D&D General Generic: is it Good or Bad?

[Beleriphon]

Lets define our word first of all. I'm assuming don't mean the biology term that relates to genus, so we're left with:

ge·ner·ic
/jəˈnerik/
adjective
adjective: generic

1. 1.
   characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things; not specific.
   "chèvre is a generic term for all goat's milk cheese"

I voted bad, but only because as a rule we're talking about D&D and fantasy here, in a forum discussing drug accessibility generic is good!

A generic fantasy setting is gong to be some kind of Tolkien knockoff that doesn't do or add anything new to the genre.

 

[Aldarc]

It depends. "Generic" can be helpful as a starting point for people who are undecided about game settings or may be turned off by niche settings; however, an oversaturation of "generic" in the market can often come across as unimaginative, pastiche, or humdrum.

 

[Umbran]

A generic fantasy setting is gong to be some kind of Tolkien knockoff that doesn't do or add anything new to the genre.

But, you already noted that generic is accessible. Having your work be accessible is not good?

 

[Umbran]

I agree that it should matter, but words are just as often taken at face value.
I'm just curious what that value might be.

With respect, you don't find the true value by forcing it to your preferred choices. You might find, for example that the "true" value isn't specifically positive or negative.

 

[SirLordCapybara]

While generic products usually have more practical uses, I find that unique concepts give me more ideas for adventures I could someday make.

 

[Azzy]

I have a Schrodinger's opinion on this: It is both good and bad and neither

It can be good or bad depending on what it is and what the individual wants from it. I like both Greyhawk (which is arguably generic/traditional/vanilla fantasy) and Eberron (which is a bit more out there), each for different reasons.

In the context of gaming accessories, generic is usually more plug and play than non-generic so it's easier to appropriate into one's campaign. However, the divergent material can challenge you to be more creative. I think there's definitely a need for both.

 

[Beleriphon]

But, you already noted that generic is accessible. Having your work be accessible is not good?

It is, but if all it can do is ape Tolkien then it isn't really very good. And I think it depends. A generic published adventure that I can apply my own details to are great. A generic setting not so much because I bought the dang thing so I didn't have to do the heavy lifting on details.

 

[Umbran]

It is, but if all it can do is ape Tolkien then it isn't really very good.

Name a setting or two of the type you mean, so that I can understand more clearly, please.

 

[tetrasodium]

The word "generic" has been getting thrown around a lot in these forums, but the context seems to be a mix of positive and negative...and sometimes, confusingly, both at the same time.

So how about you? When someone describes a feature of D&D as "generic"--a new product, an adventure, a class or campaign setting--is your reaction most often a positive one? Like maybe you read that word and think "oh nice, this thing is going to be versatile and easy to add into my current game." Or is your reaction most often a negative one? Like perhaps you read it and think "ugh, another uninspiring and bland idea that will probably water down my zesty, flavorful game."

No exceptions, no fence-sitting, no "sorta kinda maybe in some cases possibly ..." We all know that preference is relative and there are always exceptions to any given system, no need to campaign for a variety of poll options. Feel free to add nuance in the comments below. But as for the poll...

"Generic." Is it good or bad for you?

"generic" is fine, "The Forgotten realms is kind of generic in many ways so here is a heavily FR themed $thing" is setting specific not generic.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Funny... but when I see someone use the phrase "generic" when it comes to the RPG stuff here on the boards, my first instinct is "bad"... but towards the person who used the word in the first place, not what they were describing.

My thought usually tends to be "What? Couldn't actually think of something truly descriptive to say so you just went with 'generic'? That was the best you could come up with? I don't know if I want to bother listening to your advice." LOL.