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

[Imaro]

Ah here we go [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] ... the actual 2e lore for Salamanders...

Habitat/Society: Salamanders are native to the elemental plane of Fire. They come to the Prime Material plane for reasons known only to them, though it is rumored that powerful wizards and priests of certain religions can summon them for a short time. Salamanders hate cold, preferring temperatures of 300 degrees or more; they can abide lower temperatures for only a few hours. Their lairs are typically at least500 degrees. Any treasure found there is the sort that can survive this heat, such as swords, armor, rods,other ferrous items, and jewels. Things of a combustible nature, such as parchment and wood, soft metalssuch as gold and silver, and liquids, which quickly boil away, are never found in salamander lairs.Having a nasty disposition and an evil bent, salamanders respect only power, either the ability to resist their fire or the capability to do great damage. Anyone else is dealt a painful, slow, burning death. It is rumored that they have some sort of dealings with the efreeti. When encountered on the Prime plane, salamanders can be found playing in forest fires, lava flows, firepits, and other areas of extreme heat. They usually appear on the Prime plane for a purpose, and if in the middle of a task they do not take kindly to being interrupted.

Emphasis mine... so not only does nothing in 5e contradict this earlier lore... there is a precedence set in the earlier lore for the connection between them and the Efreeti... 5e fleshed that out.

 

[Hussar]

I keep seeing other people being told that they still have their old books and why can they not still use their old books and why are they forced to use the new stuff, does that not also apply to 4e as well as any other edition?

That's my point exactly. I certainly can. But, the thing is, in order to HAVE that 4e material, changes had to be allowed to be made in the first place. So, yup, I can certainly run an Astral Sea campaign in 5e. Of course I can. No problems.

What you don't see though, is me constantly bitching and complaining that I have to do that. OTOH, I get told, in no uncertain terms, that the changes to lore were a slap in the face to gamers and should never have been made in the first place. Apparently, it's perfectly cromulent to tell me to make up my own stuff, but, when the shoe's on the other foot, well, no way. Elves MUST be elves. Eladrin MUST be eladrin. No changes are ever acceptable.

Except when they are...

 

[Hussar]

Now whose playing the pedantry and semantics game? Eladrin in 4e are Fey creatures not Celestials? Oh and for the record part of being a celestial is that you dwell on an upper plane... where do Eladrin in 4e dwell? Feywild...right?

Sigh. New cosmology right? You do understand that 4e uses a different cosmology, thus terminology gets changed, yes?

It's funny. I'm told over and over again, that Planescape is just one of many interpretations of the planes and multiple interpretations are acceptable. Except, the only acceptable interpretation is the Planescape one and all others must be removed from the game.

IOW, any change is ok, so long as it's "approved" by a subset of the fandom.

 

[Imaro]

Sigh. New cosmology right? You do understand that 4e uses a different cosmology, thus terminology gets changed, yes?

It's funny. I'm told over and over again, that Planescape is just one of many interpretations of the planes and multiple interpretations are acceptable. Except, the only acceptable interpretation is the Planescape one and all others must be removed from the game.

IOW, any change is ok, so long as it's "approved" by a subset of the fandom.

Huh? What are you even talking about? Let me ask you this if Eladrin had been named Alfar instead would you have enjoyed them less in 4e? we could then have had the Eladrin as they were and the ALfar filling this new role in 4e, right? See I don't have a problem with the Eladrin as a concept... but I do think it was the wrong type of canon change to take something established since 2e and turn it into something totally different... it's sloppy and lazy.

 

[Hussar]

/snip.
* Consistency Criteria: The Eladrin gave a major, central new ability to the race formerly known as "high elves", which caused major changes to how that race works in the world. It makes them inconsistent with how the race worked before 4e.
/snip

So, why do 5e elves get the pass? 5e elves are inconsistent as well.

See, you have to remember, I don't care about changes. They don't bother me. I'll deal with them as they come. But, what does fly up my nose is the fact that what gets a pass seems to be pretty inconsistent. If adding a new, central ability to the race formerly known as high elves changes how that race works in the world, then it ALWAYS changes how that race works.

Unless, of course, you think that unlimited fire bolts or acid splashes or blade ward has no effect on how a race works in the world.

Ah here we go [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] ... the actual 2e lore for Salamanders...



Emphasis mine... so not only does nothing in 5e contradict this earlier lore... there is a precedence set in the earlier lore for the connection between them and the Efreeti... 5e fleshed that out.

LOL. So, "has dealings with" equals "is enslaved by". And that's not a change? And I note how you keep ignoring the paragraph before the 5e one you quoted that talks about how salamanders are enslaved. Wow.

Like I said, what's an "important" change or an "additive" change or a "subtractive" change appears to depend a lot more on the preferences of the claimant than anything else.

 

[Imaro]

LOL. So, "has dealings with" equals "is enslaved by". And that's not a change? And I note how you keep ignoring the paragraph before the 5e one you quoted that talks about how salamanders are enslaved. Wow.

Like I said, what's an "important" change or an "additive" change or a "subtractive" change appears to depend a lot more on the preferences of the claimant than anything else.

