I've reversed my stance on dragonborn and tieflings

[The Little Raven]

Mourn, can you at least be a bit discriminating? I know you have a vested interest in seeing 4E succeed because your job depends on it, but it's getting old.

*blink*

Maybe you misread my previous posts about my job, but I'm a programmer for a game developer. My interest in 4e in terms of development is merely a side project.

I mean, what does follow mythology 100%? Not much. Not even other mythology, but there are close analogues in celtic legend for D&D elves (guys on boats from memory).

I assume you mean the sidhe. Who were not forest-dwelling, pointy-eared wizards and hunters. Again, mythological elves are not like D&D elves.

As for TSR and D&D's IP, FR is being resurrected for a reason, and Eberron is no FR.

Resurrecting... ummm... what? How can you resurrect something that has been alive and well? News flash: Forgotten Realms never went anywhere.

And they were apparently trying to replace or equal FR's role as CRPG and novel golden goose with Eberron, remember?

Uh, no. They were releasing a new setting that wasn't in the same mold as Forgotten Realms. That's it.

Between my "dependence" on 4e and WotC's "apparent" decision to make Eberron their new FR, you seem to be awfully fond of ascribing motivations and beliefs to other people. And isn't that against the forum rules?

 

[rounser]

*blink*

Maybe you misread my previous posts about my job, but I'm a programmer for a game developer. My interest in 4e in terms of development is merely a side project.

Okay, I apologise. Read too much into an earlier post of yours that made me a bit cynical about your posts.

Uh, no. They were releasing a new setting that wasn't in the same mold as Forgotten Realms. That's it.

They seemed pretty explicit in their desire to make it as marketable as FR was/is. This is completely understandable. In that context, it was designed to "be like FR", but you're quite correct in that they weren't "looking for another FR" except in that respect.

Between my "dependence" on 4e and WotC's "apparent" decision to make Eberron their new FR, you seem to be awfully fond of ascribing motivations and beliefs to other people. And isn't that against the forum rules?

Very well, I'll back off or get banned for 3 days or something.

I'm still waiting to hear you say something discriminating about the 4E game which isn't all pro pro pro, defend defend defend, though.

 

[Mercule]

Wow. I'm certainly glad Mr. O'Connor isn't in charge of the flavor text or design of 4E. It's unfortunate that he was given such latitude in shaping the art of the tieflings.

O'Connor is obviously a talented artist and I really, really like most of his artwork and style -- almost universally better than 3E core. I can even see his point about the Ren Fest accessories. In this case, though, the cure is a lot worse than the disease.

 

[Hussar]

A town and a starter adventure, and you believe that no worldbuilding is required??? Nevermind that the whole worldbuilding thing is perhaps D&D's main draw for a large part of it's audience? An audience that isn't going to expand....except to more worldbuilders, because without hundreds of pages of "adventure path", that's all the game will support?

As Terry Pratchett says, pull the other one, for it has bells on it. If they've worked a miracle and taken the worldbuilding and adventurebuilding out of D&D (almost an oxymoron unless it's been turned into Talisman overnight and no-one's noticed), then you'll be right. I hope you're right. I just don't believe that you are.

I think you're wrong.

I think that adventure building is alive and well. But, world building is a fringe exercise done by a small group of vocal players.

I think that the majority of players just want to play. They don't want to piss about crafting these massive campaign worlds. Why should they? The average campaign lasts a year. The average group less than two. What's the point in spending months, or years, developing this campaign setting that's never going to be used?

And the reason I feel this is because of the direction that D&D is going. The huge popularity of the Adventure Paths for example. Dungeon hailed Shackled City as the most popular thing it had ever done. So popular that they did two more right afterwards.

Look at the new products for 4e. Modules galore. Pregen adventures complete with setting in the core books.

The world builders can still do their thing. It might be a bit more work for them, but, I really don't care. Now, it means that the casual gamers can get into the game and play. Right out of the chute. Now waiting, no massive amount of pregame prep required.

I think it's about time.

 

[Campbell]

Rounser,

I don't get your beef with Eladrin. Is it their name that bothers you ? Amoral fey nobles that occasionally cross over into the mortal realm seem fairly inspired by mythology to me, far more so than their previous edition brethren at the very least.

 

[pemerton]

As has been noted in other, earlier threads, Tieflings and Dragonborn are closer to the sword-and-sorcery and horror fantasy that inspired Gygax (eg Howard, Lovecraft) than are Wagner or Tolkien-inspired treatments of the creatures of Nordic or Celtic myth - to which D&D Elves (though not Dwarves) in any event bare very little resemblance. And given these literary roots, I just don't see how culturally very specific faeries like Elves and Dwarves count as more generic than reptile-men, or demonically tainted humans. Basing one's game solely on a particular North-western European mythological trope does not make it generic - it makes it very specific. At least Howard's world includes a mix of tropes from a wide range of European, African and West and Central Asian cultures.

 

[rounser]

I think that adventure building is alive and well. But, world building is a fringe exercise done by a small group of vocal players.

I think that the majority of players just want to play. They don't want to piss about crafting these massive campaign worlds. Why should they? The average campaign lasts a year. The average group less than two. What's the point in spending months, or years, developing this campaign setting that's never going to be used?

I agree. You're talking to "Mr. Worldbuilding Is Redundant" here. No argument from me. I seem to recall being on your side of the argument on a rather long thread on this topic, when it came home to me just how important a part of the game worldbuilding is to people. The hobby within the hobby.

I'm just calling it how I see it, and I'm not seeing the worldbuilders as fringedwelling minorities...more like, your typical DM (but that's just anecdotal speculation on my part). And they much prefer worldbuilding to adventurebuilding, seemingly. Old WOTC research seems to back this, with "homebrew" the most popular setting.

 

[rounser]

I don't get your beef with Eladrin. Is it their name that bothers you ?

Yes. Why the hey they just fabricated a term is understandable from a legal perspective, but that reason doesn't unbad the name. It doesn't explain itself; it's an unnecessary D&Dism in there for no reason than legal convenience. I think the core shouldn't be about that, that it harms D&D's relevance to fantasy in general. And frankly, it sounds like a 3rd rate "eldar". Games Workshop and that "eldar" word - are they paying the Tolkien estate for it? It seems more infringing than using hobbit, which is a word from mythology.

At least re-use a careworn word from the language that's fallen into disuse. "Cambion", for instance, has been through the mill of english, and survived long enough to sound and act like a proper word where others have fallen by the wayside (as does "tiefling", to a degree, but I think they should be named cambions, because english already has a word for them and doesn't need to lean on semi-synthesized german in this case...unless you want more trademarks). "Eladrin" sounds contrived and world-specific compared to these other two.

 

[IanB]

For better or for worse, "eladrin" has been part of the game's vocabulary since 2nd edition, so I'm not surprised at all that they've chosen that as the term to repurpose here.

 

[rounser]

For better or for worse, "eladrin" has been part of the game's vocabulary since 2nd edition, so I'm not surprised at all that they've chosen that as the term to repurpose here.

Not a prominent enough part of the game for me to have even heard of it before. Must've been living under a rock.