Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Defining its own Mythology
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Brentos" data-source="post: 3911785" data-attributes="member: 14027"><p><strong>Wow!</strong></p><p></p><p>Wow! Great response. I will debate a few points, though...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Score 1 for 4e</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This mythology has radically changed and altered since the 70's...this is no different. In fact, the Gygaxian lens has lost focus the farther we go along...evolution. Also, I'm a big Planescape fan, and the changed cosmology sounds really cool! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yet, this is (arguably) the biggest piece of the game that is ignored, hated, house-ruled away. You can still have evil acts have natural (or supernatural) consequences, that is whay DM fiat is for...its just no longer badwrongfun to ignore it as a game mechanic. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't see this changing. In fact, 4th edition sounds like it could do a brilliant Harry Potter type adventure!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Heh. Sh** the role-playing game! Defend your Sh** from invading beetles! Sounds cool! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is my biggest point to this. 600 pages! I imagine that a DM who has 100's of pages of houserules will not be happy with any addition. What kinds of house-rules are they? Fluff? Crunch? Restriction? New options? I would love to put them through the same lens as 4e is being put through to see if it is "real" D&D... (Not disparaging, just curious...600 pages! Based on reading your postings and such, I imagine it is actually quite good stuff.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree, but I do agree that some of the new names are...too much. In fact, I was sorry to see the names Bigby, Mord-y, etc. dropped, because I found the fluff names to be exciting (even though I didn't have any idea who they were).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think D&D can model any book very well without massive modification. Plus, making changes can be difficult...600 pages of difficult! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>You can definitely make the fluff for any book, but to make the action match what characters can do in a movie or book, and make it internally consistent and fun for all players at the table...very difficult.</p><p></p><p>But what is best is that it can do Conan in one scenario, and <em>Pirates of the Carribean</em> in another, and <em>King Kong</em> in yet a third, all within the same campaign world, and using the same characters at various levels/points in their adventuring career.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Great thoughts here! I love your thoughts on rust monster uses! I like the redesign, though, and its fluffiness could still do most of that, I think. Outside of combat, the rust monster, if given 30 minutes, maybe can still chew through a metal door.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't buy that argument. Who cares what the feat/PrC, etc is, as long as the player and DM know what mechanics can occur. I imagine you've made up feats, etc., and the name probably isn't very important anyhoo. Note, though, I'm not a fan of the Jungle Tiger Crouch Snap Whip variety name, and I hope they get Dodo'd.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Weren't we just discussing how ditching the old stuff was bad, so wouldn't have ditching the old-name "tiefling" been bad? I like the name, myself.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's not forcing the cosmology down your throat at all. They have a sample cosmology in the core books, just like 3e. Change a name, etc., and it is all yours again. The Realms, and other setting won't be tied to the sample "core" cosmology.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What races/monsters/classes should be in the core books, and why? That, too, has changed over the years. New stuff gets added, old stuff removed, and usually added later. No difference here.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Same now. The core, though, is slightly different then the prior one, which was slightly different then the prior one...etc.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Drow, Mind Flayers, Tieflings, gods, magic, clerics, fighters, dwarves, gnomes, halfling, the Forgotten Realms, Eberron...the trappings of the world, society, races, magic, gods, etc. are in the new edition. Although, I'm somewhat confused since you didn't seem to want trappings, society, etc., in the core...just a name of a monster and its abilities, or the name of a race and its abilities, which trappings, societies, do you want vs. those you don't?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks for the awesome response, this is a great debate topic and I am not trying to snark, just have some friendly debate from someone who thinks 4e sounds like the bees knees (and I've played since Keep on the Borderlands, in case you are curious).</p><p></p><p></p><p>-Brent</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brentos, post: 3911785, member: 14027"] [b]Wow![/b] Wow! Great response. I will debate a few points, though... Score 1 for 4e This mythology has radically changed and altered since the 70's...this is no different. In fact, the Gygaxian lens has lost focus the farther we go along...evolution. Also, I'm a big Planescape fan, and the changed cosmology sounds really cool! Yet, this is (arguably) the biggest piece of the game that is ignored, hated, house-ruled away. You can still have evil acts have natural (or supernatural) consequences, that is whay DM fiat is for...its just no longer badwrongfun to ignore it as a game mechanic. I don't see this changing. In fact, 4th edition sounds like it could do a brilliant Harry Potter type adventure! Heh. Sh** the role-playing game! Defend your Sh** from invading beetles! Sounds cool! :D This is my biggest point to this. 600 pages! I imagine that a DM who has 100's of pages of houserules will not be happy with any addition. What kinds of house-rules are they? Fluff? Crunch? Restriction? New options? I would love to put them through the same lens as 4e is being put through to see if it is "real" D&D... (Not disparaging, just curious...600 pages! Based on reading your postings and such, I imagine it is actually quite good stuff.) I disagree, but I do agree that some of the new names are...too much. In fact, I was sorry to see the names Bigby, Mord-y, etc. dropped, because I found the fluff names to be exciting (even though I didn't have any idea who they were). I don't think D&D can model any book very well without massive modification. Plus, making changes can be difficult...600 pages of difficult! ;) You can definitely make the fluff for any book, but to make the action match what characters can do in a movie or book, and make it internally consistent and fun for all players at the table...very difficult. But what is best is that it can do Conan in one scenario, and [i]Pirates of the Carribean[/i] in another, and [i]King Kong[/i] in yet a third, all within the same campaign world, and using the same characters at various levels/points in their adventuring career. Great thoughts here! I love your thoughts on rust monster uses! I like the redesign, though, and its fluffiness could still do most of that, I think. Outside of combat, the rust monster, if given 30 minutes, maybe can still chew through a metal door. I don't buy that argument. Who cares what the feat/PrC, etc is, as long as the player and DM know what mechanics can occur. I imagine you've made up feats, etc., and the name probably isn't very important anyhoo. Note, though, I'm not a fan of the Jungle Tiger Crouch Snap Whip variety name, and I hope they get Dodo'd. Weren't we just discussing how ditching the old stuff was bad, so wouldn't have ditching the old-name "tiefling" been bad? I like the name, myself. It's not forcing the cosmology down your throat at all. They have a sample cosmology in the core books, just like 3e. Change a name, etc., and it is all yours again. The Realms, and other setting won't be tied to the sample "core" cosmology. What races/monsters/classes should be in the core books, and why? That, too, has changed over the years. New stuff gets added, old stuff removed, and usually added later. No difference here. Same now. The core, though, is slightly different then the prior one, which was slightly different then the prior one...etc. Drow, Mind Flayers, Tieflings, gods, magic, clerics, fighters, dwarves, gnomes, halfling, the Forgotten Realms, Eberron...the trappings of the world, society, races, magic, gods, etc. are in the new edition. Although, I'm somewhat confused since you didn't seem to want trappings, society, etc., in the core...just a name of a monster and its abilities, or the name of a race and its abilities, which trappings, societies, do you want vs. those you don't? Thanks for the awesome response, this is a great debate topic and I am not trying to snark, just have some friendly debate from someone who thinks 4e sounds like the bees knees (and I've played since Keep on the Borderlands, in case you are curious). -Brent [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Defining its own Mythology
Top