Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8007767" data-attributes="member: 59082">Count me as another who is enjoying your series and hope to see that 5th part. It is partially because of that, that your ongoing insistence on "people are arguing, and I'm just trying to discuss" is a bit off-putting. You seem to equate any kind of disagreement with arguing. I can only speak for myself, but I was never arguing with you. I just didn't totally agree with your take . I have no interest in "scoring points," but I do prefer engaging in discussion that allows for some variance of opinion and even disagreement. It is all in good fun, no?By way of discussion, I'll explore some of these ideas a bit more. I think a lot of this boils down to one's relationship with the rules-as-written, including the underlying assumption of the rules and, specifically, to what degree one adheres to them in a home campaign. You touch upon this in your second point, and even acknowledge that the assumptions of 5E are more open-ended than in 2-3-4Es, but I think it should be highlighted further.5E has returned to and magnified the root assumption that individual DMs and groups should make the game their own, from gentle head-nods in the direction of a variety of settings, to the loose and comparatively simple rules set, to advocacy of Rule Zero, etc. Part of this is a more open-ended and less defined model of the multiverse, as [USER=6677017]@Sword of Spirit[/USER] mentioned in their 1st point.In other words, it is almost as if WotC is actively encouraging people not to rigidly adhere to RAW, or "CAW" (canon as written; or "TAW" if you prefer: tropes as written). I think this "new" approach is illustrated in their product line, but especially the Magic setting books, which seem secondarily to be detailed and fully realized settings, but more primarily to be sourcebooks that provide a specific combination of style, flavor and theme in the context of a Magic plane.Take Theros as an example. One could use it to run a campaign in Theros, but one can just as easily use it to incorporate "Therosian" elements in one's home campaign.Now of course this has always been the case. In 1995, one could take bits and pieces from the Forgotten Realms, Raveloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, Birthright and other settings, mixing and matching to one's heart's desire. But there was an implication that "this is the way you use this product." That has changed. The implication now seems to be "here's some cool stuff, make of it what you will."Maybe what you are asking for is something a bit more specific than simply WotC advocating for this open-ended approach. You seem to want them to explicitly not only acknowledge, but employ the Gygaxian model in at least some forthcoming products. The reason I don't see this happening--at least beyond one variant among many described in a hypothetical planar book--is that the 5E approach can include the Gygaxian model as an option, while focusing too much on the Gygaxian model runs the risk of returning to a more strictly canonical approach.What I think may happen is that they publish a planar book that isn't centralized on any specific cosmological approach to the planes, but is more of a sourcebook of variants: Grubbian Great Wheel, Gygaxian multiverse, Planescape, Spelljammer, the World Tree, planeswalking, fully isolated settings, etc*. This, in my view, would be the best of both (all?!) worlds and fit the 5E design approach of satisfying as many people as possible while offering something slightly new, even if it leaves those faithful to a specific setting or approach feeling a bit of lack.(*I personally would love to see such an approach to the planes, perhaps centered on Sigil, with different 'factions' following different cosmological models. But even if they didn't take this approach, I'd probably run it that way.)EDIT: Or pretty much what [USER=7006]@DEFCON 1[/USER]  says <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-brilliance-of-the-original-gygaxian-multiverse.672504/post-8005606" target="_blank">here</a>, but didn't read until after I posted the above.</blockquote>

Verification