D&D 5E Monsters of Many Names - Wandering Monsters (Yugoloth!)

[avin]

World Axis and primordials vs gods plagued 4e. Now that ddn is moving back to the Great Wheel 4e fans blame Planescape.

I think this thread died some time ago.

 

[steeldragons]

World Axis and primordials vs gods plagued 4e. Now that ddn is moving back to the Great Wheel 4e fans blame Planescape.

IIII don't quite get the correlation. What does World Axis and primordials v. gods have to do with "4e fans blaming Planescape."

And, just for the record, I am NOT a 4e fan. I barely recognize it as a form of D&D...and that's only because that's what it says on the label.

I think this thread died some time ago.

I absolutely concur. Sorry to have resurrected it. The points and counterpoints have been missed, avoided, argued around, and never (or rarely) actually acknowledged.

Best to let it die...hysterically.

 

[Alzrius]

Just to come back to this for a moment...Normally, I would absoLUTEly agree. People who disagree with me do NOT mandate my how I play or what I include in my games.

However...in this particular circumstance/discussion they, in fact, ARE..or are attempting to tell me what the background fluff, based from Planescape, IS in the core of D&D. Can I ignore it? YES, WE CAN! Should I have to?! NO, WE SHOULDN'T!

Again, this isn't what they're telling you - it's apparently what you're taking away from what they're saying, but that isn't what they're trying to communicate. Simply acknowledging that the game has a rich history, and that it deserves consideration on that particular merit alone, is not them telling you what D&D "is" so much as they're saying what it is to them.

As for "you shouldn't have to," that seems to presume that you have some sort of inherent right to not only play the game the way you want (which you do), but that you have the right to have the game books reflect the way you want to run your game (which you do not).

We don't have to say "This game's not taking place in Eberron. No lightning trains or warforged." Since those elements don't exist in the default D&D assumed setting. We don't have to say, "This game's not taking place in Krynn. No kender or Towers of High Sorcery." Since those assumptions don't exist in the default D&D assumed setting. But we ALL seem to have to say, "This game's not taking place in Planescape...buuut all Planescape assumptions apply."

This presumes how you define the "assumed setting" since, for example, the warforged existed in the Fourth Edition Core (the Monster Manual). Ultimately, the game can't accommodate every type of campaign world out of the box; some cherry-picking is necessary even for the default materials - someone who wants to run a Tolkien-esque game will need to remove many monsters. Someone who wants to run an E6 game will need to remove levels seven and above.

This isn't a question regarding one particular campaign setting. It's a play-style question which has no right answer. Saying that Planescape is the problem is not correct.

That is inconsistent. That is not fair [to the other settings, players who have no interest or knowledge of PS, or the default game as a whole]. That is an incorrect assumption. It is "wrong" for the game. But for 27 pages of thread here and, I believe, 50-some pages of thread in Hussar's other spin-off, that is what's being argued. PS made planar stuff what is and the default D&D core is supposed to just accept and purport that.

I, and a few others, take issue with that.

In regards to your assertions behind what's "correct" et al, see above. Saying that you shouldn't have to tailor the game out of the box is, as I see it, unrealistic. Every game will, most likely, need some personalizing. Given that, I find that it's easier to have a great deal of lore and simply remove or alter it as needed, rather than having none and needing to reinvent the (Great) wheel each and every time. Subtraction is easier than addition, to me.

Finally, the number of pages in the thread varies by how many posts you set per page; I'm using the default setting of twenty posts per page, so to me this is only a fourteen-page thread.

EDIT: Or was that too "hysterical" to contribute to the conversation?

It was still stricken with hysteria, but you seem to be starting to rein it in. Good job.

 

[Alzrius]

I absolutely concur. Sorry to have resurrected it. The points and counterpoints have been missed, avoided, argued around, and never (or rarely) actually acknowledged.

Only by people who are hysterically claiming that they're being attacked by the people who disagree with them.

Best to let it die...hysterically.

You're not doing a good job of letting it die if you keep posting (though you're doing fine with the hysterical part).

 

[steeldragons]

Only by people who are hysterically claiming that they're being attacked by the people who disagree with them.

Can ya do me a favor and find yourself a thesaurus...i think they even exist online these days...Look up "hysterical"...and just try to sprinkle in a few synonyms for me.

You're not doing a good job of letting it die if you keep posting

Not nearly as good as you quoting me about letting it die. Though I suppose, in all of my hysterics I can't really see clearly. No wonder you're doing a better job than I am. I'll just go put on my fun buckly sleeve coat now...maybe the nice man in the white coat will buckle it up for me again in the comfy soft bouncy room.

...was that tooooo "hysterical"?

(though you're doing fine with the hysterical part).

Here kitty kitty kitty...niiiice kitty...It'll be hysTEARical!!!

 

[Alzrius]

Can ya do me a favor and find yourself a thesaurus...i think they even exist online these days...Look up "hysterical"...and just try to sprinkle in a few synonyms for me.

Why? That one perfectly encapsulates how you're acting.

Not nearly as good as you quoting me about letting it die. Though I suppose, in all of my hysterics I can't really see clearly.

That's most likely true.

No wonder you're doing a better job than I am. I'll just go put on my fun buckly sleeve coat now...maybe the nice man in the white coat will buckle it up for me again in the comfy soft bouncy room.

...was that tooooo "hysterical"?

Here kitty kitty kitty...niiiice kitty...It'll be hysTEARical!!!

You've allowed your hysteria on this issue to completely let your posting devolve into argumentative baiting. Presumably you understand that you're not adding anything of value, which makes it odd that you continue down this path at all. It doesn't matter, since the mods will likely bring you to heel shortly, but you're not doing yourself any favors (and certainly not the people whose point you claim to be championing).

 

[Savage Wombat]

Planescape-as-core is not the same as Krynn-as-core or FR-as-core. Because it was, in part, effectively intended as the "Manual of the Planes" for 2nd ed. To explain how the planes worked for all D&D games, not just one. Now, you don't have to accept this as a good idea, or like it - but you should understand that this is the viewpoint we Cagers have. We're not trying to make our favorite setting into the core - we thought it was core from the beginning.

I don't expect you to agree with my position, but I'd like it if you understood what it was.

 

[Cyberen]

This kind of discussion make me want to quit ENworld...
I don't come here to participate in flame wars. Yet, in this thread and in the other, me, and other posters habe been called names (for instance, "hysteria" is a mental disorder, and such public qualification of somebody's behaviour is at least rude - and, in my country, against the law).
I plea the mods for order, here.

 

[pemerton]

Planescape-as-core is not the same as Krynn-as-core or FR-as-core. Because it was, in part, effectively intended as the "Manual of the Planes" for 2nd ed. To explain how the planes worked for all D&D games, not just one.

I think this hits on a key issue. Is material that is intended to have a type of universal status, but that in fact ends up having somewhat more of a minority status, to be accorded the position that it sought, or that it achieved?

The first approach may produce more consistency/continuity across game books. The second approach may produce more consistency with the way people are actually playing the game. I think that from WotC's point of view it's not an easy call, because a lot of people seem to value conistency/continuity for its own sake, even in relation to material that they are not themselves using.

My own preference - I think fairly obvious by this stage of the thread - would be for them to sacrifice consistency/continuity to the pursuit of playability.

 

[jadrax]

for instance, "hysteria" is a mental disorder,

Using Hysteria in that sense has pretty much been abandoned by the medical community since 1980.