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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 9536963" data-attributes="member: 7023887">No, it isn't "far too late." Your argument is "D&D has done worldbuilding wrong for decades, so they have to keep doing it that way forever, except for the one setting that got it right." Like I mentioned, steps can and have been taken to prevent this "setting is story" nonsense. Rewind Dark Sun to before Kalak was killed, so future players get to kill him too. Stop advancing the timeline in the Forgotten Realms and treat side novels and games as in their own homebrew version of that setting that doesn't affect the TTRPG books. Choose the point in time on the "metaplot" that best facilitates adventures and make that the permanent starting point for all future TTRPG books. Do what they did with 5e Ravenloft and 4e Dark Sun. They can and should go back to what made the settings interesting adventure locations in the first place.Or do new players not get to experience killing Kalak, in the name of preserving your sacred metaplot? (Or should the DM for every table that want to kill Kalak have to be forced to homebrew rules for it?)And do you have nothing to say about my premise of "players should do the cool stuff." How, on earth, could it possibly be fun for a new player to learn about a cool villain from a TTRPG setting just to be told that an NPC they'd never heard of before killed them? Or to have a cool location that was obliterated because of a metaplot so you can no longer have adventures there? Because that's precisely what your preferred method has lead to in several settings for decades (Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms again, Planescape).Or my point on how lore justification for slight changes can just be pure stupid? You liked the origin of Dragonborn in 4e Forgotten Realms? You liked the Spellplague and think the Goddess of Magic getting murdered for the 3rd time is fine? The Mark of Asmodeus from the SCAG was okay?So, for context, the SCAG for some reason felt the need to explain why all Tieflings are connected to Asmodeus now in this bit of lore.[SPOILER="Mark of Asmodeus"]During the Spellplague, Asmodeus consumed the divine spark of Azuth and thereby achieved godhood. Subsequently, Asmodeus and a coven of warlocks, the Toril Thirteen, performed a rite wherein the archdevil claimed all tieflings in the world as his own, cursing them to bear “the blood of Asmodeus.” This act marked all tieflings as “descendants” of the Lord of the Nine Hells, regardless of their true heritage, and changed them into creatures that resembled their supposed progenitor. The other folk of Faerûn, unnerved by the appearance of these devil-beings, became suspicious of all tieflings and occasionally hostile to them.In spite of what some people believe, however, Asmodeus exerts no power over his “children,” and tieflings today are as free-willed — and willful — as they ever have been. Some do choose to serve the Lord of the Nine Hells and his schemes, while others align themselves with different fiendish factions, or none at all, doing their best to stay out of infernal politics.Since the ritual that spread the curse of Asmodeus a century ago, tieflings have been born on Faerûn that belong to other infernal bloodlines, but those that bear the mark of the archdevil (and their descendants) remain the most numerous examples of their kind by far.Tieflings in Faerûn generally have the racial traits of tieflings in the Player’s Handbook, except that those not descended from Asmodeus might exhibit different qualities; see the “Tiefling Variants” sidebar.[/SPOILER]This lore barely lasted 3 years. Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes decided that it would be cool to have Tieflings descended from all of the Archdevils of the 9 Hells, so it ignored the stupid "evil warlock ritual that tied all Tieflings to Asmodeus."Why don't you agree to disagree with WotC, instead of publicly complaining about their approach to lore in dozens of threads for over three and a half years? Because every thread about a new book gets derailed by you complaining about canon and metaplots not being a thing anymore. You say you see where I'm coming from through my posts, and I believe you, but I can't say the same because you don't support your arguments with anything. I cannot construct a coherent approach to worldbuilding from "retcons bad, metaplot good."I understand if you don't respond to this post. I get that my posts are long and rambling. That's just because I'm passionate about this subject and want to understand your perspective. It intrigues, confuses, and annoys me so I want to finally make sense of it after all these years of talking with you.</blockquote>

Verification