that avoid getting in the way of different settings.

You know, you can ignore any rule or flavor text you want, right? Been that way since day 1, and it’s easy and pretty instant. I don’t know what you mean by weeks of aggravation, but if a GAME is causing that, stop playing it. No recreational activity should ever cause weeks of aggravation.