WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Micah Sweet]

Because metaplot has proven that it's definitely bad for TTRPG settings and probably bad for other media.

And metaplot isn't setting. It's sometimes adventures that take place there, but it isn't the setting itself. Metaplot ruins settings. That's not the same thing as being a setting.

Metaplot is the continuing history of the setting, which makes it part of the setting by default.

I was born in 1976. That was the present at the time, when my campaign (so to speak) began. Now it's 2022, my campaign has been running for 46 years (still on my first character!), and all the events between 1976 and now are history.

 

[Scribe]

Because metaplot has proven that it's definitely bad for TTRPG settings and probably bad for other media.

And metaplot isn't setting. It's sometimes adventures that take place there, but it isn't the setting itself. Metaplot ruins settings. That's not the same thing as being a setting.

I could not possibly agree more.

 

[Faolyn]

Horror is horror. You want to remove certain parts for your table go ahead. Its your table. When they make horror movies and series do you think they go through this entire debacle? Fading to black is also an option.

I almost inevitably run horror, to the point I actually have a hard time running non-horror games. It's where my mind just goes naturally. So I can say with some certainty that no, horror is not horror. There are many kinds of horror and differing degrees of horror. There is also (to paraphrase a horror writer I like) the difference between horror and trauma. The game needs to be horrific for the characters, not the players. The players should be having fun while playing.

And as for what you said, the reverse is true. If you want to add rape to your game, go ahead; it's your table. It doesn't need to be in the actual book. And it's makes the game much more accessible to more people--more fun to more people--not to include it in the book.

 

[Faolyn]

Option 2 in your example.

Which will still make some players angry.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I could not possibly agree more.

Whether or not metaplot is good is a different issue than is it part of the setting.

TSR released three "starter" points for the Ravenloft setting in 2e: two boxed sets and the Domains of Dread hardcover. The setting details for the latter two (and the later 3e version) had advanced due to the metaplot, but all three were the Ravenloft setting as it existed at the time.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Metaplot is the continuing history of the setting, which makes it part of the setting by default.

A part of it, yes. A bad part, even. However, something being a part of a setting doesn't make it be the setting. Or essential to it. Just like something can be a part of the game/its history without being the game. By your logic, the game is THAC0.

I was born in 1976. That was the present at the time, when my campaign (so to speak) began. Now it's 2022, my campaign has been running for 46 years (still on my first character!), and all the events between 1976 and now are history.

Yes, good for you. Enjoy your metaplots at your table. However, don't let them touch mine, the official settings, or my books with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which will still make some players angry.

But not as many, because not mentioning something isn't the same as changing it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

A part of it, yes. A bad part, even. However, something being a part of a setting doesn't make it be the setting. Or essential to it. Just like something can be a part of the game/its history without being the game. By your logic, the game is THAC0.

Yes, good for you. Enjoy your metaplots at your table. However, don't let them touch mine, the official settings, or my books with a 10 foot pole.

Mechanics are not part of the setting. They may inform the setting as it is expressed, but they are not people, places or events.  those three things comprise setting.

Again, the value (or lack thereof) of metaplot has nothing to do with it being part of the setting if it exists.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I almost inevitably run horror, to the point I actually have a hard time running non-horror games. It's where my mind just goes naturally. So I can say with some certainty that no, horror is not horror. There are many kinds of horror and differing degrees of horror. There is also (to paraphrase a horror writer I like) the difference between horror and trauma. The game needs to be horrific for the characters, not the players. The players should be having fun while playing.

And as for what you said, the reverse is true. If you want to add rape to your game, go ahead; it's your table. It doesn't need to be in the actual book. And it's makes the game much more accessible to more people--more fun to more people--not to include it in the book.

So I'm not very familiar with the Domain you cited but I am aware of the Phantom Lover from the 2e Ravenloft Darklords book I own. If I can recall correctly, he too would rape but the way I envisioned his actions were very much like the visitations of a vampire despite the fact that they would undoubtedly be more sexual in nature than that of a vampire feeding.

If someone at one's table (a player) had active trauma of a RL incident (of that nature) it would obviously be the DM who would need to not include such a common trope (Night Hag, Succubus, Rusulka...etc) in the campaign. As it would for any other story that would negatively affect their player/s.

It's not like we sanitise Greek myths right for those who would be affected by the rapes by Zeus?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Mechanics are not part of the setting. They may inform the setting as it is expressed, but they are not people, places or events.  those three things comprise setting.

And?

Again, the value (or lack thereof) of metaplot has nothing to do with it being part of the setting if it exists.

Metaplots are the cancer of settings. They grow bigger and bigger over time, slowly killing the setting, and must be completely excised for the health of its host.

Cancer is a part of the body. But one that must be removed for the good of the body.