How involved are you in D&D's "metaplot"?

[Umbran]

Any narrative justification for the physics of the entire universe suddenly changing is going to be ridiculous.

Well, the original physics of game universes are pretty rediculous to start with, so I don't see a problem with that

Presumably virtually every group trying a new edition starts a new campaign anyway.

I haven't followed metaplot, but I've played with several groups through edition changes. We didn't start new campaigns for the purpose. Not 1e to 2e D&D. Not in changing editions of Shadowrun, not in changing editions of White Wolf games.

What's wrong with good old-fashioned alternate realities? 1e Forgotten Realms, 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e... just let them all be 'shards' of the same reality. Don't try to shoe-horn changes between editions into the same timeline.

The thing is, there are folks out there that are kind of invested in the timeline - either for their own game, or in being a fan of fictional tie-ins. These folks don't want to see the original timeline vanish.

But I don't really care about Drizzt and book continuity seems like a dumb reason to bend the metaplot around a new edition.

Dude! Book continuity is *money*. Every single one of the Salvatore's 18 Drizz't books has made the New York Times best seller list! Is cold, filthy lucre not a good reason to bend things?

 

[the Jester]

I hate metaplot in my D&D with the burning rage of a thousand exploding stars.

The thing is, metaplot- especially when done heavy-handedly, which is most of the time throughout D&D's history- strongly influences the direction of further setting material. Usually in a direction that's incompatible with my campaign.

Examples: What use are all the post-Avatar trilogy FR books if you never had an avatar crisis, kept the gods who died around, overthrew Cormyr and collapsed the economy of Faerun? Suddenly nothing that has been written since the 1e days applies to your campaign. Sure, you can adapt setting material, but the whole point of a pre-made world is to make it easier on the dm- so metaplot basically defeats the purpose of canned settings. IMHO, YMMV, etc.

 

[the Jester]

Presumably virtually every group trying a new edition starts a new campaign anyway.

Not mine! We keep on truckin'.

My setting has been around since 1e (depending on how you look at it). The only times we've started new groups with a new edition was when the old group was at a natural endpoint anyhow. (4e was a good example of this; my 3e epic game had already had its finale and my halfling game reached its conclusion too. Perfect, though not intentional, timing.)

 

[Dungeoneer]

Not mine! We keep on truckin'.

My setting has been around since 1e (depending on how you look at it). The only times we've started new groups with a new edition was when the old group was at a natural endpoint anyhow. (4e was a good example of this; my 3e epic game had already had its finale and my halfling game reached its conclusion too. Perfect, though not intentional, timing.)

So out of curiosity, do you attempt to make any sort of in-game justification of the changes?

 

[the Jester]

So out of curiosity, do you attempt to make any sort of in-game justification of the changes?

It depends- not usually, but in the 1e-2e transition, I threw away most of the old gods and created a new pantheon (all custom priest types, natch) and justified it as the world moving into a new sign of the Zodiac.

2e to 3e, we just converted and kept playing, or at least that was one of the things we did. (There were plenty of new pcs in 3e, too, of course.)

For 4e, I advanced my timeline thousands of years, but I would have done that regardless to ensure that the epic pcs were out of the picture. I didn't want them to dominate the scene, I wanted the new group to have a chance to shine.

 

[Grogg of the North]

[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] for what it's worth, I have no idea what the sundering is either. And I don't feel like I'm missing something in my life by not knowing.

I don't participate in any of the living worlds (Greyhawk, pathfinder, whatever). Pretty much every game I've ever played in has been in a homebrewed world. I did play through part of the Shackled City Adventure Path, but there was nothing in there that really made me think it couldn't be placed in any other campaign setting. In fact, the only time I was ever in a game where the GM made a big fuss about the campaign being in an established setting, the game crashed and burned in a few sessions.

I'm not too concerned about the plot of the world. I'm not playing in the game because of the world. I'm playing because of PCs. Irregardless of the system, they should be the center of attention and everything else should revolve around them.

 

[MerricB]

[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] for what it's worth, I have no idea what the sundering is either. And I don't feel like I'm missing something in my life by not knowing.

Even as I'm participating in it, I'm not quite sure what it is.

Well, in Murder in Baldur's Gate, you get the return of Bhaal. I haven't worked out what the point is of Legacy of the Crystal Shard is yet, but there's another Chosen of the gods wandering around there.

Overall, metaplot matters to me as it affects supplements to a campaign setting I use. I mainly have seen the Sundering because I'm running D&D Encounters; its effect on my otherwise is minimal as my other games are in Greyhawk. The campaign events in "official" Greyhawk (back in 2E) had a definite impact on my game, but more as background information and resources to draw from rather than a prescriptive "this happens to your campaign" command.

Funnily enough, the revision of the cosmology in 4E was adopted by me wholeheartedly - and I'll keep it for my game going onwards!

Cheers!

 

[Nellisir]

D&D has metaplot?

(That'd be a "no, I'm not involved". Perks of always running a house campaign.)

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

(snip) But I don't really care about Drizzt and book continuity seems like a dumb reason to bend the metaplot around a new edition.

Drizzt makes more money for FR than the tabletop RPG products.

Sad, but true.

 

[Sunseeker]

I really don't keep up with D&D lore, because the instant I like it, it changes, and I don't like that. Plus I never buy campaign books and write my own so really, I never get the chance to learn about it.