Defining its own Mythology
- Thread starter Remathilis
- Start date
AWizardInDallas
First Post
Kesh said:
Maybe I don't want half-demons and dragon people swimming in my soup? You know as well as I do that the play notes in the monster manual for playing monster races don't have near as extensive a treatment as they do in the core rule books. So now gnomes are relegated to a mere footnote in 4E. Hack! There's the machete.
Besides, I already have the same rather lame "racial footnoting" with the current monster manuals.
Also, even World of Warcraft has gnomes!
Remathilis
Legend
To address KM's and Mirtek's points (about Greyhawk/3e and combined myth)
Greyhawk, IMHO is NOT the quintessential D&D setting. Forgotten Realms is. Before all the gognards lynch me, allow me to elaborate.
Realms (up to 4e) is the truest form of hodge-podge D&D. One section of the continent (Faerun) has enough combined eco-system to house northern barbarians, southern jungles, and eastern deserts that are only slightly more than filed off Viking, African, and Egyptian myth sprinkled on the already mixed bag of core D&D. Its deity list is a combination of new creations (Lathandar, Torm) D&D influenced creations (Lloth, Moradin) and classic real mythology (Tyr, Lovitar). Beyond the Realms proper is even more blatant (Maztica, the Hordelands, Kara-Tur) In essence, Realms is the greatest example of the "melting pot" that catches all manner of new, old and borrowed traditions (nothing blue I guess) and tries to make sense of them under the banner of the D&D game. Mystara, my favorite setting, is blatant to the point of pornographic when it comes to this "This is like X, but with a different name" approach to world-building.
So why does Realms work as a setting? Liberties. There is no real world myth of a champion of Tyr adventuring in Chult(Africa) to hunt down a cultist of Lovitar, so D&D fills in rest. D&D has always done that; modify the myth somewhat to fit the game (Vampires drain energy with a touch?) In that regard, 4e is carrying on its tradition, but cranking the amount up. Again, Realms makes a good model: It appears they are canning the "real world" deities from the Realms or modifying them.
Greyhawk, IMHO is NOT the quintessential D&D setting. Forgotten Realms is. Before all the gognards lynch me, allow me to elaborate.
Realms (up to 4e) is the truest form of hodge-podge D&D. One section of the continent (Faerun) has enough combined eco-system to house northern barbarians, southern jungles, and eastern deserts that are only slightly more than filed off Viking, African, and Egyptian myth sprinkled on the already mixed bag of core D&D. Its deity list is a combination of new creations (Lathandar, Torm) D&D influenced creations (Lloth, Moradin) and classic real mythology (Tyr, Lovitar). Beyond the Realms proper is even more blatant (Maztica, the Hordelands, Kara-Tur) In essence, Realms is the greatest example of the "melting pot" that catches all manner of new, old and borrowed traditions (nothing blue I guess) and tries to make sense of them under the banner of the D&D game. Mystara, my favorite setting, is blatant to the point of pornographic when it comes to this "This is like X, but with a different name" approach to world-building.
So why does Realms work as a setting? Liberties. There is no real world myth of a champion of Tyr adventuring in Chult(Africa) to hunt down a cultist of Lovitar, so D&D fills in rest. D&D has always done that; modify the myth somewhat to fit the game (Vampires drain energy with a touch?) In that regard, 4e is carrying on its tradition, but cranking the amount up. Again, Realms makes a good model: It appears they are canning the "real world" deities from the Realms or modifying them.
Ahem. Now that I'm back. First I'll apologize about the tone.
The sooner that those who say "D&D has left me behind, I'm not the target audience, I'm being forced by WotC to play their way" act on their feelings, the sooner things are better for everyone.
I am certain that those who don't want D&D 4e will not take it, those who want D&D 4e's mechanics will take what they want from it and ditch the rest, and those who do want D&D 4e and like it will take it and run it. Those are the only options.
And I simply have grown impatient with folk who give the impression that they'll go with 4e, but they're going to hate it, or loudly proclaim that they hate it and they'll not be going with it - but despite their decision to stay with 3e, they're still loudly proclaiming it.
I say good riddance to the continual fighting and the "It's still D&D" "No it's not". The sooner that everyone can decide what they're going to do, the better everyone will be happy.
Someone is going to get left out in the cold when change comes. I'd rather see people stick with what they like (1e, 2e, 3e, whatever) and be happy, than play something they hate with gritted teeth, cursing it every step of the way because it's not what they want.pawsplay said:
The sooner that those who say "D&D has left me behind, I'm not the target audience, I'm being forced by WotC to play their way" act on their feelings, the sooner things are better for everyone.
I am certain that those who don't want D&D 4e will not take it, those who want D&D 4e's mechanics will take what they want from it and ditch the rest, and those who do want D&D 4e and like it will take it and run it. Those are the only options.
And I simply have grown impatient with folk who give the impression that they'll go with 4e, but they're going to hate it, or loudly proclaim that they hate it and they'll not be going with it - but despite their decision to stay with 3e, they're still loudly proclaiming it.
I say good riddance to the continual fighting and the "It's still D&D" "No it's not". The sooner that everyone can decide what they're going to do, the better everyone will be happy.
