D&D 5E Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."

[pemerton]

Is there anyone else in this thread who remember when a certain sort of deftness with respect to pastiche was regarded as good GMing? When RPGing magazines (not to mention the DMG itself!) would have advice on how to adapt and incorporate, into one's campaign, tropes, episodes, personages, organisations, etc from story and film?

Perhaps the reason that the players in my GH game seemed to like the way WoHS were incorporated was because they were mostly of that era, rather than (what I identify as) a late-80s/90s approach where the goal of RPGing seems to be to stick to someone else's published fiction - in details, events, unfolding timelines, etc - as closely as possible.

 

[Lanefan]

I missed this post earlier.

Hmmm... see I assume that once a new owner takes over a property they decide what it is and what it isn't... as an example... Gygax, TSR, dont decide what is or isnt D&D anymore.... WotC do. I am interested in a situation where a new owner wouldnt or shouldnt decide this if you have one...

But what if I decide I'm going to use the Gygax version and ignore whatever came after? It's still 'official' D&D.

Or for a setting - what if I decide I'm using Greenwood FR and ignoring anything anyone else did? It's still canon FR.

Lan-"the picture you get is completely dependent on which moment in time you take the snapshot of"-efan

 

[Imaro]

I missed this post earlier.But what if I decide I'm going to use the Gygax version and ignore whatever came after? It's still 'official' D&D.

Or for a setting - what if I decide I'm using Greenwood FR and ignoring anything anyone else did? It's still canon FR.

Lan-"the picture you get is completely dependent on which moment in time you take the snapshot of"-efan

I get that you personally can decide what you want to use... but, I was asking about the owners of a property. When shouldn't or wouldn't they decide what is or isn't their official product. And having something produced previously doesn't necessarily guarantee that a new owner will consider it that way once they own the product... for an example look at the previously official Star Wars expanded universe...

 

[Shasarak]

Is there anyone else in this thread who remember when a certain sort of deftness with respect to pastiche was regarded as good GMing? When RPGing magazines (not to mention the DMG itself!) would have advice on how to adapt and incorporate, into one's campaign, tropes, episodes, personages, organisations, etc from story and film?

That is because Gygax would just steal any idea that he liked - ah, those wild woolly days when we used to walk to school up hill in the snow both ways.

Perhaps the reason that the players in my GH game seemed to like the way WoHS were incorporated was because they were mostly of that era, rather than (what I identify as) a late-80s/90s approach where the goal of RPGing seems to be to stick to someone else's published fiction - in details, events, unfolding timelines, etc - as closely as possible.

Perhaps the reason was that your Players did not know enough about GH to know (or care!) how many moons there are? Maybe they liked the extra magic sub system? It certainly is a mystery alright.

I mean it would be hard to stick closely to someone elses timeline when there was not much evidence of any time line - even if you wanted to.

 

[Shasarak]

I get that you personally can decide what you want to use... but, I was asking about the owners of a property. When shouldn't or wouldn't they decide what is or isn't their official product. And having something produced previously doesn't necessarily guarantee that a new owner will consider it that way once they own the product... for an example look at the previously official Star Wars expanded universe...

It will be interesting to see what Disney does with the Star Wars movies. I enjoyed Rouge One but I would like to see a movie where they advance the time line from the end of RotJ.

 

[cbwjm]

It will be interesting to see what Disney does with the Star Wars movies. I enjoyed Rouge One but I would like to see a movie where they advance the time line from the end of RotJ.

Did you somehow miss episode 7 set 2-3 decades after RotJ or do you mean a jump of 100+ or more years?

 

[ProgBard]

Is there anyone else in this thread who remember when a certain sort of deftness with respect to pastiche was regarded as good GMing? When RPGing magazines (not to mention the DMG itself!) would have advice on how to adapt and incorporate, into one's campaign, tropes, episodes, personages, organisations, etc from story and film?

Perhaps the reason that the players in my GH game seemed to like the way WoHS were incorporated was because they were mostly of that era, rather than (what I identify as) a late-80s/90s approach where the goal of RPGing seems to be to stick to someone else's published fiction - in details, events, unfolding timelines, etc - as closely as possible.

