D&D Beyond: Mythology in MTOFs

[gyor]

[video=youtube_share;yCqW_MI-Exk]https://youtu.be/yCqW_MI-Exk[/video]

https://youtu.be/yCqW_MI-Exk

Very strange video, I'm not sure what to think of it.

 

[TerraDave]

"WHY IS THE QUESTION MYTHOLOGY IS THE ANSWER"--pasty faced, hand waving, eyebrow shaking mearls.

 

[Bitbrain]

Pretty interesting video, and I agree. I think it's more satisfying as a world-building exercise to ask "why are things this way?" instead of "how?".

 

[gyor]

Pretty interesting video, and I agree. I think it's more satisfying as a world-building exercise to ask "why are things this way?" instead of "how?".

I like a mix of both + Who and Where.

 

[TerraDave]

Pretty interesting video, and I agree. I think it's more satisfying as a world-building exercise to ask "why are things this way?" instead of "how?".

But do either why or how really have a big impact on most games? I guess people like reading that stuff, though I don't find what Mearls saying to be especially compelling in that sense either.

It does seem like a strange point of emphasis. Elf or dwarf PCs are going to behave like the players want them to, and the same for NPCs controlled by the DM. You don't need more then a paragraph or two of flavor text to set that up.

 

[gyor]

But do either why or how really have a big impact on most games? I guess people like reading that stuff, though I don't find what Mearls saying to be especially compelling in that sense either.

It does seem like a strange point of emphasis. Elf or dwarf PCs are going to behave like the players want them to, and the same for NPCs controlled by the DM. You don't need more then a paragraph or two of flavor text to set that up.

I think the idea is to provide a broader context to compare your character against.

 

[TerraDave]

I think the idea is to provide a broader context to compare your character against.

Ahh, but what context?

The context of your character's world, which depends on the DM and the various materials they may or may not be using?

The context of how people actually play that particular race, which this may or may not reflect?

Or the context of this is what they have made up lately about these races?

I do wonder about the audience for this. Its hard to get players to read more then a few paras here or there if there isn't some kind of obvious mechanical advantage to doing so.

Are DMs really looking for a bunch of background on core races, outside the context of a particular setting, or at all?

 

[Parmandur]

Ahh, but what context?

The context of your character's world, which depends on the DM and the various materials they may or may not be using?

The context of how people actually play that particular race, which this may or may not reflect?

Or the context of this is what they have made up lately about these races?

I do wonder about the audience for this. Its hard to get players to read more then a few paras here or there if there isn't some kind of obvious mechanical advantage to doing so.

Are DMs really looking for a bunch of background on core races, outside the context of a particular setting, or at all?

Same audience as Chapter 1 in Volo's Guide (which is much the same but for monstrous races) or the "Complete Book of *" series from 2E.

 

[TerraDave]

Same audience as Chapter 1 in Volo's Guide (which is much the same but for monstrous races) or the "Complete Book of *" series from 2E.

I guess. The success of VG clearly laid the path for this. And the complete books did have flavor text--of widely varying quality--along with crunch, again of widely varying quality, which is what I assume drove sales.

But, its like, are you buying it for the articles, or really just looking at the pictures.