D&D 5E Legends & Lore 3/17 /14

[ExploderWizard]

Yeah, KM pegged me right on this one. I loathed 2e for this. And, yup, I had to take a big old black marker and redact swaths of the MM every time I ran a campaign for a new player. It was sooooo annoying. And, because 2e tried to shoehorn everything into the same universe, I constantly had players asking to play (Setting specific class/race) in my campaign, because, "Well, the rules say that everything is in one universe and accessible from everywhere else. What's wrong with your game?"

Redacted monster manuals?

That's WAY too much bother to worry about. Just deciding to man up and say no never looked so easy.

 

[Hussar]

Redacted monster manuals?

That's WAY too much bother to worry about. Just deciding to man up and say no never looked so easy.

Well ok. I never actually took a pen to my books. I was speaking more figuratively. Yup had to say no all the bloody time. It was so bloody tiresome and meant I had to constantly be in guard with players assuming that because something is in the books it must be true.

It was a constant battle and all because TSR figured that everything should be lumped together.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Well, I have no idea how WotC is going to resolve the question... but all I can really hope for is that they are wise enough not to waste the space putting in additional lore from other campaign settings and instead treat their players like intelligent beings. Ones who can grasp the not-at-all-difficult concept that just because something is written down as a base example (or a "default", for those who keep getting hung up on that term)... it doesn't mean it's never going to be different elsewhere. Hopefully WotC will give their player base that respect for their cognitive ability.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Well, I have no idea how WotC is going to resolve the question... but all I can really hope for is that they are wise enough not to waste the space putting in additional lore from other campaign settings and instead treat their players like intelligent beings. Ones who can grasp the not-at-all-difficult concept that just because something is written down as a base example (or a "default", for those who keep getting hung up on that term)... it doesn't mean it's never going to be different elsewhere. Hopefully WotC will give their player base that respect for their cognitive ability.

I would like to hope so but then again this is the same company that thought " Play a dragonborn if you want to....look like a dragon." wasn't too stupid to print.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I would like to hope so but then again this is the same company that thought " Play a dragonborn if you want to....look like a dragon." wasn't too stupid to print.

Well... thankfully that was only four words and a punctuation mark so it didn't take up much space. And I would like to think that it was put in mainly for the benefit of really young players to whom "playing a dragon" could be seen as the ultimate in cool. But maybe I'm just fooling myself. LOL.

 

[Iosue]

I would like to hope so but then again this is the same company that thought " Play a dragonborn if you want to....look like a dragon." wasn't too stupid to print.

Given the "humans with pointy ears" approach to race that has been part and parcel of D&D since forever, this is a perfectly cromulent reason to play a dragonborn.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I was assuming that Grazz't would be in the Monster Manual and not relagated to another book. If they are bringing in proper nouns into the MM without even having those proper nouns IN the book, I would be dead set against that.

I have no problem with Orcus being the lord of undead so long as Orcus is actually in the MM. Asmodeus is the lord of Hell? Cool. So long as I can turn to the right page and see who this Asmodeus guy is. But, as soon as you start referencing elements that aren't included in the book, now it's just an advertisement to buy that setting guide. "Hey, Aarococra are like this in Athas." Well, what's an Athas and why should I care?

The stats for Grazz'zt might be in the MM. The adventure that features him or the supplement that describes the Abyss where he lives or whatever is probably going to be a different product, though. If the DMG has a blurb on what the Abyss might generally be, then it can have a little blurb on what Athas might generally be (heck, for much the same reason -- no reason some budding DM can't jam bits of Athas into the desert in their home game). The upthrust being that this isn't an advert -- just because Grazz'zt lives in the Abyss and Braxat live on Athas doesn't mean that you then need to go buy the book about the Abyss or the book about Athas. The MM gives you what you need to run the critter, and references the fact that there might be deeper lore if you want to dig into it.

Now, let's not get too carried away though. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think that a new player might know real world mythologies. If you reference Greek Myths with a centaur (something D&D hasn't actually ever done) it's not a huge stretch to think that someone might know what those myths are. But, I certainly wouldn't presume that anyone who hasn't been a D&D fan for a long time would know what a Domain of Dread, Krynn or Lady of Pain are.