Was anything already established contradicted? Changed? It seems like you are purposefully choosing not to see the difference between changing something...

Eladrin are no longer a race of good aligned celestial beings on a higher plane but instead the subrace of Elves formerly known as High Elves...

As opposed to adding too existing lore...The previously established unknown dealings Salamanders have with the Efreet are that of slave and master or rebel and enslaver...

It's not about preferences it's about contradiction...

EDIT: The laughter button... nice, mature way to signify you're really trying to converse and understand the other point of view. It's cool alot of people resort to mockery when something is beyond their understanding...

 

[Hussar]

Was anything already established contradicted? Changed? It seems like you are purposefully choosing not to see the difference between changing something... Eladrin no longer a race of celestials on a higher plane but instead the subrace of Elves formerly known as High Elves...

As opposed to adding too existing lore...The previously established unknown dealings Salamanders have with the Efreet are that of slave and master or rebel and enslaver...

And the fact that this actually changes both salamanders and efreeti is ... not a change? Since when did Efreeti launch an apocalyptic war across the planes? Since when were Efreeti particularly interested in conquest or destruction? Since when was Salamander culture dominated by Efreeti enslavement?

But, hey, these aren't really changes right? They're ... clarifications? expansions?

What's being contradicted with Eladrin. Planescape lore specifically ALLOWS for contradictory interpretations right? The Great Wheel isn't the one interpretation above all right? Or is that just lip service? That we're allowed to have multiple planar interpretations, but, only so long as it's only Planescape?

 

[Imaro]

And the fact that this actually changes both salamanders and efreeti is ... not a change? Since when did Efreeti launch an apocalyptic war across the planes? Since when were Efreeti particularly interested in conquest or destruction? Since when was Salamander culture dominated by Efreeti enslavement?

What apocalyptic war across the planes that's not mentioned anywhere in my MM? Where are you getting this stuff from? You are adding your own take/twist to the lore...

As for when were the Efreet particularly interested in conquest or destruction... AD&D 2e Monstrous Manual. Here's some excerpts from the Efreet entry...

"An efreet outpost is a haven for 4dl0 efreet and is run as a military station to watch or harass others in the plane..."

"Outpost forces are usually directed against incursions from the elemental plane of Air, but they can be directed against any travelers deemed suitable for threats, robbery, and abuse..."

"Fire elementals tend to avoid the efreet, whom they feel are oppressive and opportunistic..."

"Djinn hate them, and there have been numerous djinn-efreet clashes...."

"Efreet view most other creatures either as enemies or servants, a view that does not endear them to other genies..."

Seem pretty conquest focused and destructive to me...and for the record this is AD&D general lore not Planescape... as was the Salamander lore I quoted as well.​

But, hey, these aren't really changes right? They're ... clarifications? expansions?

Yes... and you seem unfamiliar with the actual lore you keep claiming has been changed as opposed to expounded upon and added too.

What's being contradicted with Eladrin. Planescape lore specifically ALLOWS for contradictory interpretations right? The Great Wheel isn't the one interpretation above all right? Or is that just lip service? That we're allowed to have multiple planar interpretations, but, only so long as it's only Planescape?

Allows for contradictory interpretations of what? The planes sure... but an entire species, kinda hard to do that with weapons, spells, etc. that affect say Celestials vs. Fey.

 

[Shasarak]

That's my point exactly. I certainly can. But, the thing is, in order to HAVE that 4e material, changes had to be allowed to be made in the first place. So, yup, I can certainly run an Astral Sea campaign in 5e. Of course I can. No problems.

What you don't see though, is me constantly bitching and complaining that I have to do that.

Yep, I never see you complaining about it

Originally Posted by Hussar

You're basically saying that because it costs you a minor bit of work, I can NEVER have anything that I want. Because I DON'T WANT standard D&D cosmology. I've never liked it and have always been forced to home-brew my own since my 1e days. ALWAYS. Then in 4e, I finally got a cosmology that I could work with and I liked, only to have that shut down and flushed down the toilet because you apparently can't be bothered to do any work.

Well, unless you do complain about it. Or is it that you only complain about the parts of the lore that you like?

I dont blame you because it is never nice to be slapped in the face while being thrown under the bus. I can really emphasize with that feeling.

OTOH, I get told, in no uncertain terms, that the changes to lore were a slap in the face to gamers and should never have been made in the first place. Apparently, it's perfectly cromulent to tell me to make up my own stuff, but, when the shoe's on the other foot, well, no way. Elves MUST be elves. Eladrin MUST be eladrin. No changes are ever acceptable.

Except when they are...

To use your example no one liked McPizza so it was scrapped but everyone liked the Big Mac so we still have it now. Would it be a good idea for McD to scrap the Big Mac and change the name of McPizza to Big Mac? I dont know why they would but they seemed to be able to add on McCafe to their Big Mac menu without any problems. That is the difference between changing a winning strategy and adding to a winning strategy.

 

[Shasarak]

Yes... and you seem unfamiliar with the actual lore you keep claiming has been changed as opposed to expounded upon and added too.

You have to remember that it is difficult for someone who does not care about setting canon to be consistently familiar with setting canon.