Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ambroseji" data-source="post: 6278898" data-attributes="member: 6700516">As [MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION] just said, the whole point of this week's L&L was that the printed lore will be presented in a format that can be easily ignored. Additionally, the snippet we are looking at is just a small excerpt from one entry. I feel safe assuming there will be several other entries for jackalweres that provide alternate lore soundbites.There are a lot of people in this thread who are talking as if their game will be severely inconvenienced if they don't use the printed lore. Personally, I run into players who make lore assumptions while playing 5e now, pulling from 3.x, 4e, or even earlier editions. I almost exclusively run games in homebrews, so my lore is modified at least, but I have never been inconvenienced by it.  There are dozens of folks in this thread who have stated that they like having detailed lore in the monster manual and they are not hindered the use of proper nouns. Obviously, WotC cannot publish a book with lore that works for everyone unless they withheld it completely. Every DM here will probably ignore one piece of lore or another, but I would rather have more lore than less. More lore means more points of inspiration for all DMs, and will make it easy for new DMs to put monsters into their game and create their own scenarios.Another point: I have no problem with players reading the MM; when I was a player I loved reading it just for fun. But ultimately, the MM should be published for DMs. The information should not be tailored for player consumption. It's a DMing tool.</blockquote>

Verification