D&D General D&D as an lore fan vs a tools fan

[bsss]

I can't decide on what to pick because I keep coming back to feeling that D&D has too much of both. I like the tools when they make distinct unique characters and produce a simple and effective framework for playing fantasy games. I like the lore when it provides iconic places, people, and stories, but only as a backdrop with ample space to let my campaign emerge with whatever story it wants.

Modern D&D is gluttony, and I'm trying to watch my figure.

EDIT: with that qualification, I went with "Lore", because I like reading a lot of the stuff even if I never use it in a game because it's too specific or bollocks or whatever. It's fun to consume and maybe it'll inspire me or get referenced later in my games. My eyes just gloss over rules I don't care about and I grumble about the overcomplication while mentally ripping pages out of my book.

 

[Corinnguard]

So many interesting bits of lore and tools, so little time to look at all of them.

 

[DEFCON 1]

When I'm a player, I always want my character to have a grounding foundation in the location and time/place in history of where the character developed grew up in. So I always prefer having lore that the DM or the setting writer can provide. I never just want to create a character in a vacuum away from the table and then showing up and saying "Squeeze this character in where the game is starting". To me that's pointless. That's playing the mechanics and not the story. Lore is essential to having a character be a part of the world for me.

Likewise, if I'm a DM... I need as much lore as I can get, as I'm not much of a world-builder and don't really enjoy doing it. I'm more than fine with taking existing lore (whether it is a setting or a adventure book or whatever) and then adding and adjusting stuff to it so that pieces that I grab from various products can fit together into a more cohesive whole-- one that I have then in the back of my mind as I improvise around everything.

Mechanics? My only interest in game mechanics is whether they assist me in my job improvising stories and events around what my players are doing. So D&D mechanics are important to me because I've been so immersed in them for so long I know how to use them off the top of my head when creating interesting story encounters and needing to fill in gaps. But the actual mechanics themselves are no better or no worse for me than most other RPGs. I certainly don't love them to the point that I want every single game I play to be a d20 or 5E derivative-- if I'm going to be collaborating on stories with the other players, I'd prefer the mechanics to help add to those stories... which usually means having distinct mechanics built expressly for that game/genre/setting. If I am playing or running D&D... then absolutely, the d20/5E mechanics are key. But if I'm playing something else... just give me the right mechanics for that game to make the creation and improvisation with them more intuitive.

 

[payn]

Tools here. While I like the lore of the settings as a foundational spring board, im not overly into them in detail. Id fail any trivia night for them. The ruleset is the main draw and setting/lore is just sprinkles on top. I never thought about my use as tool driven, but yeah it fits. Probably why im able to just shrug and move on if edition churn is not in my favor. Im not married to the D&D brand.

 

[soviet]

Tools. I think the lore of classic Gygaxian D&D is powerful and evocative but that's because it is so sparing. Maybe tropes is a more accurate word. I want my D&D to be an effective ruleset for playing with and exploring those tropes.

All the lore in the post Gygaxian sense, like millions of pages of lukewarm forgotten realms drivel, has no value to me at all.

 

[TwoSix]

Tools. I like and appreciate many of the copyrighted D&D elements and settings, but I'm not running a D&D game specifically to explore and invoke those elements. To me, those lore elements constitute what Daggerheart calls a "campaign frame". It's a useful shorthand to give the group references to build their characters and narrative with.

I have zero interest in buying an owlbear plushie or an Elminster keychain. I recognize plenty of the D&D lore, but I have no emotional attachment to it.

 

[Argyle King]

I am interested in both modes of using D&D.

Lore: I would still love to get a good Dragonlance series.

Tool: I agree that, as a 'tool,' the game can be used to play out stories like the ones I read and watch. I enjoy that. Though, I would also say that -D&D specifically, in its current form- doesn't work very well as a tool to tell/play some of the stories that I enjoy. Funny enough, I'm not even sure that D&D as a tool necessarily works well for some D&D lore either. I'm not bashing the game. I'm simply opining that the current product that is the physical tool clashes with the mental space that is the lore.

So, I suppose that the current state of affairs for me personally is that I enjoy the lore more than the tool. When I started typing this thread reply, I initially thought to say that I enjoy both equally. But, thinking as I was typing caused me to realize how frequently I'm playing through D&D Lore (or D&D-inspired Lore) through other 'tools' (other game systems).

 

[Umbran]

I care about the lore of a world that I'm playing in, as far as it is relevant to my play. So, like, if I am playing Rime of the Frostmaiden, I care about the story behind that situation.

Do I care about the Moonshae Isles while I'm playing that? No. The Red Wizards of Thay and their machinations don't matter to me if I'm not interacting with them.

I haven't played any D&D games in which I've needed to care about the lore of the world overall - they've all been pretty local. And when I'm not playing in the setting, I really couldn't give two hoots about it.

But, when I think about it, that is also true when I'm playing in non-D&D games. When I was playing a Star Wars game, I cared about the lore that I was interacting with, not the lore of the entire Star Wars universe.

 

[SothFan]

I’m sorry, I have no idea what that means?

I thought you were saying it was recent you would not do the theme park for D&D, but would for Star Wars; but upon reading twice more I see at no time would you have ever been in D&D as anything other than a game. I misunderstood the recent revelation as a recent choice.

I think I am getting the discussion and topics mixed up as I read one and a previous one is still on my mind. Sorry for the confusion.

As I now understand this discussion, I voted lore as I do not play these games but enjoy fantasy novels.

 

[Corinnguard]

When I'm a player, I always want my character to have a grounding foundation in the location and time/place in history of where the character developed grew up in

In the last two FR adventures my group played in, my DM had us look at a map of Faerun for a place that our characters hailed from. I had my Dragonborn Fighter (Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus) hail from the frontier town of Ruinspoke in the Dragonborn nation of Tymanther. As for my Bugbear Ranger/Rogue (Tyranny of Dragons), he hailed from The Reaching Woods near the town of Berdusk (where he worked as Bounty Hunter in his pre-adventuring days). In both cases, I checked out the lore for Ruinspoke, Tymanther, and the Reaching Woods and the towns near it on the FR Wiki.

Even if you aren't totally into the lore of a given setting, it's a good idea to know the lore of where your character came from.