Branduil said:
On the other hand, you can have something like the Nintendo Wii, which had, and still has, many "hardcore" gamers throwing hissyfits about its lack of power and unconventional controller. Meanwhile, it enjoys unprecedented success.
"Hardcore" gamers are whiny, selfish dorks who can and will complain about anything and everything that isn't to their exact specifications.
broghammerj said:
I agree that it isn't Greyhawk, but Greyhawk sort of was the original setting for 1E and as a result the Great Wheel is "generic" DND cosmology.
The thing that a lot of people are overlooking is that what is "historical" or "conventional" D&D "fluff" to them is not necessarily so to other gamers. It all depends on when you started playing and what settings and rules you used.
I started playing with B/X/C/M D&D, and the first time I saw the "Great Wheel" was either Best of Dragon Vol. 1 or the 1e DMG, a good couple of years after I started playing.
The "Great Wheel" was thus not the standard cosmology for The Known World (Mystara), even in its AD&D 2e incarnation.
It wasn't the cosmology for Dragonlance; at least not in its original incarnation. "The Abyss" was about the only plane referenced, at it was the home of Takhisis (Tiamat), a Lawful Evil goddess. The Great Wheel might have been tacked-on to the setting later though.
I don't think it was the standard cosmology for Dark Sun. Perhaps not for Ravenloft or Birthright either.
And in 3rd Edition, the Forgotten Realms and Eberron have already ditched it.
broghammerj said:
This is where changes to fluff have me scratching my head yet the NPC creation system isn't complete???
Fluff changes don't require playtesting and R&D time. They probably have guidelines for creating NPCs, but not a "robust" system for generating them very quickly.
broghammerj said:
What I want is a super generic DnD core books. I thought the Greyhawk gods were too much in 3.0. They should have had generic gods without names and basically left their portfolio such as healing, justice, etc. If they want they could throw in example names form GH, greek mythology, etc.
I couldn't disagree more. I don't want the D&D equivalent of the GURPS Basic Set. D&D as simply a toolset is dry and boring. Even if I don't use the fluff of the core rules, they at least provide some inspiration and context. I think the 4e core books should contain a playable "default" setting with enough flavour to be able to pick it up and play it. It doesn't need to be a massive tome like the FRCS; a short chapter in the PHB giving the players the important background info and a slightly longer chapter in the DMG to complement it would be sufficient. Give the new players something they can work with right out of the core books instead of requiring them to buy yet another book just to get a world to play in.
It's easy to replace the fluff of the core books with a homebrewed setting, or the Realms, or whatever else I choose.
broghammerj said:
The elemental planes on the other hand may not seem sexy or fun but I would guess like many gamers they have little relative impact on your game. They do however provide a historical point of reference that many of us older players can refer to on a common level. If their not core than they are certainly canon. I would argue they are both.
If an aspect of the game is boring or uninteresting and goes unused by the majority of players, then I would consider that a problem. Make them interesting and more appealing so that they are used by more players. Don't keep stuff around solely as a "historical point of reference" for an incredibly small percentage of players to wax nostalgic about. There is very little in any edition of the game that couldn't be improved upon in some way.