The minds behind 5e certainly seem, at the very least, to think it's legit - the hardback campaigns all have "how to port this into your homebrew or $OtherSetting" advice.

And the previously mentioned Matt Colville is a big advocate of mashing up whatever works for you - it's all over his Running the Game videos. But, again, he's been playing since the '80s (if not before) and is by his own admission a fan of certain old-school ways that may be out of fashion.

I think it's great, myself, though that won't be a shock to anyone following this thread. But again, I am by nature and inclination a syncretist/magpie/bricoleur, and purity tests rub me the wrong way (including tests for purity's slicker hipster cousin, "authenticity"), which is why I'm neither an OSR convert nor a canon-prescriptivist. I can appreciate the skill it takes to color inside the lines, but give me mashup and fusion any day.

 

[Imaro]

Is there anyone else in this thread who remember when a certain sort of deftness with respect to pastiche was regarded as good GMing? When RPGing magazines (not to mention the DMG itself!) would have advice on how to adapt and incorporate, into one's campaign, tropes, episodes, personages, organisations, etc from story and film?

Perhaps the reason that the players in my GH game seemed to like the way WoHS were incorporated was because they were mostly of that era, rather than (what I identify as) a late-80s/90s approach where the goal of RPGing seems to be to stick to someone else's published fiction - in details, events, unfolding timelines, etc - as closely as possible.

Personally I favor the inventiveness and originality of homebrewing unique content over either of the two methods you speak to above... different strokes I guess...

 

[ProgBard]

Personally I favor the inventiveness and originality of homebrewing unique content over either of the two methods you speak to above... different strokes I guess...

If we want this thread to run about nine times as long as it already is, we could start to have a conversation about where the line between "deft pastiche" and "inventiveness and originality" is. Personally, I think trying to draw that distinction is a mug's game. (Again, see Hofstadter: "Variations on a Theme as the Crux of Creativity," in Metamagical Themas.)

But for now, it may be sufficient to pass on a parable, as recorded by poster WillA over a decade ago in the comment thread to the post "'Fanfic': force of nature," on the site Making Light:

There was once a conjurer who boasted that he had become god-like. One god happened to overhear, and challenged him to a contest.
“Can you do this?” the god asked, scooping up a handful of dirt and making it into a bird. They watched the bird fly away.

“Sure,” said the conjure-man, and reached down for a handful of raw material.

“Hey,” said god. “Use your own dirt.”

"Props to any writer who can make a story fly," says WillA. "None of us use our own dirt."

 

[pemerton]

I favor the inventiveness and originality of homebrewing unique content over either of the two methods you speak to above

If we want this thread to run about nine times as long as it already is, we could start to have a conversation about where the line between "deft pastiche" and "inventiveness and originality" is. Personally, I think trying to draw that distinction is a mug's game.

<snip>

"Props to any writer who can make a story fly," says WillA. "None of us use our own dirt."

The boundaries between influence, borrowing, pastiche, karaoke, etc certainly can be blurred.

There is another consideration here, too, that relates to creativity, authenticity, and the audience's enjoyment.

For my part, I think I'm creative in some spheres of my life (philosophy, certain aspects of law, teaching) but not in others (I enjoy playing music for fun, but can't write songs - either music or lyrics/poetry). When it comes to fantasy fiction, I think I do a reasonable job of basic pastiche and trope evocation, but I don't think JK Rowling needs to worry that I'm going to be encroaching on her royalties any time soon.

In some domains, authenticity can be as important as quality - eg there is a pleasure in watching a friend play music even if you have a recording of the same song by a better musician - but this still depends upon one's friend meeting the basic requirements of pitch, rhythm etc. When it comes to stories - which have less of a "performance" dimensions and more of an "intellectual" dimension to the way that they engage you, I think the capacity of authenticity to mitigate (lack of) quality is less than music.

Applying this to GMing: I think my players, on the whole, will have more fun with my pastiche and rehashing of tried-and-true tropes than any attempt I make at authentic (but likely rather crappy) originality!