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

[Shardstone]

Yes, that is the choice we can make. It's the choice we could always make, and many have made (including me!).

But Wizards isn't encouraging you to pick and choose with their current policy. They encourage you to imagine the lore of each edition as limited to that edition, and for the 5E lore to only include 5E material (and not even all of it). You can make up your own canon, they say, but they don't encourage mixing. (The implication I get is that they'd rather you use 5E lore, or modifications thereof.)

If they really wanted to encourage players to tap into the lore of every edition, they would have said that instead, rather than creating barriers between different editions' canon. Or just not said anything at all.

No they don't.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Most people don't give a furry rat's derriere about detailed lore. Most people only need a 10,000 foot view of a campaign world and will never read more than a sentence or three. Meanwhile there are already thousands of pages of information available at the click of a button for those who do want that kind of detail.

I don't see any significant demand for detailed lore. Many want to fill in the blanks themselves, most just don't care. I'm not making any judgement call on what "enough" is, because I'm in the "I want to fill in the blanks myself" crowd. I'm just pointing out the reality that in my experience most people don't care and for those that do there's a ton of existing lore a few clicks away.

most people use homebrew adventures but that does not stop them making adventures and selling them, so why not give some detailed lore helps dms set the scene and player make detailed characters who belong.

 

[Oofta]

most people use homebrew adventures but that does not stop them making adventures and selling them, so why not give some detailed lore helps dms set the scene and player make detailed characters who belong.

How much is enough and does the source of the lore matter? I don't really have a horse in this race, I only do homebrew. But if I'm doing Tomb of Annihilation and want to know about Chult, a google search is a few clicks away and I have a ton of info. I mentioned earlier that if I look up the Harpers, there's a 7 page wiki which doesn't even include the detailed pages on specific important individuals. You could spend days reading through all the material that's available.

Would it be "better" if all of that was consolidated into one source book? Maybe? But then you just have lore scattered about in a bunch of different products. If I want to set my own adventure in Chult that's unrelated to ToA, how do I get the "official" source material? Why don't I just rely on all the info that's freely available? How would you keep any source book up to date when a new module is released that adds or modifies something? Why not just let people do things like the FR wiki for free?

I suspect WOTC has looked at the ROI for campaign setting only books and decided to spend money elsewhere because it's just not profitable. Or at least not as profitable as what they are producing. That's why they created the DmsGuild, let others go after the pennies while they focus on the dimes (or dollars if the movie is successful).

 

[Henadic Theologian]

How much is enough and does the source of the lore matter? I don't really have a horse in this race, I only do homebrew. But if I'm doing Tomb of Annihilation and want to know about Chult, a google search is a few clicks away and I have a ton of info. I mentioned earlier that if I look up the Harpers, there's a 7 page wiki which doesn't even include the detailed pages on specific important individuals. You could spend days reading through all the material that's available.

Would it be "better" if all of that was consolidated into one source book? Maybe? But then you just have lore scattered about in a bunch of different products. If I want to set my own adventure in Chult that's unrelated to ToA, how do I get the "official" source material? Why don't I just rely on all the info that's freely available? How would you keep any source book up to date when a new module is released that adds or modifies something? Why not just let people do things like the FR wiki for free?

I suspect WOTC has looked at the ROI for campaign setting only books and decided to spend money elsewhere because it's just not profitable. Or at least not as profitable as what they are producing. That's why they created the DmsGuild, let others go after the pennies while they focus on the dimes (or dollars if the movie is successful).

Most of the wiki info is out of date and having access to the wiki info doesn't improve the value of WotC products and turn it into a Golden Age.

 

[Oofta]

Most of the wiki info is out of date and having access to the wiki info doesn't improve the value of WotC products and turn it into a Golden Age.

Then it's a good thing I never said we were in a golden age. But again, what's a better option? If you want an official, supported source, it has to be paid for. For my home campaign, I maintain an online wiki-style document (even if I'm probably the only one that uses it). For something as massive as FR ... it would be a huge investment. Probably not one that would be profitable.

During the TSR days, they cranked out materials and assumed it would sell. It didn't work out well for the company, but all those books are still out there if you want them. What would it take to keep all that info current and how do you pay for it?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Most of the wiki info is out of date and having access to the wiki info doesn't improve the value of WotC products and turn it into a Golden Age.

What does "Out of date" really mean?
It only has relevance if meta-plot is important but I have to question why?

Personally I never saw the need for either the Spellplague or the meta plot to "correct" it. The game would have been better off with out either.

Unless are hanging plot hooks from lore and even then character decisions will drift the campaign from the lore? What do you do with meta plot then?

 

[MadArkitekt]

Hey, I’ve definitely run D&D scenarios involving brunch. I just don’t need a source book about it.

(which isn’t to say I didn’t buy The Complete Book of Elf Brunches back in the 90s… it was a long time ago and my memory isn’t great anymore).

Ok. I am really confused. Where did brunch come into this? And now I’m hungry, curse you.

 

[JEB]

"The material in games and novels before 5e is not canon because we don't want a massive barrier for new DMs and Players." Clarification.

The DMG said novels and video games are part of a setting's canon, without distinguishing by edition. The 2021 policy splits off tabletop canon from novels, video games, and every other "expression" of D&D. It's a change in policy.

 

[JEB]

No they don't.

I'm afraid they do:

Every edition of the roleplaying game has its own canon as well.

 

[Shardstone]

Fair enough. I just really don't like the idea of beholders spawning from their own dreams. I seems like a detail invented to allow them to make variants with an excuse.

If you have one idea you already like, why do you need to use the new idea you don't like?