No one knew what a hobbit was before Tolkien described it. No one know what Quiddich was before Rowling made it a thing. That's new lore: making up new stuff. The MM shouldn't presume you know who the Lady of Pain is, but it can feel pretty confident that anyone can understand the concept of a war of evil against evil. The dude thumbing through the book might not know what a Domain of Dread is, but he might know a Bella Lugosi expy when he sees one.

And, again, just as the DMG can contain a brief description of the Abyss or of the Nine Hells or of the Astral Plane, it can contain a brief description of Krynn, Athas, Sigil, Oerth...like [MENTION=98938]DeF[/MENTION]CON-1 said, a few words and a punctuation mark don't take up that much space.

Reference: "Athas is a world turn desert by arcane magic."

Hypothetical MM: "Braxats are massive, bestial giants who live on Athas and love to hunt those smaller and weaker than themselves"

Reference: "Metamorphosis is a normal world transformed by the acts of powerful gods and outsiders."

Hypothetical MM: "In the Metamorphosis setting, Jackalweres were created by Grazz'zt from normal jackals and serve him along with lamia."

Reference: "Planescape is a world where characters travel through heavens and hells to live their beliefs."

Hypothetical MM: "In the Planescape setting, Mariliths, like all demons, are involved in a great war against devils that pits law against chaos."

Engaged newbie player coming to a table with a homebrew setting having read all that and meeting a jackalwere: "What are these jackalweres like?"

And everybody wins.

Yeah, KM pegged me right on this one. I loathed 2e for this. And, yup, I had to take a big old black marker and redact swaths of the MM every time I ran a campaign for a new player. It was sooooo annoying. And, because 2e tried to shoehorn everything into the same universe, I constantly had players asking to play (Setting specific class/race) in my campaign, because, "Well, the rules say that everything is in one universe and accessible from everywhere else. What's wrong with your game?"

I'd much, much rather that the core game focused on a fairly generic overview of the races - tying them to elements within the same book is fine - and keep all the setting specific stuff contained to that setting. Stop trying to shoehorn everything together. It never works for one thing - the cosmologies are just too different. And the balancing elements don't export either.

I would say that this sounds like pretty much the problem that [MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION] was talking about with the method presented in this article: "Oh, I've got to redact and say no to jackalweres because people are going to come in assuming their X, and they aren't, necessarily, that."

The article wasn't very good at reassuring me that this won't be a problem in 5e. Mearls said it won't be, but with that example, it would be. So I don't know that they're seeing this from that perspective.

 

[Agamon]

And everybody wins.

I get what your saying here, but what I don't get is why a blanket statement at the beginning of the MM stating that each campaign may have different monster lore can't work. There's no need to arbitrarily foist every monster onto a specific setting.

The same example group that somehow can't understand that listed lore is optional even if that is pointed out to them explicitly is also going to wonder what use a MM with 3 monsters with Greyhawk lore is to their Greyhawk game.

Then again, said players from this group have more worrisome problems outside of any game. Like figuring out how to put socks on.

 

[Dausuul]

Most people don't sit down, pick up the Monster Manual, and read it cover to cover, carefully assimilating every word. This is something I see a lot as a software developer: People are not computers. Present them with a page of detailed instructions and they won't read it. Or if they do read it, they'll forget most of it, because they have no context to slot it into. Instead, they'll just jump in and start trying whatever looks promising, according to whatever paradigm they've already got in their heads. You can call them morons and scream about how it shouldn't be that way, but you're just swinging your sword at the tide; this is human nature, deal with it.

In 25 years of gaming, I don't think I've ever read the opening pages of a Monster Manual in their entirety. Why would I? It's a reference book, not a novel! I bought it because I wanted to read about monsters and monster lore. The rest, I'll look up when I need it.

 

[ExploderWizard]

In 25 years of gaming, I don't think I've ever read the opening pages of a Monster Manual in their entirety. Why would I? It's a reference book, not a novel! I bought it because I wanted to read about monsters and monster lore. The rest, I'll look up when I need it.

I don't always read an MM cover to cover but I do read the into section and the descriptions of what the statblock entries mean for a particular system. That way when I do need to reference a monster the statblock will not have to be decoded.