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

[dave2008]

Honestly, lore is low on my list of what makes an edition the "golden age" edition.

Me too.

 

[MadArkitekt]

Me too.

What criteria does a edition need to meet to be gold in your eyes? (That reads belligerently. Apologies, I’m not being combative, just very curious)

 

[Blue Orange]

Almost everyone thinks Nazis are bad, and even more people did back when the lore came out. I don’t think the Nazi thing was a coincidence. Having your villain copy their ideology was probably a no brainer. (Gary Gygax’s original ethics of evil were Social Darwinism, more or less.) They did the same with the Daleks and the Galactic Empire in Star Wars; Star Trek didn’t have any space Nazis because it was supposed to be optimistic. Starting the biggest war in human history and committing war crimes so vast they invent new names for them tends to do that. (As long as you lose, of course…)

But the lore thing-I agree, I enjoyed reading about the structure of the Zhentarim and the Knights of Takhisis. My best guess is lore books aren’t as profitable as they used to be, or else they wanted to avoid the weight of backstory making it too hard to get into the game. Long running franchises like Marvel and DC, not to mention Hasbro properties GI Joe and Transformers, reboot every so often. I would bet it’s a business decision.

 

[dave2008]

What criteria does a edition need to meet to be gold in your eyes? (That reads belligerently. Apologies, I’m not being combative, just very curious)

Well from a historical perspective I would say sales and social influence.

Personally, I am more interested in variety, ideas, and creativity. So for me it would have to be an OGL edition and since I didn't play 3e it would have to be 5e. The OGL, DMsGuild, and the internet have created an explosion of creativity that TSR or WotC could never match. So I would definitely say 5e is the golden age for me. So many great and interesting ideas available.

 

[MadArkitekt]

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.

Exactly!

 

[Mind of tempest]

One phenomenon I find interesting in D&D lore videos on Youtube is how many of them use 5E as a starting point, but try to fill in the gaps using lore from older editions - even from 4E, the least compatible of the lot with the others. And how that's continued even as Wizards' willingness to retcon and reboot older lore has become more obvious. Even when Wizards' current policy is explicitly telling them anything from before 5E (and possibly anything outside the current core rules!) isn't canon.

So I guess some modern D&D fans must like having deep lore, even when Wizards is going the opposite way.

yeah, that is me, as most people tend to build settings of what they know and few are ever going to be accomplished, world builders and thus tend to blindly copy clichés ideas that are boring or they make something which feels like a weekend in hell which as its place but I would like something else.

admittedly most f the classic settings do not really grab me either.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't have Southlands but Midgard was better than WotC efforts.

 

[MadArkitekt]

yeah, that is me, as most people tend to build settings of what they know and few are ever going to be accomplished, world builders and thus tend to blindly copy clichés ideas that are boring or they make something which feels like a weekend in hell which as its place but I would like something else.

admittedly most f the classic settings do not really grab me either.

I can see where you’re coming from. Try picking out some of your favorite monsters and see where they started as opposed to now. Covering something like the history of the Harpers and the escapades of Minsc and Boo is daunting especially if you’re not invested. Pick something you’re intrigued with and do a bit of digging, then work some lore in if you’d like.

 

[Oofta]

That's fine. I personally love lore and hold 2e's lore as what to shoot for. Do a majority want more? Who knows. Nothing says they do. Do a majority want less? Who knows. Nothing says they do. Do a majority like it best the way it is. Who knows. Nothing says they do.

This discussion should be held without people trying to speak for a majority they know nothing about on this topic. Just speak for yourself(general you).

I was trying to be humorous, sorry if it came off as insulting. But I still stand by what I said. A significant portion, I think the vast majority, only have high level of comprehension of most campaign worlds that could be fit on a page or two. I know I've bought books in the past thinking how awesome it was and then ... yeah. I read the first few pages, skimmed the rest. Pages of lore is simply not for everyone.

In addition, the lore is still out there and available for download if you want it. I realize some may consider campaign worlds largely stagnant because of this but if I were to use a published campaign world I would want to make it my own anyway. I'd pick a period, tweak things so that Bob who could have a doctorate in the setting could still be surprised and start from that point. I want the PCs to have a chance to stop the fall of kingdom X, not have new lore that comes out that says the kingdom fell in year Y.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What's a "Golden Age"? If you look at the so-called Golden Age of comics, that stuff was mostly garbage.

So, in that sense, it would probably be a fair to describe 2nd edition as the Golden Age of D&D lore. Thank goodness it's over!