D&D 5E Do you care about setting "canon"?

[I'm A Banana]

Not really.

Rewriting mechanics requires playtesting for balance, errata for when inevitable problems crop up, teaching people the new rules, having to peruse every release for ways to adapt them to the new mechanics, etc.

Rewriting lore is as simple as "Drow are actually jungle elves who are nocturnal" and watching as precisely no mechanics conflicts come up and not a single bit of playtesting is needed. If you get a "that sounds cool, tell me more" from the players, you've done very well.

See? Not remotely the same thing and massively easier to ignore lore.

If you set up a strawman, you're not exactly proving anything by knocking it down, are ya?

Consider that at some tables, rewriting the mechanics doesn't require any of those things. They're all superfluous. Hey, I just plugged two new ability scores and a half-dozen DMs Guild class options into my new game, who cares how balanced they are? I'm the DM, I make the judgement calls, as long as we're all having fun who gives a toss whether you kill the necromancer in five hits or in seven? Hell, maybe I don't even track HP, I just declare something dead when it seems like people are getting bored of fighting it. Attack rolls? Never figured they were necessary, my group just rolls damage. Game works like a dream.

Consider that at other tables, "Drow are actually jungle elves who are nocturnal" is met with, oh I don't, now, someone saying, "Well, they're not really Drow then, are they? I mean, maybe they're fun and all, but they're not what anyone would call Drow. That's just not what Drow are. Never have been."

What you're illustrating here is that you personally care more about mechanics than about story. That's fair enough. Even expected on a site like ENWorld. But that's also not the way everyone plays the game.

 

[MechaPilot]

Consider that at other tables, "Drow are actually jungle elves who are nocturnal" is met with, oh I don't, now, someone saying, "Well, they're not really Drow then, are they? I mean, maybe they're fun and all, but they're not what anyone would call Drow. That's just not what Drow are. Never have been."

Considering that the Drow essentially stole their name from the norse Trow, who may have actually been dwarves of some kind (and who, to the best of my knowledge, were not matriarchal and did not worship and insane spider demon-goddess), arguments like that don't hold much water in my eyes.

What you're illustrating here is that you personally care more about mechanics than about story. That's fair enough. Even expected on a site like ENWorld. But that's also not the way everyone plays the game.

I don't think that's accurate or fair. If the lore is being altered to fit a game world, then it sounds very much like he cares about story.

 

[Maxperson]

All elves are either High Elves - who live at the North Pole and make toys - or Wood Elves - who live in trees and make cookies.

That's my canon. There can be no other kinds of elves

Don't forget the urban elves who make shoes.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Considering that the Drow essentially stole their name from the norse Trow, who may have actually been dwarves of some kind (and who, to the best of my knowledge, were not matriarchal and did not worship and insane spider demon-goddess), arguments like that don't hold much water in my eyes.

Brand matters. Drow in D&D have been different than dark elves in mythology in general (see: giant fighting robots vs. TRANSFORMERS).

I don't think that's accurate or fair. If the lore is being altered to fit a game world, then it sounds very much like he cares about story.

He doesn't care about the story published in the books. Just like that group who doesn't use attack rolls doesn't care about the rules published in the books.

It might be more specific to say that he cares more about the mechanics that are published in the books than about the story that is published in those books.

But that's not how everyone plays.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes. By "merging of OA into Kara-Tur" I intended "merging of OA into FR".

Sure, but even without any merging at all, the OA included "western" lands with PHB classes and gods that were outside of the Celestial Court. That was a part of the OA even without any other settings being involved.

But if those gods are powers who are able to order the universe independently of the Celestial Emperor, then the whole premise of the Celestial Bureaucracy is mistaken. Which is to say, the setting takes on the same cynical tone as Planescape.

Not mistaken. Just Kara Tur centric.

 

[Maxperson]

Let me will see what Gygax has to say about that!

Pretty sure he just wants a Big Mac.

 

[MechaPilot]

Brand matters. Drow in D&D have been different than dark elves in mythology in general (see: giant fighting robots vs. TRANSFORMERS).

Brand doesn't matter. Meijer brand acetaminophen works just as well as Tylenol's does.

Relating specifically to the Drow, the name conjures a mental image that can be useful. Coming up with a different name to avoid unnecessary baggage is a good idea, but it's not at all required. After all, especially if a world has its own cosmology, there's no reason a world could have their own alternate version of the drow with different origins and natures.

He doesn't care about the story published in the books. Just like that group who doesn't use attack rolls doesn't care about the rules published in the books.

Not caring about canon does not inherently mean one values mechanics over story, and it should not be equated as such. It simply means one doesn't care for established canon.

 

[MechaPilot]

Don't forget the urban elves who make shoes.

Is that code for Drow?

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

I have performed a cursory reading of the thread and am aware of the context. I believe that modifying lore is minimally intrusive while modifying mechanics is more intrusive (possibly even pervasive, depending on how ingrained the rule is to the system). There are also, naturally, instances where these things overlap (making elves come from the far realm would then, reasonably, require slapping the aberration creature type on them, and would interact with certain spells).

That said, virtually anything can be ignored with relative ease (all of the new UA options can be totally ignored with no effect on the game whatsoever). It's when you get into replacing a thing that potential problems can occur.

If you knew the context, why did you reply to speak on ignoring and not take into consideration that replacement was part of the context? I am not understanding that.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Brand doesn't matter. Meijer brand acetaminophen works just as well as Tylenol's does.

Brands matter because pure function isn't the reason people make the choices they do in life. If it was, this wikipedia page wouldn't exist. It'd just be "paracetomol" in plain white bottles up and down your pharmacy aisles.

Relating specifically to the Drow, the name conjures a mental image that can be useful. Coming up with a different name to avoid unnecessary baggage is a good idea, but it's not at all required. After all, especially if a world has its own cosmology, there's no reason a world could have their own alternate version of the drow with different origins and natures.

A new name or a new world sounds fine to me.

The publishers saying "Drow are elves who have been bit by shadow-infused spiders sent by Lolth" and using that as the basis for what Drow are for a decade, denying all other Drow, makes problems.

Not caring about canon does not inherently mean one values mechanics over story, and it should not be equated as such. It simply means one doesn't care for established canon.

Canon = story, so if one does not care about established canon, then one does not care about the story the books present. If one then cares about the mechanics the books present, then one cares about the mechanics in the books more than the story in the books.

Which is fine - most folks who use a lot of homebrew probably don't care much about the story in the books. Most folks who use a lot of houserules don't care much about the rules in the books, and that's fine, too. We all buy D&D books for both reasons, to varying degrees.