D&D General Do you care about lore?

[Umbran]

But can you tell anybody who played Dark Sun or Eberron that lore wasn't a core play aspect of the campaigns they were playing? That the lore isn't core to defining why one is Dark Sun and the other Eberron?

Sure, Dark Sun is not Eberron. But both are D&D. Like, Elbows are not Spaghetti, but both are pasta.

 

[billd91]

(Well, it shouldn't be. See my earlier gripes about the implicit setting assumptions in the Monster Manual, many of which fly in the face of both Eberron and Dark Sun.)

I very much disagree with that assertion. There are a lot of campaigns that people play (have always played) that don't involve particularly strong, distinctive lore unique to them - the lore in the game itself, particularly the Monster Manual, provides lore for the campaign. Specific campaigns may deviate from that lore, but having lore there in the first place gives all DMs a starting point - and for many, that's enough. And for a lot of people, having it be a common starting point is attractive because it means what they've learned about the game can be shared, discussed, or brought along to other tables without everyone wondering what they're talking about.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I very much disagree with that assertion. There are a lot of campaigns that people play (have always played) that don't involve particularly strong, distinctive lore unique to them - the lore in the game itself, particularly the Monster Manual, provides lore for the campaign. Specific campaigns may deviate from that lore, but having lore there in the first place gives all DMs a starting point - and for many, that's enough. And for a lot of people, having it be a common starting point is attractive because it means what they've learned about the game can be shared, discussed, or brought along to other tables without everyone wondering what they're talking about.

None of that invalidates the idea that the game isn't the lore.

It's essentially a mathematical or logical proof:

If Monster Manual lore isn't true in Eberron or Dark Sun, but the Monster Manual, Eberron and Dark Sun are all D&D, Monster Manual lore isn't required for it to be D&D.

Is it nice to have for some folks? Sure.

But is it required, essential or otherwise fundamental? Clearly not.

 

[Reynard]

But can you tell anybody who played Dark Sun or Eberron that lore wasn't a core play aspect of the campaigns they were playing? That the lore isn't core to defining why one is Dark Sun and the other Eberron?

Perhaps the issue is conflating some terminology. By "game" we mean "the actual rules procedures that are D&D" and it seems maybe based on your statement above than by "game" you mean "campaign" or, more broadly, "the sitting down and rolling dice and talking in voices."

 

[Umbran]

None of that invalidates the idea that the game isn't the lore.

Also...

Take a player from one setting. Hand them a character sheet, and sit them down in a session of another. Then say, "Roll for initiative." They will generally know what to do, and get through the entire event, without knowing lore. Ergo, the game is not the lore, as you can play ignorant of said lore.

 

[cbwjm]

I prefer the term "stock".

WotC sells a stock car. All WotC parts, all WotC design. They also sell official parts, upgrades, and accessories made explicitly to be compatible with thier stock. However, their is no reason why you can't take your stock car and fill it with custom and aftermarket parts. You can repaint it, replace the tires, even replace the engine if your brave enough.

I think the issue is that people use the term "D&D" to refer to a lot of things: out of the box stock, lightly modded, customized aftermarket, heavily rebuilt, and even other similar products (ie Pathfinder). Further, people disagree what stock should even look like; some people want a fully usable car requiring no modifications and others want a box of parts they can make a car or a bicycle or whatever out of it.

I think this is a good analogy. I remember when I got into 2e, I had the 3 core books only so there was pretty much no lore tied to any of the settings in my games. The planes weren't the great wheel, the gods were all different since I hadn't even heard of the greyhawk or the forgotten realms at that point and I was probably using real world mythology for ideas. So I had no real established lore to get in the way of playing, just the bare bones of DnD to let me create the worlds I wanted to.

 

[Scott Christian]

Lore for specific settings, especially settings that have fantasy novels, makes sense to me. It's the implicit-setting lore, like the kind you find in the monster manual, that I find a bit strange because it's world-building minus the world. I don't mean that it is strange in a bad way, just that because it is quasi-setting neutral I don't feel obliged in any way to adhere to it. Also, what I mean is that the lore itself is weird because it's a mash-up of so many different things.

That is a very fair complaint. Yet, that is also what one of the pillars that makes D&D, well, D&D. A mash up of myths, timeframes, and setting designs.

 

[Scott Christian]

Except that's not even true in all official D&D settings. There may be NO divinities in Eberron, and the equivalent in Dark Sun is very different. What is true about clerics is that they gain their powers from belief, and I don't think that is detailed enough to be called "lore".

The cleric was a simple example. And to be truthful, if you can't sympathize for those players/DMs that use clerics as divine lore, and then suddenly that lore changes and it messes with their schemata, then I don't know what to say.

I understand your point - lore doesn't really matter. But, maybe, just maybe, there are tables where it matters a lot. Tables where great roleplaying or a memorable encounter happened because of lore.

There are two sides.

 

[Scott Christian]

There's no "continuity" in D&D.

I don't understand this line of thinking.
D&D has been consistent with much of its lore for the past 20 or 25 years. It is one of the reasons it has been able to grow and expand. Because people learn little bits of lore and can attach themselves to it, even if it is ten years later.

There's a red dragon! (Guess what, it's evil!)

 

[Scott Christian]

For example, let's talk about trolls. Trolls can only be finally killed by acid or fire damage. THIS IS NOT LORE (even if there is lore about trolls in the game). This is a game mechanic.

I have to disagree. This is lore. It is simply reflected in the mechanics. They are tied together. A big old monkey fist knot.