Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iron_Chef" data-source="post: 1304844" data-attributes="member: 4530">I use the term &quot;illogical&quot; to describe any setting that has 1) dozens, if not hundreds, of human, non-human and monster races all sitting side by side (many in harmony, such as the thousands of gnomish defenders of the human city of Geanavue) just because the PHB and MM say they exist in D&amp;D so therefore they &quot;must&quot; exist in Kalamar; 2) a bloated FR level NON-pantheon of dozens of gods (none of which have proper names); 3) a setting that has the same access to magical spells (and thus items) and does not take into account the drastic economic, educational, militaristic and transportation applications thereof, as these would immediately be exploited by governments for their betterment and their enemies detriment. I did say Kalamar was better at detailing some elements than FR or GH, but ultimately, it still subscribes to the same tired &quot;kitchen sink&quot; theory of world design, as well as suffering from the sanitizing effect of political correctness, which flies in the face of the logic of human nature. Maybe Kalamar is better than GH or FR, I've never played it, nor have I read all of the setting or its sourcebooks, but it does not *appear* different enough from FR/GH to me to warrant switching. I can't pick up the setting and say, &quot;wow, this is just so different and cool&quot;. All I can do is say &quot;well, at least they got some things right&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iron_Chef, post: 1304844, member: 4530"] I use the term "illogical" to describe any setting that has 1) dozens, if not hundreds, of human, non-human and monster races all sitting side by side (many in harmony, such as the thousands of gnomish defenders of the human city of Geanavue) just because the PHB and MM say they exist in D&D so therefore they "must" exist in Kalamar; 2) a bloated FR level NON-pantheon of dozens of gods (none of which have proper names); 3) a setting that has the same access to magical spells (and thus items) and does not take into account the drastic economic, educational, militaristic and transportation applications thereof, as these would immediately be exploited by governments for their betterment and their enemies detriment. I did say Kalamar was better at detailing some elements than FR or GH, but ultimately, it still subscribes to the same tired "kitchen sink" theory of world design, as well as suffering from the sanitizing effect of political correctness, which flies in the face of the logic of human nature. Maybe Kalamar is better than GH or FR, I've never played it, nor have I read all of the setting or its sourcebooks, but it does not *appear* different enough from FR/GH to me to warrant switching. I can't pick up the setting and say, "wow, this is just so different and cool". All I can do is say "well, at least they got some things right". [/QUOTE]

Verification