Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do You Care About Planescape Lore?
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="Alzrius" data-source="post: 6132235" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>I disagree with your disagreement; I think that is a pretty hysterical overstatement of the issue...presuming that it could even be considered an issue at all.</p><p></p><p>First of all, there's no combination of particular races and settings that will lead to intrinsically bad games. You seem to think that there's some sort of combination of "kender, muls, and baurier playing in the Forgotten Realms" that will somehow objectively lead to a bad game for everyone involved. That's nonsense, of course, since the tastes, desires, and role-playing abilities of the players involved will be different every time. You're making an objective value judgment where none is possible.</p><p></p><p>Moreover, this is (as others have noted) not an issue of setting, but an issue of players vs. GMs. If the GM doesn't want there to be a particular crossover in his campaign, even if by the book such a thing is possible, he just has to say so. If players don't respect the GMs invoking of Rule 0 - at least insofar as the GM is trying to set up a particular campaign - then they're called problem players. That has nothing to do with the canon.</p><p></p><p>On the flipside of the coin, there's also something to be said for PC exceptionalism. I've read plenty of threads where, when the PCs ask to be a one-in-a-million race, with some intricate backstory for how they got where they are, people agree that it's not necessarily a vice to let the PC be something different/special. The problems come when the GM has a good reason for disallowing that anyway, and the player won't respect that.</p><p></p><p>In other words, there needs to be some mutual respect between what the players want and what the GMs want, and if there's a conflict then someone should know when to acquiesce (usually, to me, that should be the player).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, this isn't a setting-specific complaint. It's just another variation of the old "I can't GM the group anymore once they have magical travel available - they're just <em>teleporting</em> everywhere and ruining my campaign!"</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The "assumed level of mixing" was always exceptionally marginal. Crossovers were comparatively few - and even the meta-settings had a relatively small amount of direct crossovers.</p><p></p><p>As for "why should you have to do the work" the answer is...why not? If some people want something, and others don't want it, whichever way it goes down will leave one group unhappy, and they'll have to do the work to change it. So why not you and yours then? After all, there's already a rich history of lore and canon to the game, so it makes more sense to default to that than not to.</p><p></p><p>That's without saying that this poll, and the poll results that WotC took recently, seem to be a pretty clear indicator that more people want that lore than don't want it (yes, standard disclaimer about how accurate these polls are, but so far they're the best we have to go on).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 6132235, member: 8461"] I disagree with your disagreement; I think that is a pretty hysterical overstatement of the issue...presuming that it could even be considered an issue at all. First of all, there's no combination of particular races and settings that will lead to intrinsically bad games. You seem to think that there's some sort of combination of "kender, muls, and baurier playing in the Forgotten Realms" that will somehow objectively lead to a bad game for everyone involved. That's nonsense, of course, since the tastes, desires, and role-playing abilities of the players involved will be different every time. You're making an objective value judgment where none is possible. Moreover, this is (as others have noted) not an issue of setting, but an issue of players vs. GMs. If the GM doesn't want there to be a particular crossover in his campaign, even if by the book such a thing is possible, he just has to say so. If players don't respect the GMs invoking of Rule 0 - at least insofar as the GM is trying to set up a particular campaign - then they're called problem players. That has nothing to do with the canon. On the flipside of the coin, there's also something to be said for PC exceptionalism. I've read plenty of threads where, when the PCs ask to be a one-in-a-million race, with some intricate backstory for how they got where they are, people agree that it's not necessarily a vice to let the PC be something different/special. The problems come when the GM has a good reason for disallowing that anyway, and the player won't respect that. In other words, there needs to be some mutual respect between what the players want and what the GMs want, and if there's a conflict then someone should know when to acquiesce (usually, to me, that should be the player). Again, this isn't a setting-specific complaint. It's just another variation of the old "I can't GM the group anymore once they have magical travel available - they're just [i]teleporting[/i] everywhere and ruining my campaign!" The "assumed level of mixing" was always exceptionally marginal. Crossovers were comparatively few - and even the meta-settings had a relatively small amount of direct crossovers. As for "why should you have to do the work" the answer is...why not? If some people want something, and others don't want it, whichever way it goes down will leave one group unhappy, and they'll have to do the work to change it. So why not you and yours then? After all, there's already a rich history of lore and canon to the game, so it makes more sense to default to that than not to. That's without saying that this poll, and the poll results that WotC took recently, seem to be a pretty clear indicator that more people want that lore than don't want it (yes, standard disclaimer about how accurate these polls are, but so far they're the best we have to go on). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do You Care About Planescape Lore?
Top