Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 3788724" data-attributes="member: 1106">And what gods do these settings share in common?&nbsp; Lolth.&nbsp; Some demihuman gods.&nbsp; That's it.Thor is in the Deities and Demigods from 1st ed.&nbsp; 12 year old gamers might go slay Zeus, in 1st ed, and if you were running a setting-lite game, you could just pick a bunch of deities from that book and call it a day.&nbsp; Maybe you didn't have those experiences.&nbsp; Earth pantheon gods are &quot;generic&quot; because they fit in any old D&amp;D world as much as they do another, and everyone knows them already.I agree about the existence of a &quot;D&amp;D mythology&quot;, including stuff like that and the origin of the mind flayers with regard to githyanki, etc. But at the same time we need to make sure that crap doesn't get added to the core in some place where it can't be ignored in the same way you could an aesthetically tasteless monster or poorly conceived spell.&nbsp; Few would object to Vecna turning up wherever; many would object to some wizard club with a lame name turning up everywhere.&nbsp; And for every Vecna or Rod of Seven Parts which hit a chord there are many other artifacts and parts of the D&amp;D mythology and implied setting which everyone ignored because they were lame (C.I.F.A.L.s, anyone?)Iron Sigil and Emerald Frost might well be the latter.&nbsp; They don't sound like they have the &quot;mythic resonance&quot; of Tiamat in the least.&nbsp; They sound cheesey, and like something created as a result of crunch support rather than being an aesthetically good idea.&nbsp; This &quot;crunch first, flavour afterthought&quot; didn't generate good flavour in 3E, and I don't see that changing much in 4E.&nbsp; The wizard implements is good crunch and good flavour; this doesn't look like it's got the balance right in the same way that seems to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 3788724, member: 1106"] And what gods do these settings share in common? Lolth. Some demihuman gods. That's it. Thor is in the Deities and Demigods from 1st ed. 12 year old gamers might go slay Zeus, in 1st ed, and if you were running a setting-lite game, you could just pick a bunch of deities from that book and call it a day. Maybe you didn't have those experiences. Earth pantheon gods are "generic" because they fit in any old D&D world as much as they do another, and [b]everyone knows them already[/b]. I agree about the existence of a "D&D mythology", including stuff like that and the origin of the mind flayers with regard to githyanki, etc. But at the same time we need to make sure that crap doesn't get added to the core in some place where it can't be ignored in the same way you could an aesthetically tasteless monster or poorly conceived spell. Few would object to Vecna turning up wherever; many would object to some wizard club with a lame name turning up everywhere. And for every Vecna or Rod of Seven Parts which hit a chord there are many other artifacts and parts of the D&D mythology and implied setting which everyone ignored because they were lame (C.I.F.A.L.s, anyone?) Iron Sigil and Emerald Frost might well be the latter. They don't sound like they have the "mythic resonance" of Tiamat in the least. They sound cheesey, and like something created as a result of crunch support rather than being an aesthetically good idea. This "crunch first, flavour afterthought" didn't generate good flavour in 3E, and I don't see that changing much in 4E. The wizard implements is good crunch and good flavour; this doesn't look like it's got the balance right in the same way that seems to. [/QUOTE]

Verification