Last edited:
Remathilis
Legend
Rechan said:
While I don't believe this area should be filled with like-minded zealots who fawn over every WotC proclamation as the Word of Pelor, I too get tired of people who hang around the 4e boards shouting about how 4e is Asmodeus Incarnate. Read if your interested, disagree if you don't like a decision, but for the love of Pete, don't derail interesting and informative threads by shouting "Anime" "Wizard$", "MMO" "WoW" and my personal favorite "Great, now my Homebrew world is ruined. WotC is teh suxxors!"
If I was interested in that kind of debate, I'd argue politics.
I read a sig recently that read "If WotC gave away a box full of money, people would come to the forums and complain about how the bills are folded."Remathilis said:While I don't believe this area should be filled with like-minded zealots who fawn over every WotC proclamation as the Word of Pelor, I too get tired of people who hang around the 4e boards shouting about how 4e is Asmodeus Incarnate. Read if your interested, disagree if you don't like a decision, but for the love of Pete, don't derail interesting and informative threads by shouting "Anime" "Wizard$", "MMO" "WoW" and my personal favorite "Great, now my Homebrew world is ruined. WotC is teh suxxors!"
If I was interested in that kind of debate, I'd argue politics.
EATherrian
First Post
Remathilis said:
As a LONG time Greyhawk and FR fan (yes, you can love both) I have to agree with you. FR really shows how you can integrate new and different ideas into a game world, and it does it well. Still, Greyhawk will always have a warm spot in my heart, since it was my first game world, and I think it is more consistently built from a world-building standpoint, which is a hobby of mine. Variety is the spice of life, though, so I don't see why we can't love all of the game worlds.
Dr. Strangemonkey
First Post
I just don't think that:
A.) this core means what prior cores meant.
Previous cores seemed to be sort of mid-way point between what experienced gamers needed in terms of setting material - a generic pap that could be worked into just about anything - and what new players needed - a flavorful pap that you could eat right out of the box and then discover how to season on your own.
This core seems to be more about the latter, it gives you everything you need to hit the full range of the game experience from hyper-traditional races to resonant new ones, and with every race fitting an obvious niche and need in the game and classes.
Which I am less upset about than I might be because it does seem like tasty tasty pap, and I think the whole structure of this edition seems to assume that advanced players are really advanced players and that they'll go out, find what they need, and adapt it. Heck that they can even just take the ingredients in the pap, and go out and cook something entirely different from what's on the box.
The core seems to be part of canon, but I don't think this edition assumes it defines canon in the way the old cores did.
B.) I disagree with much of this thread. I don't think the new mythology is really either new or a newly distinct flavor to DnD. I think its functional with regard to the flavor question where prior cores where not, but I think all the flavors here are familiar. Whether a guy is a god or greater demon doesn't make much difference to me, but I am glad that Takhisis is now front and center and that something fey is playable right out of the gate.
Now there is room for legitimate complaint. I've always felt screwed over by DnD naming conventions and by that standard three decently name feats out of four ain't bad, but there may be enough of turn here that the screw represents different complications, I wouldn't say I know yet. And Wizards could be really screwing up on alignment, I appreciate their efforts to make it easier to subtract from the system or at least to use it more precisely, but alignment has to be usable at least as written. A Miltonic satan figure for which we all have sympathy or a 40K style gray against a black background default won't serve anyone too well.
But even with those and Raven Crowking's excellent post doing a lot to open my eyes, I still think there isn't really enough evidence to merit the strong feelings people have about the flavor changes as a whole either way.
I like that we are looking like we are going to get a functional core, and I see the risks, but beyond that I think we have to wait and see.
A.) this core means what prior cores meant.
Previous cores seemed to be sort of mid-way point between what experienced gamers needed in terms of setting material - a generic pap that could be worked into just about anything - and what new players needed - a flavorful pap that you could eat right out of the box and then discover how to season on your own.
This core seems to be more about the latter, it gives you everything you need to hit the full range of the game experience from hyper-traditional races to resonant new ones, and with every race fitting an obvious niche and need in the game and classes.
Which I am less upset about than I might be because it does seem like tasty tasty pap, and I think the whole structure of this edition seems to assume that advanced players are really advanced players and that they'll go out, find what they need, and adapt it. Heck that they can even just take the ingredients in the pap, and go out and cook something entirely different from what's on the box.
The core seems to be part of canon, but I don't think this edition assumes it defines canon in the way the old cores did.
B.) I disagree with much of this thread. I don't think the new mythology is really either new or a newly distinct flavor to DnD. I think its functional with regard to the flavor question where prior cores where not, but I think all the flavors here are familiar. Whether a guy is a god or greater demon doesn't make much difference to me, but I am glad that Takhisis is now front and center and that something fey is playable right out of the gate.
Now there is room for legitimate complaint. I've always felt screwed over by DnD naming conventions and by that standard three decently name feats out of four ain't bad, but there may be enough of turn here that the screw represents different complications, I wouldn't say I know yet. And Wizards could be really screwing up on alignment, I appreciate their efforts to make it easier to subtract from the system or at least to use it more precisely, but alignment has to be usable at least as written. A Miltonic satan figure for which we all have sympathy or a 40K style gray against a black background default won't serve anyone too well.
But even with those and Raven Crowking's excellent post doing a lot to open my eyes, I still think there isn't really enough evidence to merit the strong feelings people have about the flavor changes as a whole either way.
I like that we are looking like we are going to get a functional core, and I see the risks, but beyond that I think we have to wait and see.
