D&D 5E How Much Lore is Enough?

[Teflon Billy]

I'm comfortable with it--in fact, I like it--because I don't in even the tiniest degree think of it as WotC dictating aspects of my setting. I see them giving a default presentation which everyone not only can, but is basically expected to, change or ignore as they see fit. I find the lore to be inspiring to the imagination, sometimes introducing something I want to use, other times inspiring me by making me want to look for alternatives.

I find this far preferable to, say, the 1e MM, and at least as preferable--albeit in a different way--as the 2e.

Huh, guess I should've read the thread before replying. Mousferatu said it better than I did

 

[Mirtek]

I don't understand what you mean by the "spirit of the game" but it sounds like it's pretty much the antithesis of what I understand to be the spirit of the game.

And that's the quintessence of this thread.

To whit, and I'm paraphrasing from pretty much every edition of D&D ever published: "Here's a bunch of stuff that we thought was pretty cool and you may like too. Use this stuff as best suits you and your group. Feel free to change whatever you need to."

Which to me is not the spirit of D&D at all. It may have started as such, but it has outgrown it long ago. The spirit you describe is what I would attribute to systems like GURPS, but to me and countless others D&D has long since become it's own thing rather than just a toolbox.

The "Spirit of D&D" isn't at all about having enough of the proper elements all lined up in their proper context so that it "feels" sufficiently like D&D,

To a great many it is.

To quote from an excellent editorial written by Erik Mona for Dungeon Magazin Issue 134:

I met my friend Joel Bergstrom in the 10th grade, when the jump from junior high to high school brought with it hundreds of new kids from the other school across the town. Up to that point I knew all of the active D&D players about my age
[...]
Here was a kid I'd never met before [...] We joked about the deadly Tomb of Horrors and the goofy technology in Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. We agreed that the early Forgotten Realms material was the best and discovered we both liked Ed Greenwood's Dragon articles (especially about the Nine Hells)
[...]
In college I discovered the Internet where I came into contact with thousands of D&D players. To my surprise many remembered with fondness the same things Joel and I had discussed back in 10th grade. Years later during a decade of obsession with conventions and the RPGA, I gamed with hundreds of players, and the same elements were sure to light a fire in their eyes. The Rod of Seven Parts. Vecna. Dragotha. This is the mythology of the Dungeons & Dragons game, and the related fondess transcends player age, experience, or campaign setting
[...]
hold a candle for the mythic elements that make Dungeons & Dragons more than a simple game
[...]
The entire adventure path [he is refering to Age of Worms] is our attempt to present not just a D&D experience but the prototypical D&D experience. Concepts like the Wind Dukes of Aaqa, Kyuss, and even Dragotha
[...]
In the course of the last year it's been a pleasure to bring modern myth making to the magazine while still rooting things in the existing D&D mythology we all love

This is the mythology of the Dungeons & Dragons game, and the related fondess transcends player age, experience, or campaign setting
-> I fully believe that 4e would be have much, much, much less rejected if they had just kept the mythology intact. For me that is was really drove scores of players away. Sure, there would have been grumbling over the new rules and sure some players would have left because of them. But a whole lot of players leaving 4e were driving away by the mutilation of the game table trancending, shared and beloved D&D mythology.

Absolutely yes generic modules sell far better than campaign specific ones. See @Eric Mona in several Dungeon editorials where he states exactly that - any time they ran campaign specific modules in Dungeon, sales were noticeably worse.

And that's why issues should be run for the shared D&D mythology that applies to Athas as much as to Oerth and Toril. Only when you get too specific, aka slapping the Eberron or FR logo on top of things, you are limited mostly to the specific fans of that setting. If you're writting about the Abyss or Limbo you'e writing about D&D in general


To the original topic of the threat: I want as much lore as they can squeeze in. Reading a MM should be a pleasure in initself beside getting technical game information. I love titbits that tie monsters together all throughout the book. Reading how the ecology of monster B mentions something about monster T I have not yet read and pages later the ecology of monster T picks up on it. E.g. like in the 2e MM the green dragon entry mentioned that green dragons living in woods bordering hills, once they are grown enough, try to enslave local hill giant tribes. And later the hill giant entry mentioned how hill giant tribes living in hills bordering woods hunt young green dragons because they consider their meat a delicacy. Boom, suddenly the green dragon behavior mention early is seen in an entirely new light beyond mere powerlust

 

[Hussar]

If you're writting about the Abyss or Limbo you'e writing about D&D in general


Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?364122-How-Much-Lore-is-Enough/page6#ixzz3EVg49PSg

I guess that's where I get off the train. I don't see the Abyss or Limbo as needing to be one thing in all settings. Saying that the Abyss, or Limbo is X in this setting but Y in that setting is how I came to D&D. In one setting, the Abyss is ruled by demon lords, in another, Takhisis is the queen of the Abyss. And to me, that's fantastic.

It was 2e that really drove the idea of the "one true lore" that you're talking about. Those earlier modules might have been a shared experience, because a lot of us played those modules, but, the campaign outside of those modules maybe looked completely different.

To me, the Abyss with The Wind Dukes of Aqaa (sp) or Obyriths is simply one specific take on the Abyss, not something that needs to be given any sort of privileged position. IOW, I pretty much completely disagree with Erik Mona as you've quoted him. Although, I do agree that had 4e taken your route and not changed so much of the lore, it would have fared much, much better since it's fairly obvious I'm in the minority here.

Funnily enough, these last few threads on this topic has really made me realise that as I'Ve DM'd over the years, I've pretty much rejected any lore heavy creatures out of my own campaigns. I mean, I've almost never used githyanki or beholders or slaad or any other creature that comes with lots of baggage. I just look at that baggage and realise that I don't want to be bothered trying to play D&D using other people's settings. I want to tell my own stories and that means using elements that aren't so heavily tied to the "story of D&D".