D&D 5E What is your definition of a Vanilla setting

[jgsugden]

Vanilla was once a special treat considered the best of the elite. Now, people forget that it tastes amazing and take it for granted. That would be the Forgotten Realms.

 

[TwoSix]

To me, a vanilla setting is one that takes the tropes and flavors present in the PHB and reifies them into the world. Elves, dwarves, dragonborn, tieflings, etc. all work they way they say in the book. Bards have colleges that exist within the setting, druids have circles they can meet with, all rogues can talk to each other in thieves' cant so they know they're rogues, etc.

Since Greyhawk doesn't have a published place for a lot of the post-2000 additions to the core, same with Dragonlance, that makes FR the most vanilla setting for 5e by default.

 

[Garmorn]

This is a strange question for me. I have never ran nor played in any of these world long enough to get a feel for them. A max of 6 sessions per campaign with no more than 4 or 5 campaigns since I started in 81.

A vanilla setting to me is one with out any back ground/world building. Just the basic assumptions and not attempt to make a full fledged world.

 

[akr71]

I view both Greyhawk & FR as Vanilla - you don't really need anything more than the core 3 books and maybe a map. The real debate is which one is vanilla and which one is french vanilla.

 

[Reynard]

Peopl use "vanilla" pejoratively all the time, but I don't think it is supposed to be used that way. "Vanilla" means that is support whatever flavors you decide to make central to your sundae. Maybe you like fruit, or gummy bears, or jalapeno. Vanilla lets you have those without overpowering them like chocolate or something like Rocky Road would. Vannilla gives you control over the flavors.

Among the listed choices, Dragonlance is actually a good example of how you add toppings to vanilla (either of the other two, IMO) to get a specific flavor (in this case, Mormon Myth inspired fantasy). A "flvor" like Dark Sun is too powerful, too distinct to allow for such a thing. That's why, I think, FR is so popular: it is easy to make one's own by choosing your bad guys and your conflicts.

 

[steeldragons]

I think I have to concur with the bulk of everyone else's assessment. FR and GH are basically both a "baseline" of "vanilla." ...which I think is great. The fact it gets used as a derrogative has never made sense to me. Vanilla is a great flavor!

Dragonlance, I think, is a bit more than marginally outside of "vanilla" given it's various rules differentiations, but also the customized existing species and new species entirely that are just part of that world. It, generally, holds to the fantasy tropes. The cosmic fight of Good v. Evil. The heroes are heroes, the bad guys are bad guys, "god-granted" magic and sorcery are two separate things, kingdoms/worldly powers rise and fall, etc... but it has it's own personal elements...the "chocolate chips (or raisins)" being mentioned are there. I'd say DL is more like...a basic strawberry. Fresh. Simple. "Basic," some might deride. But a flavor of its own and stuff in it that straight up "vanilla" doesn't have.

Contrary to current culinary trends, something -a game system, a game setting, a [new or revised] class, a [new or revised] species,... an ice cream, ANYthing- doesn't have to be "chocolate ice cream with black cherry jam, fudge swirl, brownie chunks and peanut butter cup in it" to be entertaining or "interesting."

The ever-seeking masses should probably be asking different questions than "Why are all of the ice creams I encounter NOT the chaotic mishmash of flavors and ingredients I like best [or feel I "need"]?" Try, "What's wrong with vanilla? Why don't [or "can't?"] I find just vanilla -or just chocolate or just strawberry- enjoyable?"

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Vanilla was once a special treat considered the best of the elite. Now, people forget that it tastes amazing and take it for granted. That would be the Forgotten Realms.

That's what vanilla deserves for displacing rosewater.

 

[Umbran]

I think I have to concur with the bulk of everyone else's assessment. FR and GH are basically both a "baseline" of "vanilla." ...which I think is great. The fact it gets used as a derrogative has never made sense to me. Vanilla is a great flavor!

I agree.

People frown on vanilla. But without it, large swaths of your desserts will fall flat.

 

[opacitizen]

In my take the most vanilla is what you get from the PHB itself, and even there ignoring most of the fluff: just what the game mechanics and the essential fluff required to build a simple character of each class describe, discarding specificities like entity names and lore, and so on.

And, to tell you the truth, that's the vanilla I prefer. I like having a great toolset and building my own stuff with it, and I usually prefer it to playing in someone else's imagination. Sure, there are exceptions, settings and worlds that I love, but I love to customize even those. I've never been a fan of following metaplots and such.

YMMV, of course.

 

[DemoMonkey]

Greyhawk.

Forgotten Realms USED to be a nice scoop of plain vanilla, but after decades of add-ons, retcons and edition changes...