D&D 5E My Review of Mordenkainen’s Tome of Foes is Live will also answer any questions

[Kendra Lawrence]

I can't say I'm really a fan of this trend of the "unreliable narrator" for sourcebooks.

 

[Parmandur]

I can't say I'm really a fan of this trend of the "unreliable narrator" for sourcebooks.

The only reliable narrator is the DM; there is no "Canon" but what the DM determines at his table. That is Canon per Perkins et al.

 

[cbwjm]

I can't say I'm really a fan of this trend of the "unreliable narrator" for sourcebooks.

I think this is more or less a way to say that what's in the book is "true" but an individual DM might run things differently to what's in the book.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I can't say I'm really a fan of this trend of the "unreliable narrator" for sourcebooks.

No version will satisfy everyone. If you present lore as ''absolute, definitive facts'', people will be up in arms about how WotC force their vision of D&D unto the customer. If you present the lore as if coming from unreliable narrator, people will be up in arms about how useless lore is if its just ''Dm may do whatever they want with this informations''.

 

[Kendra Lawrence]

No version will satisfy everyone. If you present lore as ''absolute, definitive facts'', people will be up in arms about how WotC force their vision of D&D unto the customer. If you present the lore as if coming from unreliable narrator, people will be up in arms about how useless lore is if its just ''Dm may do whatever they want with this informations''.

That's admittedly how I feel lol (what point are the sourcebooks and establishing anything if people are just going to do what they want, anyway?), so I guess I am one of those who is upset I understand taking bits and pieces, or doing things completely homebrew, but if you have an established setting, there should be some canon things about it, otherwise it isn't really an established setting, and D&D may as well be just a "this is how you play, here are some basic rules, now go," instead of creating whole worlds with a history, themes, cultures, etc for it.

 

[Parmandur]

That's admittedly how I feel lol (what point are the sourcebooks and establishing anything if people are just going to do what they want, anyway?), so I guess I am one of those who is upset I understand taking bits and pieces, or doing things completely homebrew, but if you have an established setting, there should be some canon things about it, otherwise it isn't really an established setting, and D&D may as well be just a "this is how you play, here are some basic rules, now go," instead of creating whole worlds with a history, themes, cultures, etc for it.

Tools in the toolbox, to be used or repurposed as needed.

 

[Grumpy RPG Reviews]

Humans are humans lol.

Mostly I was joking. I would not want to see Earth race recreated. That would at best be pointless in terms of game mechanics (everyone has the same basic stats and bonuses) and at worst a terribly racist and sexist idea.

But this is a fantasy game - there are possibilities. I would be interesting to see the Eloi and Morlocks (of The Time Machine) explored, or magical Cybermen, or Atlantaens, and so forth. That said, it is probably the subject for a different book.

 

[cbwjm]

I wouldn't mind seeing some different humans. You could easily base various cultures off the variant human like they did in some of the planeshift settings.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Tools in the toolbox, to be used or repurposed as needed.

"Rulings over rules" taken to the literary level.

 

[Parmandur]

"Rulings over rules" taken to the literary level.

Exactly: in reality, the way it always has been, anyways.