D&D (2024) No Appendix N Equivalent?

[DrJawaPhD]

Today an "Appendix N" is impossible. It would need to mention almost every scifi (including fantasy) novel that people read today, and even more importantly every movie and tv series.

I try to find scifi tv shows, and the list from inspirational tv alone would be over 200, nevermind movies and books.

It is no more "impossible" today than it was 10 years ago when they included one in the 2014 PHB and a second one in the 2014 DMG. There is no "need" to mention everything, you have one page where you mention as much as you can fit.

You can fit quick references to a hell of a lot of inspirational content onto a single page

 

[Azzy]

I never paid much attention to Appendix N when I got into D&D. So much of it I've never read and will never read.

 

[Deset Gled]

Deleted.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

These days D&D is it's own media. It doesn't need a list of novels to explain what it is.

And you could fill a whole book listing media inspired by D&D.

 

[Retros_x]

At this point a modern Appendix N would be 384 pages

Tons of URLS in that Appendix too, lot of tumblr. ;P

You say that and yet...

Lovecraft the person had terrible, harmful views.[...]

You arguing why Lovecraft should be included basically confirmed the point of @Deset Gled that there will always be a point of contention. I also would remove it as editor. People are getting tons of inspiration from the internet anyway, tons of threads in forums about the same topic etc. Appendix N was a relic from pre-internet time. Also D&D can have so many different forms and genres today, how would an appendix N even cover that. You would need subheadlines in that appendix for the biggest genre and vibe differences etc. its just easier to google inspiration for that funny, light-hearted Eberron campaign you want to run.

Hot take: Even most of the grognards complaining about Appendix N missing would not use it at all, they just want a confirmation for their taste.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Hot take: Even most of the grognards complaining about Appendix N missing would not use it at all, they just want a confirmation for their taste.

If that is really the main motivator, then perhaps a page given over to examples and advice for different tones/styles could be useful?

Lovecraft is certainly Problematic as the kids say, but his influence on cosmic horror cannot be denied. It's sort of like Birth of a Nation being one of the most virulently racist films ever made (based on a virulently racist, revisionist, and mostly made-up book), but you have to talk about it in film history courses because it is such a landmark of cinematography technique.

Instead of just one Appendix N that appeals to just one demographic though, why not have (say) 5-10 pages given over to "here are sources for styles X, Y, Z, W, Q"? I'm a huge huge proponent of DMG books that aim to teach by example and arm the reader with knowledge and wisdom that will help them make their own decisions about what they want to run and the vision they want to pursue. If instead of locking D&D into the reading list that a man 50-odd years ago compiled, we instead point to several different approaches with tradition as one of them, we would simultaneously recognize D&D's roots while supporting new DMs in their pursuit of their D&D. Isn't that all to the good? I mean, it does mean spending pages on that text. But I have more than a few ideas about ways to save DMG space.

 

[Yaarel]

Instead of just one Appendix N that appeals to just one demographic though, why not have (say) 5-10 pages given over to "here are sources for styles X, Y, Z, W, Q"?

Why do these "these are my favorite books" lists need to be an official statement from a corporation? Cant fansites produce a list of their own favorites? Does Critical Hit have such a list of favorite resources for viewers and players who like this setting style?

 

[Retros_x]

If that is really the main motivator, then perhaps a page given over to examples and advice for different tones/styles could be useful?

It was a hot take and a half-joke. But as I said its much easier to get specific examples and advice from the internet IMO. At least in my experience I know not a single person who actually used the appendix from 2014 to get inspiration.

Lovecraft is certainly Problematic as the kids say, but his influence on cosmic horror cannot be denied.

Neither me nor anyone else here wanted to deny that.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Why do these "these are my favorite books" lists need to be an official statement from a corporation? Cant fansites produce a list of their own favorites? Does Critical Hit have such a list of favorite resources for viewers and players who like this setting style?

1. They don't. It's not the "official statement from a corporation" that matters. It's having it in a central, accessible place that every new DM should possess.
2. They can. I just don't think that that is as useful as the above.
3. I assume you mean Critical Role? I don't believe they do, but I don't actually know.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It was a hot take and a half-joke. But as I said its much easier to get specific examples and advice from the internet IMO. At least in my experience I know not a single person who actually used the appendix from 2014 to get inspiration.

Whether it was a hot take or not, my suggestion was quite serious.

Neither me nor anyone else here wanted to deny that.

You had said:

You arguing why Lovecraft should be included basically confirmed the point of @Deset Gled that there will always be a point of contention. I also would remove it as editor.

If one wishes to refer to cosmic horror as a D&D/TTRPG concept--which has been with us since mindflayers and beholders and the Worm That Walks, which was specifically created for Call of Cthulhu but is now present in several editions of D&D and D&D-adjacent things (PF1e, at least)--then referencing Lovecraft is unavoidable. As you would choose to leave him out, that either means not talking about cosmic horror at all, or doing so in an impoverished way. Since my premise was to talk about various different styles, with cosmic horror being a prominent one among them, my response was (in effect) "well...okay but we kinda can't 'remove it as editor.'"