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
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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 3915715" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>None of those concepts rules out "some distant source of magical energy" and/or "a dimension between places." And even if they did, the spells could work as written without having to worry about it. And even THEN, even if they were ruled out and it affected spells (like it did with Sigil and teleportation), it's such a minor point of the rules that going around it was not really a problem.</p><p></p><p>A racial ability to teleport (at will?) is much more ingrained in the system then a handful of spells that might possibly draw on or access some other dimension. Eladrin might not even be *usable*, if it's an important enough power for them.</p><p></p><p>It remains to be seen how, exactly, pervasive this type of thing is, but if they're not shy about slapping it on a racial power from level 1, it's reasonable to have a concern that they might not be particularly rare.</p><p></p><p>Or take the wizard styles that have those confusingly obtuse names like Golden Wyvern. The previews may suggest that it's a wizard style and a name of a feat. One may infer that it's could easily be more than that, too. If I don't have the Golden Wyvern Wizards IMC, for whatever reason, it means that I'm de-tangling at least two (and likely more) elements from each other, and having, as a DM, to account for that. </p><p></p><p>The more common they are, the more they'll get in the way. We don't have proof that they're extremely common, but the previews suggest they may be, so it's a reasonable concern. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It still HAD a mythology, though, so 4e isn't doing anything new in defining their own. It may be a different mythology, but 3e built it's brand through it's mythology if you believe that 3e had a strong implied setting.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We may as well have had Merlin, Gandalf, The Bursar, Hoplytes, Ptah, and Krom for all the game was attached to those particular concepts.</p><p></p><p>Or, here's a better exercise, count the differences between the 3e SRD and the 3e Core Rulebooks. That's how generically non-Greyhawk 3e was.</p><p></p><p>4e, if it is building a brand, is going to have multitudinous differences from it's SRD, not just a handful of nearly meaningless names.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 3915715, member: 2067"] None of those concepts rules out "some distant source of magical energy" and/or "a dimension between places." And even if they did, the spells could work as written without having to worry about it. And even THEN, even if they were ruled out and it affected spells (like it did with Sigil and teleportation), it's such a minor point of the rules that going around it was not really a problem. A racial ability to teleport (at will?) is much more ingrained in the system then a handful of spells that might possibly draw on or access some other dimension. Eladrin might not even be *usable*, if it's an important enough power for them. It remains to be seen how, exactly, pervasive this type of thing is, but if they're not shy about slapping it on a racial power from level 1, it's reasonable to have a concern that they might not be particularly rare. Or take the wizard styles that have those confusingly obtuse names like Golden Wyvern. The previews may suggest that it's a wizard style and a name of a feat. One may infer that it's could easily be more than that, too. If I don't have the Golden Wyvern Wizards IMC, for whatever reason, it means that I'm de-tangling at least two (and likely more) elements from each other, and having, as a DM, to account for that. The more common they are, the more they'll get in the way. We don't have proof that they're extremely common, but the previews suggest they may be, so it's a reasonable concern. It still HAD a mythology, though, so 4e isn't doing anything new in defining their own. It may be a different mythology, but 3e built it's brand through it's mythology if you believe that 3e had a strong implied setting. We may as well have had Merlin, Gandalf, The Bursar, Hoplytes, Ptah, and Krom for all the game was attached to those particular concepts. Or, here's a better exercise, count the differences between the 3e SRD and the 3e Core Rulebooks. That's how generically non-Greyhawk 3e was. 4e, if it is building a brand, is going to have multitudinous differences from it's SRD, not just a handful of nearly meaningless names. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Defining its own Mythology
Top