D&D (2024) No Appendix N Equivalent?

[EzekielRaiden]

No I would not choose that, you misread me. I would choose to not write an Appendix at all, because as it was already stated and you prove with your argumentation, it will always be a point of contention. Either you put Lovecraft in for example for reasons you state than others are mad because he is a racist or they don't see cosmic horror as relevant to D&D as other genres and influence they miss from the Appendix. Or you left him out than people like you are mad. In the end its just a lot of butthurt because someones important artists is not included and they feel unseen for a weird parasocial reason. New DMs will not suffer because one author is included or not.

There will always be issues like this. I would rather be constructive and supportive to new DMs needing guidance, even if it potentially risks offending folks who dislike that (surprise, shock, horror) people in the past were more, and more openly, prejudicial than people today.

It also will offend some people to include the references to Corellon being trans/intersex/bigender, and that trans/intersex elves are thus seen as honored by Corellon. The fact that some people will find something offensive clearly isn't a reason to not do some of the things 5e does.

And additionally it is not needed. I asked the DMs i know personally, nobody used the Appendix in 2014 and they all are already quite versed in the fantasy genres. I would argue that most DMs new and old alike are already familar with the genre and already get their inspiration from somewhere.

Nothing is "needed." This is a leisure hobby. Absolutely everything within it is "unnecessary" from the front cover to the back. "Needed" is even worse than useless, it is actively unhelpful.

 

[Cadence]

Were 1e, Moldvay Basic, and 5e (2014) the only versions that had one? Moving adjacent, PF 1e did.

---

I wonder what they could do with a coffee table size book with lots of art and page snippets lining up the history of the inspirational reads and what it inspired and some reviews of the time and now, picks of some of creators, etc...

 

[TwoSix]

It is juat a list of authors and books thst have influenced the game background. It made a lot more sense in the late q960s when getting deep cut recommendations was nice, because finding books could be hard.

Exactly. And now, in the 2020s, there's probably little of less value than a small group of people's aggregated list of easily looked up things.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think once upon a time it was important for D&D to explain what its inspiration was. I don't think that's nearly as important today for many reasons. D&D is in many ways is it's own genre of fantasy. Calling out one series of books versus another seems like an invitation to an unnecessary argument that WotC or the designers can't possibly win, nor will it really be enlightening to anyone anymore. Once upon a time Gygax may've needed to call out Three Hearts and Three Lions or Fafhrd and The Grey Mouser as being the vibe of his game because there was an "educating the buyer" component. Now, I highly doubt that someone buying D&D doesn't know what it is that they're in for.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Correct, and useless. Which was the point.

Yes, exactly the point. Everyone knows what fantasy is before they can read. It’s a different world from 1979, when the genre was obscure and there was no internet to look things up. People do NOT “need guidance” in this area, and suggesting they do is gatekeeping: “oh no, what if they are inspired by Harry Potter!!!!!”

 

[Parmandur]

Were 1e, Moldvay Basic, and 5e (2014) the only versions that had one? Moving adjacent, PF 1e did.

I believe so yup.

I wonder what they could do with a coffee table size book with lots of art and page snippets lining up the history of the inspirational reads and what it inspired and some reviews of the time and now, picks of some of creators, etc...

That idea uis as rad as heck, but thenrights issues might be extensive.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, exactly the point. Everyone knows what fantasy is before they can read. It’s a different world from 1979, when the genre was obscure and there was no internet to look things up. People do NOT “need guidance” in this area, and suggesting they do is gatekeeping: “oh no, what if they are inspired by Harry Potter!!!!!”

...

You do realize I would expect Harry Potter to be included in this, right?

For God's sake, why does everyone interpret this as "oh, OF COURSE you're trying to be snooty and judgmental and exclusionary" when I've explicitly said otherwise every single post?

Everyone knows what fantasy is. Everyone does not know how to turn the fantasy background radiation into something USEFUL. That's the whole point here.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

...

You do realize I would expect Harry Potter to be included in this, right?

Sure, but some people would be horrified. Meanwhile, there will be something that would shock you that is included or excluded.

Everyone knows what fantasy is. Everyone does not know how to turn the fantasy background radiation into something USEFUL.

And a list of books won't help with that. It takes a proper explanation, which is what is in the DMG, rather than a useless list of books.

 

[M.L. Martin]

There have been two strains in D&D from nearly the beginning--"D&D as fantasy toolkit" and "D&D as unique game experience."

Appendix N can be useful for both, but its usefulness to the latter is primarily in identifying the sources that create the "D&D flavor." Since WotC is thoroughly committed to the latter and to a self-referential vision of "D&D is about being D&D," a reading list doesn't serve their goals, or the goals of building the brand and furthering the dominion of Asmodeus.

 

[Yaarel]

...

You do realize I would expect Harry Potter to be included in this, right?

For God's sake, why does everyone interpret this as "oh, OF COURSE you're trying to be snooty and judgmental and exclusionary" when I've explicitly said otherwise every single post?

Everyone knows what fantasy is. Everyone does not know how to turn the fantasy background radiation into something USEFUL. That's the whole point here.

The Harry Potter books are important for establishing the mage as the central knightly hero.

I am still trying to understand the benefit of an Appendix N. It seems so obvious to me that this kind of "favorite sources" list works better in DnDBeyond than in any hardcopy book. For one thing, a digital list can modify, add, evolve, and specialize. Today, such a list in a book becomes almost instantly obsolete the moment a new fantasy movie becomes popculture.

Wait. Is this defacto a debate about literary canon and who decides?