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.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dragonlance: Solamnic Knights & Mages of High Sorcery Preview
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="Reynard" data-source="post: 8811680" data-attributes="member: 467"><p>This is actually one of those things I feel like we should examine a little more deeply and not dismiss out of hand.</p><p></p><p>WotC has consistently given short shrift to world building since the start of 5E. Their adventures and settings are shallow. I like to refer to 5E as the "MCU Edition" because it is popular and fun and cool, but shallow and, frankly, it's best not to think too hard about it.</p><p></p><p>The "lol why are you worried about mustaches" attitude is a pretty succinct distillation of the the MCU attitude. Who cares? It's just facial hair?</p><p></p><p>But here's the thing: little details are the key to good worldbuilding. Whether this culture wears long mustaches (like the Celts; it didn't appear out of nowhere) or this culture has a schism between the two kinds of elves is important stuff. It matters, from the perspective of building a world that feels real and complete and deep. Dismissing it out of hand reveals an "MCU" attitude that amounts to "shut up and get on with the adventure."</p><p></p><p>Which is fine as far as it goes, but some people want more than that. Some people want detailed world building even if those details aren't focused on combat bonuses or class abilities or other mechanical bits.</p><p></p><p>What's weird is that there is no problem with keeping mustaches as a cultural aspect of the Knights of Solamnia. It doesn't do anything to make them bad or unpalatable to modern audiences. But they still just ignored it. It wasn't even on their radar. You can tell by the art. That should tell you how much they care about Dragonlance in general. They don't care about its nuances or particulars. It's just another nostalgic cow to be milked to death. It is an IP meant to be marketed in such a way as to extract as much income from both older and new fans as possible with no regard tow hat it might have meant at some time.</p><p></p><p>Which is fine. WotC is a business. They should want to sell books. But by the same token when older fans see that it is a shallow cash grab, we shouldn't feel bad about not buying these things. They aren't for us, even if they try and convince us otherwise with nostalgic names.</p><p></p><p>And to be clear, I am not suggesting that new or old fans who don't care about how WotC is treating these old properties are wrong. They should absolutely enjoy the things they enjoy and support those things by buying them. If WotC is making stuff you love, by all means, buy it and support it and evangelize it, regardless of it nostalgic cred.</p><p></p><p>But if they aren't? Don't. Don't buy things just because it has a brand on it you once loved. Don't reward them for doing something wrong to a thing you loved. Don't be so desperate for validation of your formative brands.</p><p></p><p>The lackof mustaches doesn't mean Dragonlance is bad. But it is a hint, a suggestion, that WotC hasn't really even looked at what they were re=-creating beyond even the most basic level. Their concern is about broad, shallow features that appeal to the widest audiences, without concern about anything that came before or detailed worldbuilding that (although arbitrary) gives a sense of texture to the world. WotC doesn't care about the depth of Dragonlance because they don't expect you to care about Dragonlance six months from now. And that goes for every world they produce.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Reynard, post: 8811680, member: 467"] This is actually one of those things I feel like we should examine a little more deeply and not dismiss out of hand. WotC has consistently given short shrift to world building since the start of 5E. Their adventures and settings are shallow. I like to refer to 5E as the "MCU Edition" because it is popular and fun and cool, but shallow and, frankly, it's best not to think too hard about it. The "lol why are you worried about mustaches" attitude is a pretty succinct distillation of the the MCU attitude. Who cares? It's just facial hair? But here's the thing: little details are the key to good worldbuilding. Whether this culture wears long mustaches (like the Celts; it didn't appear out of nowhere) or this culture has a schism between the two kinds of elves is important stuff. It matters, from the perspective of building a world that feels real and complete and deep. Dismissing it out of hand reveals an "MCU" attitude that amounts to "shut up and get on with the adventure." Which is fine as far as it goes, but some people want more than that. Some people want detailed world building even if those details aren't focused on combat bonuses or class abilities or other mechanical bits. What's weird is that there is no problem with keeping mustaches as a cultural aspect of the Knights of Solamnia. It doesn't do anything to make them bad or unpalatable to modern audiences. But they still just ignored it. It wasn't even on their radar. You can tell by the art. That should tell you how much they care about Dragonlance in general. They don't care about its nuances or particulars. It's just another nostalgic cow to be milked to death. It is an IP meant to be marketed in such a way as to extract as much income from both older and new fans as possible with no regard tow hat it might have meant at some time. Which is fine. WotC is a business. They should want to sell books. But by the same token when older fans see that it is a shallow cash grab, we shouldn't feel bad about not buying these things. They aren't for us, even if they try and convince us otherwise with nostalgic names. And to be clear, I am not suggesting that new or old fans who don't care about how WotC is treating these old properties are wrong. They should absolutely enjoy the things they enjoy and support those things by buying them. If WotC is making stuff you love, by all means, buy it and support it and evangelize it, regardless of it nostalgic cred. But if they aren't? Don't. Don't buy things just because it has a brand on it you once loved. Don't reward them for doing something wrong to a thing you loved. Don't be so desperate for validation of your formative brands. The lackof mustaches doesn't mean Dragonlance is bad. But it is a hint, a suggestion, that WotC hasn't really even looked at what they were re=-creating beyond even the most basic level. Their concern is about broad, shallow features that appeal to the widest audiences, without concern about anything that came before or detailed worldbuilding that (although arbitrary) gives a sense of texture to the world. WotC doesn't care about the depth of Dragonlance because they don't expect you to care about Dragonlance six months from now. And that goes for every world they produce. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dragonlance: Solamnic Knights & Mages of High Sorcery Preview
Top