D&D 5E 5e isn't a Golden Age of D&D Lorewise, it's Silver at best.

[Maxperson]

Well, exactly my point: customer satisfaction and enjoyment for a luxury product like D&D books is directly tied to their profit, since people won't buy books they don't like.

But my point is that you can like a book for 9 reasons and the 10th, lore can be deficient in your eyes and you will still happily buy it. I've bought many 5e books, but I think the lore is deficient. I'm evidence of what I am saying.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

5E Ravenloft isn't a continuation of the old setting, it's a reboot. Spelljammer is looking to be much the same, based on previews. Any further content we get for those settings will be for the new version, not the old.

The Realms has been presented as a continuation of the old setting for most of 5E... but the announcement of the current canon policy last year, and the lore changes creeping in through errata and books like MOTM, might suggest changes are coming there as well. I would be surprised if they do a total reboot as they did with Ravenloft, though.

(Dragonlance is going to be interesting, and probably instructive. My bet is they'll deal in broad strokes and work around the details of the old canon, avoiding any potential fan backlash.)

FR is different from the other setting in that it's been a consistent living setting while the rest have been dorment for years.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

But my point is that you can like a book for 9 reasons and the 10th, lore can be deficient in your eyes and you will still happily buy it. I've bought many 5e books, but I think the lore is deficient. I'm evidence of what I am saying.

Same here. I bought MToF despite the poor quality of the lore.

 

[Maxperson]

There is also the possibility that at this point the vast majority of players have no other experience then 5e and others only have experience with 4e & 5e. So it's not a matter of preferring 5e's approach to, it's having too little experience with anything else, so they could be open to more lore, we just don't know.

That's a possibility as well.

 

[Smackpixi]

I Love playing in FR in The well trod areas cause there’s so much lore and previous lore and history. Wherever you are, if you need something in This Swamp, there probably is something already written. My players are in The Mere of Dead Men, and with official and Dungeon adventures it is loaded with stuff to look through and play with or also disregard and ignore. WotC has made a point of being much less specific on lore recently, because their goal is to make things more open. I don’t really care for it, but unless you’re fixated on true To official published for some reason, all that detail Is still available, in my world the last 500 years of FR history is just yesterday when I need it.

but to OP point. Yep, they’ve gone vague...because it’s all fictional history so it doesn’t matter and you can do whatever the fork you want. They are very much trying to empower DMs by implying that these are not fixed real places, these are just helpful ideas of places you could run a game.

 

[Smackpixi]

None of this naughty word is real is hard for some people

 

[a.everett1287]

I Love playing in FR in The well trod areas cause there’s so much lore and previous lore and history. Wherever you are, if you need something in This Swamp, there probably is something already written. My players are in The Mere of Dead Men, and with official and Dungeon adventures it is loaded with stuff to look through and play with or also disregard and ignore. WotC has made a point of being much less specific on lore recently, because their goal is to make things more open. I don’t really care for it, but unless you’re fixated on true To official published for some reason, all that detail Is still available, in my world the last 500 years of FR history is just yesterday when I need it.

but to OP point. Yep, they’ve gone vague...because it’s all fictional history so it doesn’t matter and you can do whatever the fork you want. They are very much trying to empower DMs by implying that these are not fixed real places, these are just helpful ideas of places you could run a game.

I'm discovering that some people need to be told how to be creative in step-by-step instructions, I guess.


Once again, being facetious because I disagree so deeply with this premise

 

[Charlaquin]

None of this naughty word is real is hard for some people

What are you talking about?

 

[MGibster]

I don't get people's fascination with lore. For a TTRPG lore is just "if you cannot think of something cool yourself, use this".

What is lore? I'm not trying to be deeply philosophical here, I'm just trying to get a grasp on what we're talking about. For me, the lore is simply the setting and I think of it as a sandbox where I can play my way. The big problem with lore in the 1990s is that it was very often more important than whatever the players were doing. (But then I'm convinced many RPG books from the 1990s were written more with the intention of being read for entertainment than for use in gaming.)

One nice thing about lore is that if everyone at the table is familiar with it then you don't have to do a lot of explaining. If we all know about Vampire the Masqurade, we understand the difference between an Anarch and Justicar. A common framework is nice for any game.

 

[Smackpixi]

What are you talking about?

I’m saying some people want settings to be specific and “real” and WoTC has abandoned that idea, they’re just going to say, “ here’s some ideas, but do whatever you want” and I’m saying that’s hard for some who want their settings to be specific and ”real” outside their own game/ideas.