D&D (2024) No Appendix N Equivalent?

[Deset Gled]

Because people who play D&D are massively literal. If it’s not on the list it ain’t D&D. As already stated, it’s just people looking for reassurance that the stuff they like is the RIGHT kind of inspiration.

Why should I care what inspires designers? Their pay check I assume.

If you want to know what Chris’ Perkins’ favourite fiction is ask Chris Perkins, but it’s no more useful for D&D than anyone else’s list of favourite fiction.

IMNSHO, to read a book (or view a piece of art, or hear a piece of music) and think "I don't care what inspired the creator!" feels like it would be a very sad way for me to experience the works I enjoy. To declare "and other fans could never appreciate that information either!" feels even sadder.

 

[Distracted DM]

Why should I care what inspires designers? Their pay check I assume.

If you want to know what Chris’ Perkins’ favourite fiction is ask Chris Perkins, but it’s no more useful for D&D than anyone else’s list of favourite fiction.

When I pick up a new ttrpg product, yeah I want to know what kind of things inspired them to create it, for multiple reasons. Should DnD be any different? It could be I guess, it's a big IP corpo product after all... But someone had to design the system, and they had their own inspirations that might've inspired them in the design process.

 

[John Lloyd1]

First.

I couldn't find it in the 1981 black books.

 

[Retros_x]

When I pick up a new ttrpg product, yeah I want to know what kind of things inspired them to create it, for multiple reasons. Should DnD be any different? It could be I guess, it's a big IP corpo product after all... But someone had to design the system, and they had their own inspirations that might've inspired them in the design process.

But why does it need to be part of a core book. Publish a "behind the scenes" article, a post mortem, whatever, something for the people who are interested in the design process. But appendix N comes with so many contentions and discussions, why is this in there, can I run D&D based on something that is not in there, old players being angry about modern inclusions like anime, new players being confused about old inclusions they never head about etc. pp.

And even from the defenders of appendix, I have not read a single comment in this thread "yeah, I took inspiration from Appendix N. I had no idea for my own, read some stuff and it inspired my campaign". Everyone is like "its interesting, I got some nice books out of it - never used it in my campaign though". You don't need the DMG to get fantasy book recommendations. And again most DMs already have their inspiration, their idea of the type of fantasy they want to run. And if they need inspiration - most get it from the internet.

Just leave that relic behind. Which they already did. And appereantly already did for 3th and 4th edition too! I learned that from this thread. So 2014 5e DMG was the single exception of including Appendix N for the last 24 years.

 

[Yaarel]

"All literature is completely equal and there is zero worth in discussing themes and tone because all works equally contribute to every possible interpretation" is simply not true.

It isnt that "all literature is equal". It is that diverse approaches to fantasy are legitimate.

Unless the list is sprawling and encyclopedic, any kind of "abbreviated" "essential" is defacto gatekeeping.


For example, I was looking thru the Star Frontiers "gate keeping". Some of the authors I love are there, like Asimov, Norton, and Bradbury. But some of the scifi authors I love are missing, like Stasheff. And some on the list I dont particularly care for.

Meanwhile, most of the list is from a half a century ago. None of them are talking about accelerating technology, which is something scifi today needs to think about a.s.a.p.


These tiny curated lists that are frozen on a page, dont seem helpful to play a game of D&D today. Yeah, it is interesting, and even historically interesting. But DnDBeyond is a better place for this kind of thing. Even then, is a corporation willing to attach its reputation to authors from a previous century who are sometimes problematic?

 

[Immeril]

Because people who play D&D are massively literal. If it’s not on the list it ain’t D&D. As already stated, it’s just people looking for reassurance that the stuff they like is the RIGHT kind of inspiration.

If we are being literal: the appendix doesn't state that D&D players should read these novels/authors. It merely literally states that those are 'works that have inspired the game’s designers'.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If we are being literal: the appendix doesn't state that D&D players should read these novels/authors. It merely literally states that those are 'works that have inspired the game’s designers'.

And it is still at best useless, and at worst divisive.

The emphasis of the new DMG is all on "make it your own", not on trying to reproduce what the designers do.

All the inspiration you need to play D&D is whatever YOU like.

If you want a list of books to read, you can find them all over the internet, they don't need to be wasting pages in the DMG.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

To declare "and other fans could never appreciate that information either!" feels even sadder.

I'm sure there are people who like that sort of information. But it's idle curiosity. It's not relevant to preparing a game of D&D, so there is no place for it in the DMG. You can find that stuff out easily enough anywhere on the internet if that's what floats your boat.

 

[Immeril]

And it is still at best useless, and at worst divisive.

The emphasis of the new DMG is all on "make it your own", not on trying to reproduce what the designers do.

All the inspiration you need to play D&D is whatever YOU like.

If you want a list of books to read, you can find them all over the internet, they don't need to be wasting pages in the DMG.

AFAIK they have never wasted ‘pages’ on inspirational lists. The appendix was only half a page in 1e DMG, and 1 page in 5e PHB.
What’s so divisive about it? People make it divisive because they apparently are unable to understand what the appendix is, even though it’s literally stated on the page.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

When I pick up a new ttrpg product, yeah I want to know what kind of things inspired them to create it, for multiple reasons. Should DnD be any different? It could be I guess, it's a big IP corpo product after all... But someone had to design the system, and they had their own inspirations that might've inspired them in the design process.

Yeah, they designed it many years ago, many of them are dead, and the things that inspired them are a matter of historical record. And often not what you would want point younger readers at.

In the 50 years since then D&D has grown into it's own thing (there are several hundred licenced D&D novels for a start), so the thing that inspires D&D, and the current game designers, is D&D.