D&D General All Dead Generations: "Classic Vs. The Aesthetic"

[Crimson Longinus]

dragons have this weird issue where D&D can't decide whether they're animals or supergeniuses so they're both instead.

I think that's what I like about them...

 

[Malmuria]

First of, I have to say I am really glad someone started this thread. The two current threads in which the exact same topic is already being discussed clearly weren't enough!

Sorry!

It's a long-ish read, but I'd encourage everyone to take a look at the article I posted when they have a chance. It's not primarily about evil orcs or whatever, but rather about the genre expectations players bring to the table when they join a game of "dnd." Basically, original dnd was itself a mashup of tolkein, howard, vance, arthurian fantasy, western, sci fi, and that this mashup has in turn become, self referentially, what "fantasy" means for a lot of players (especially those whose experience of fantasy comes from rpg video games). But if a mashup of these various genres and aesthetic styles makes for a good general toolkit, it creates a lot of dissonance at the table (and in forum discussions), because people are wanting different things from all of the fantastical elements (including what counts as an "orc" etc). The solutions are tricky. Should the dm engage in extensive worldbuilding, which takes a lot of time and will probably be ignored by players anyway? Should the game add further mechanics for developing cultures, backgrounds, backstories, etc...but this investment in character creation may make groups avoid character deaths (which is ok?)? And the typical answer of "session 0," "talk with your players," etc, similarly implies that all these different expectations could be resolved ahead of time, and that groups want to spend a lot of time in meta-commentary about their game (whereas my players barely respond to my scheduling emails...ahem).

As much Gygaxian vernacular fantasy can add difficulties to bringing players new to it into a Classic game, bizarre and extremely unique settings can also present difficulties. Cliche and known aspects of the setting are important to fantasy as they allow the author or designer to highlight the fantastical elements and the reader or player to appreciate them. In adventure design especially, where page space and referee attention are both at a premium the use of cliches and well known elements can quickly suggest a description that the referee or players will fill in easily, while something entirely strange and unique requires a level of detail and explanation that goes beyond what most players of an RPG are willing or able to take in prior to playing. More visual mediums such as film or video games are more easily able to convey setting information through imagery that breaks with audience expectations, while less interactive mediums such as novels don’t ask the reader to make decisions based on the unknown setting and can more slowly unveil it.

 

[Malmuria]

I think that's what I like about them...

I think of dragons as being like cats, so both animals and super-geniuses

 

[Yora]

Yes. It won't be better if we get a replacement of "evil race" by "evil cultures".

I can see a Faction Folio as a viable product to market. It's not something we've really seen before in non-setting-specific books, but give them a really generic name and a page with customization options, and you could have a really useful book for GMs.

 

[Umbran]

Some of us just need mindless caricatures to serve as the BBEG's foot soldiers.

And, as always, what you do at your table is your business.

The question then becomes - do you see that, given the cultural moment we are in, pushing that as a baseline for D&D is problematic?

 

[Mannahnin]

I think the chance that WotC forks their product line to appeal to the small percentage of the base that prefers the older aesthetics when they already have all of those older editions available via PDF is approximately zero.

You are probably right.

And anyway, OSE already exists. It's not D&D in name, but it's otherwise exactly what you're asking for. A gorgeously reorganized B/X with new art and ascending AC as an option. It even has super convenient online reference tools.

 

[Yora]

There is a whole market with easily two dozen games that do exactly that in a number of slightly different ways.

And I don't think many of the people who love them have any interest in some big shiny corporate product instead of things people made at home on their computer out of passion for the art.

 

[Mannahnin]

orcs, goblins, and the like are inspired by folklore that essentially viewed such things as evil spirits that inhabited the wilds. Tolkiens middle earth was also influenced by his Anglican worldview that included moral absolutes as good and evil and that free thinking entities can be wholly devoted to one or the other. IE- angels are good and fallen angels or demons are wholly evil, elves are wholly good and orcs were corrupted elves, originally. D&D took these creatures largely from Tolkiens vision and kept this concept of moral dedication. Thus, here you have the origins of the "evil" monstrous humanoids, completely divorced from postmodern political views.

And even Tolkien struggled with this.

Tolkien:

""They would be Morgoth’s greatest Sins, abuses of his highest privilege, and would be creatures begotten of Sin, and naturally bad (I nearly wrote ’irredeemably bad’; but that would be going too far. Because by accepting or tolerating their making - necessary to their actual existence - even Orcs would become part of the World, which is God’s and ultimately good.)~Letter #153"

 

[Doug McCrae]

First of, I have to say I am really glad someone started this thread. The two current threads in which the exact same topic is already being discussed clearly weren't enough!

Don't blame @Malmuria! The article posted starts off by saying:

NOTE: THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT THE USE OF HUMANOIDS OR THE RACIALIZED OTHER IN DUNGEONS & DRAGONS... THIS POST IS ABOUT HOW AESTHETIC (SETTING, PLAYER EXPECTATIONS, THEMES AND IMAGERY) INTERACT WITH MECHANICS AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES.​

 

[Lanefan]

Why do people keep asking this? Obviously, they exist as part of the game because people want them to. They’re cool.

And what makes them cool? That they're the enemy - maybe honourable, maybe not - to be fought and vanquished.

Taking away their enemy-ness removes much of their (meta-game) reason for being.