RuinousPowers
Hero
I miss those, even if they all read the same!For that matter, generic monster entries had "Habitat/Society" and "Ecology" sections back in AD&D 2E; those have since gone the way of the dodo.
I miss those, even if they all read the same!For that matter, generic monster entries had "Habitat/Society" and "Ecology" sections back in AD&D 2E; those have since gone the way of the dodo.
Yeah, D&D came around and once embraced the gamut of speculative fiction, but then started dialing it back and pushing the fantastic back to the fringes for a very long time. The trend of fantasy returning is a reclamation, not a new thing.I remember monsters being well integrated into society from the old gray box Forgotten Realms. Beholders being part of human political organizations and worshipping the same God as humans. In Savage Frontiers, also 1e, I think they had an orc leader trying to turn his tribe from raiding to agriculture, so it seems like they've been doing it for a long time.
This is setting content, but settings should do this kind of thing.For that matter, generic monster entries had "Habitat/Society" and "Ecology" sections back in AD&D 2E; those have since gone the way of the dodo.
I always enjoyed the implied setting that material provided; that, and it seems impractical that published settings would be able to put out paragraphs of material on this for every monster in the myriad monstrous compendia.This is setting content, but settings should do this kind of thing.
If the monster is prominent for the themes and mood of the setting, the setting can and should elaborate an ecology for it to show how it fits into the setting.I always enjoyed the implied setting that material provided; that, and it seems impractical that published settings would be able to put out paragraphs of material on this for every monster in the myriad monstrous compendia.
Sure, but how many monsters is that really going to be, versus how many are typically made available over the life of a given edition? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see an Elminster's Ecologies (affiliate link) for other campaign settings, I just don't think we'll get anything like that anytime soon, whereas sticking a few paragraphs into the generic bestiaries seems far more practical.If the monster is prominent for the themes and mood of the setting, the setting can and should elaborate an ecology for it to show how it fits into the setting.
I agree with essentially all of this. The tone seemed grittier in some respects.I’m not talking rules or mechanics. I mean in terms of theme, tone, and aesthetic.
To you, what are the main ways D&D has evolved it’s tone, theme, genre, and aesthetics since you first started playing?
[Note — keep any rants about how you hate inclusivity or diversity out of this thread; not interesting in the slightest].
It’s hard to pinpoint how, but I feel that the implied ‘setting’ or ‘genre’ constantly evolves. I’m not an OSR style gamer generally, and my memories of play way back then are mixed in with being a kid, so everything was different just because I had a different lens. It feels more cartoony or modern American 'Ren Faire' to me than it used to rather than anything European/medieval (which is fine — it is it’s own genre, not a documentary). In other words, the emphasis is more on fantastic heroics than 'dark ages'. I guess player empowerment is a big theme.
I also feel like the implied time period (not that it's a simulation of anything) has moved forward from medieval to renaissance. Obviously this analogy is mightily flawed, but again, I'm talking in terms of aesthetic and tone.
I just pull out my old book and use the material. Very little of it has mechanical weight, and the parts that do are easily converted.Sure, but how many monsters is that really going to be, versus how many are typically made available over the life of a given edition? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see an Elminster's Ecologies (affiliate link) for other campaign settings, I just don't think we'll get anything like that anytime soon, whereas sticking a few paragraphs into the generic bestiaries seems far more practical.
One huge difference between modern d&d and warcraft that pretty much collapses the WoW analogy & presents mechanical problem for 5e is magic item churn differences. MMOs have an extreme level of magic item churn compared to 3.x & take that a step further with expansions that could be likened to jumping between level tiers. 5e by comparison has a magic item churn that makes 3.x look even more extreme than that of MMOs. Without churn the GM is faced with a choice between constant mudflation till the system melts down or just being overly stingy with treasure. Both of those are things that the 2e dmg wrote at length aboutI do think that the tone of D&D has changed. Some people, possibly @Charlaquin, have described it as Mos Eisley or World of Warcraft, but I would say that it has become more "superhero" in its tone. The PCs are heroes, often out to save the day, who have cool abilities, with game play often serving as a vehicle for showcasing the cool things that the character can do. The world that superheroes of DC and Marvel inhabit has likewise increasingly become incredibly crowded as new characters are introduced, diverse ensemble teams are formed, and the cosmic/exceptional becomes ordinary/mundane, etc.
Here I would also point out that the tone of the Warcraft franchise itself has shifted to being more superheroic. This superhero influence was even fairly explicit by the former lore director Chris Metzen. We even see elements of that superhero influence in things like Thrall's orc name being revealed as Go'el* in the Burning Crusade expansion.
* It's technically Hebrew for "redeemer," but it was meant to evoke the name "Kal El" from Superman, as Chris Metzen is a fan.
I think we’re focusing on different aspects of play. You’re talking about the PCs and their abilities and actions, and how adventures are set up to show them off. And I agree that D&D (and WoW, for that matter) is very super heroic in that sense. I was talking more about the general milieu; the eclectic demographics of the world(s), the chronological mishmash of fashion and technology, etc. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the tone is super heroic while the aesthetics are Ren Faire.I do think that the tone of D&D has changed. Some people, possibly @Charlaquin, have described it as Mos Eisley or World of Warcraft, but I would say that it has become more "superhero" in its tone. The PCs are heroes, often out to save the day, who have cool abilities, with game play often serving as a vehicle for showcasing the cool things that the character can do. The world that superheroes of DC and Marvel inhabit has likewise increasingly become incredibly crowded as new characters are introduced, diverse ensemble teams are formed, and the cosmic/exceptional becomes ordinary/mundane, etc.
Here I would also point out that the tone of the Warcraft franchise itself has shifted to being more superheroic. This superhero influence was even fairly explicit by the former lore director Chris Metzen. We even see elements of that superhero influence in things like Thrall's orc name being revealed as Go'el* in the Burning Crusade expansion.
* It's technically Hebrew for "redeemer," but it was meant to evoke the name "Kal El" from Superman, as Chris Metzen is a fan.