D&D (2024) No Appendix N Equivalent?

[Vaalingrade]

in favour of inch-deep mile-wide stuff like Sanderson's Cosmere (sorry Sanderson bros, the man can churn it out, and can write a fight scene, but he can't give it any depth or humanity, and the Cosmere represents the very worst of "World-building not characters" lore-baiting) or YA stuff which is often fun but deeply unoriginal and will be entirely forgotten in ten years.

And people wonder why I don't want a section in the books promoting this kind of behavior.

Fantasy already has enough gatekeepers without giving them more turrets to man those gates with.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Certainly, "great literature" is one thing I would be wary of suggesting for D&D. D&D is inherently pulpy fan fiction, and pulp is often the best source of ideas. With the added advantage that if it gets forgotten, no one will notice you are plagiarising. We can't lift meaningful discourse on the human condition, but we can lift the cool looking drilling machine from Thunderbirds.

 

[billd91]

(hello Morbius, Mary Shelley wants her plot back).

[aside]She can't have it. She wrote it so long ago that her IP is public domain. It belongs to everyone now.[/aside]

 

[Parmandur]

Certainly, "great literature" is one thing I would be wary of suggesting for D&D. D&D is inherently pulpy fan fiction, and pulp is often the best source of ideas. With the added advantage that if it gets forgotten, no one will notice you are plagiarising. We can't lift meaningful discourse on the human condition, but we can lift the cool looking drilling machine from Thunderbirds.

I dunno, I think Shakespeare's The Winters Tale would make a pretty good. Asis for a module.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I dunno, I think Shakespeare's The Winters Tale would make a pretty good. Asis for a module.

Sure, but you have to be careful. Shakespeare was great at plotting, and plots you can lift (e.g. Forbidden Planet). But characters not so much, since the focus should be on the PCs.

But my main point is, it doesn't matter if it's garbage, even garbage is a good source of ideas, and no one cares if you steel it.

 

[Gradine]

I don't think I am misreading it at all. Cozy as an aesthetic has been around for well over a decade and is fading in popularity with anyone under about 30, frankly.

I work at a university, and I can tell you that this is decidedly not true. Cozy has never been bigger among that age group, and considering the state of things (at least here in the US) I can foresee it expanding in influence.

More to the point, dark and gritty has not made any kind of significant comeback within that age group. I think there's a definitely a drive of nostalgia towards that aesthetic among Gen X or even older Millennials, children of the 90's and all, but I gotta tell you, I'm an older Millennial, and I just celebrated my daughter's tenth birthday and my seventeenth wedding anniversary. Young adult, we are not.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And people wonder why I don't want a section in the books promoting this kind of behavior.

Fantasy already has enough gatekeepers without giving them more turrets to man those gates with.

It's not "gatekeeping" to have an opinion on stuff, and your post here is a great example of how that word, along with "gaslighting" has been reduced to a meaningless buzzphrase that's just slathered on everyone you have the slightest disagreement with.

Gatekeeping is when you are saying "X isn't really fantasy" or "If you like Y you're not a real fantasy fan" or the like.

It's funny that you're getting so upset here, because Sanderson fans are some of the most aggressive gatekeepers out there, both towards other people reading Sanderson's books, where they can be quite aggressive and unpleasant towards anyone who isn't familiar with or very interested in the Cosmere stuff (I personally got called a "tourist" and sneered at a couple of years ago, because I'd "only" read like ten Sanderson books and apparently not the correct ones!), and towards anyone recommending other fantasy authors at all, particularly ones Sanderson himself hasn't recommended. This is often the way too - you have a subject that is gentle and kind (and Sanderson himself seems to be, and his books often focus on doing the right thing), and the fandom are pretty horrible and embody everything the works despise (c.f. Steven Universe's fandom - what did that poor nice show do to deserve them?).

YA fantasy is an area basically patrolled by YA BookTok, and if a YA fantasy novel fails is perceived as failing to comply with their restrictions/objections, it again is very aggressively pushed against - people who like it are told they're bad people, TikTokers who recommend it get basically exiled/cancelled, and even publishers have been impacted by this at times.

You're perfectly well aware I didn't suggest Sanderson or YA (both of which I read) "aren't fantasy" or "shouldn't be read" or the like, so claiming "gatekeeping" is absolutely silly. Particularly given how much of both I've read (I've given up on Stormlight, but if Sanderson started something new and cool I might be interested, despite his weak characterization - which has certainly improved a bit over the years, just really slowly!).

My point is very simple, and ironically for your claim, is about real gatekeeping (yes I am gatekeeping gatekeeping!) - Sanderson Cosmere fandom and general YA fantasy fandom have become so dominant in fantasy book discussion spaces online that anything else is squeezed very hard (and as I noted, sometimes even aggressively and intentionally pushed out), and it's increasingly difficult for new authors to get any kind of traction with fantasy writing unless it's YA. The only other way that seems to be seeing much success in recent years is to emulate Sanderson and go incredibly hard on worldbuilding and lore, lore, lore, lore, even if it leads to entire books full of exposition and very little else.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The point was taking a jumping off point for an aggressive rant against some target dujour. Warcraft, anime, videogames, YA -- just find and replace for BS D&D stock 'point'.

It's a thing in this community and something we don't need more of.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I work at a university, and I can tell you that this is decidedly not true. Cozy has never been bigger among that age group, and considering the state of things (at least here in the US) I can foresee it expanding in influence.

I remain very skeptical - I know people in that age group and a bit younger and I don't see that aesthetic being very popular anymore, but much grimier ones. It's possible that the US/UK differences (the UK has always been far more grime-friendly) plus the fact that the majority of university students are going to be wealthier and thus insulated from problems somewhat (unless we're talking a community college or similar) play into this, but I feel like you're seeing what you want to see. I also question whether the world going to hell is going to make people double-down on that aesthetic - historically that hasn't been how young people have reacted in such situations, but history isn't always a guide here.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The point was taking a jumping off point for an aggressive rant against some target dujour. Warcraft, anime, videogames, YA -- just find and replace for BS D&D stock 'point'.

It's a thing in this community and something we don't need more of.

I love that you think I hate YA given the amount of YA I read!

You seem to adopting a position that if you criticise something at all, that's "gatekeeping", and we "don't need more of it" (funny, given how much you, specifically, criticise things, including D&D). Which is itself something we "don't need more of", frankly.

Criticism by people who actually understand what they're talking about and are engaged with it shouldn't be lazily dismissed as being the same as ill-informed "X sux" stuff.

Again, you're actually gatekeeping here. You're saying I'm not allowed to criticise stuff, and the community doesn't need people criticising stuff. That's genuine gatekeeping.

I actually have played thousand and thousands of hours of Warcraft. I have max-level characters in the current expansion, but according to you, I'm what, not allowed to criticise it because some dingbat who has never played it or last played in briefly in 2006 might say something dumb about it? Care to back that up?

I've watched an awful lot of anime recently, including most of the big hits, but according to you I'm not allowed to criticise it because you're determined "this community" doesn't need it, on the apparent grounds that some know-nothing grog rants about characters "looking anime" or whatever?

I'm apparently not allowed to critique Sanderson, despite having read 10 of his novels, and literally 5000+ pages of his work (maybe closer to 10,000), because you think what, I haven't read enough? If so that is literally gatekeeping.

I think the real problem here is you're not engaging with what you read here, you're knee-jerk reacting to any criticism of certain things, no matter how well-informed. Imho you should make more of an effort to separate informed criticism from mindless reactionary sentiment, lest you end up engaging in the latter yourself.