D&D General D&D as a Curated, DIY Game or "By the Book": Examining DM and Player Agency, and the DM as Game Designer

[TwoSix]

In the other thread, I just saw that @cbwjm posted this:
Maybe, I have definitely noticed a lot more people nowadays who think that just because something exists in a core book it must exist in game (could easily just be due to the prevalence of forums and social media making it seem like more though). I remember having an argument with people on Reddit who seemingly took offence at my statement that my world didn't have dinosaurs in it. They couldn't grasp that everything in the book is an option and that somewhere in the real world a game was being played where they couldn't polymorph or wildshape into dinosaurs.

I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? A huge portion of the fanbase only has experience with 5e. What has been published in 5e that's an example of a novel setting defined by curation and exclusion? It's not shocking at all that the idea would be wholly unfamiliar to them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm just going to say this once on this thread. Don't agree with a specific style of running the game or the OP? Have a different point of view? Explain your logic and reasoning. There are many, many shades of gray on this topic and you are reducing it to black and white while people who prefer that the DM create a curated world are doing it wrong. Personally I prefer a game that makes sense to the DM whether I'm DM or player. If that means a curated world with strict limits, so be it.

There are many games, many styles, no style will work for everyone.

I have explained it and how it's a matter of who gets the say at the table.

Also there are many games. Most of them aren't D&D. D&D, particularly 3.5 and 5e is something where ridiculously powerful wizards have a huge role to play in any game and setting thanks to a combination of its magic and levelling system. Once you've got "high enough wizards can do almost anything" then some will - and casters are particularly prominent in 5e where more than half the classes eventually can cast ninth level spells.

Also what do you mean "a game that makes sense?" Because if anyone understands every part of their world then that must be a pretty boring world compared to the real one.

Does this make The Great Pendragon Campaign a bad thing? No. But it's entirely distinct from D&D.

 

[Charlaquin]

I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? A huge portion of the fanbase only has experience with 5e. What has been published in 5e that's an example of a novel setting defined by curation and exclusion? It's not shocking at all that the idea would be wholly unfamiliar to them.

I was gonna say the M:tG settings, but they’re not really exclusive, are they? Which is weird to me to realize as an M:tG fan, since normally part of spoiler season for each new set is learning what tribes are and aren’t present on the plane the set is set in.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem with this framing is that it implies that the one who is making the choice of curation is solely the DM, and is imposing it on the players. That's neglecting the fact that there are a lot of players who are actively looking for the DM to be the one to do the curating.

No it doesn't. I have at no point said or implied the DM is not to push things to the foreground. And players who want the DM to do the curating will pick from those things.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? A huge portion of the fanbase only has experience with 5e. What has been published in 5e that's an example of a novel setting defined by curation and exclusion? It's not shocking at all that the idea would be wholly unfamiliar to them.

Mmm. I would go further.

I would say that, arguably since 3e, the idea of curation and exclusion (and homebrew addition, which is included but rarely mentioned!) has not been a priority in D&D.

Which means that if you accept this premise (you don't have to!), it's been a good 20 years of this being the norm.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? A huge portion of the fanbase only has experience with 5e. What has been published in 5e that's an example of a novel setting defined by curation and exclusion? It's not shocking at all that the idea would be wholly unfamiliar to them.

What has been published in any D&D that's an example of a novel setting defined by curation and exclusion? I can get about as far as Dark Sun's divine magic (Dark Sun being pretty kitchen sink-ish otherwise) and Council of Wyrms. Meanwhile Greyhawk, the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, the Nentir Vale, Golarion, Planescape, Spelljammer, and just about everything else that has been remotely core are all kitchen sink. Greyhawk looks less so in retrospect simply because it's the oldest.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Also there's a major difference between a third party and a homebrew. In a homebrew things are the way they are ultimately because you made them that way. The setting is Doylist whatever the Watsonian justifications. If you're making the setting the only reason anything that's not deliberately designed to mess up the setting is excluded is because you say so. And the real world is pretty weird.

I just don't agree with this at all. The idea that published settings have thematic and valid reasons for the things that they include and exclude, but a homebrew that isn't wide open is because the DM is a big meanie, is just silly.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Mmm. I would go further.

I would say that, arguably since 3e, the idea of curation and exclusion (and homebrew addition, which is included but rarely mentioned!) has not been a priority in D&D.

Which means that if you accept this premise (you don't have to!), it's been a good 20 years of this being the norm.

Given that the Realms were 2e's default and very much inclusionist, and Greyhawk was inclusionist it's not 20 years of this being the norm - it's been the norm since at least 1974.

 

[TwoSix]

No it doesn't. I have at no point said or implied the DM is not to push things to the foreground. And players who want the DM to do the curating will pick from those things.

I believe you as to that being your intent, but using phrases like "almighty throne" and "kowtow" suggests that DM as sole curator has some tyrannical undertones.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I just don't agree with this at all. The idea that published settings have thematic and valid reasons for the things that they include and exclude, but a homebrew that isn't wide open is because the DM is a big meanie, is just silly.

You mean it's silly to consider looking someone in the eye and saying "No you can't play what you want and there's no way and no how I'm going to adapt my world to make us both have fun and have fun playing something that isn't your most inspired choice for X hours per week" different to not taking into account what people you have never met or heard of might want?