Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scars Unseen" data-source="post: 8442590" data-attributes="member: 10196">On the subject of nebulous vs definitive:I've said earlier in the thread that generalizations are acceptable as narrative short hand in fiction, and I stand by that.  That doesn't necessarily mean that I prefer concise prescriptive societies over ones with more nuance.  In fact, if I had to choose, I'd say I prefer the latter for any kind of serious campaign that isn't just a kick-down-the-doors dungeon crawl at heart.But here's the thing.  I don't think that you can have it both ways and have a good product.  Explicit nuance or conciseness, choose one.  If WotC wants to go with rich worldbuilding with complex breakdowns of individual societies, they need to go back to thick campaign setting books that focus primarily on that world building instead of the crunch heavy books with hints of it.  Otherwise, instead of nuanced, the resulting world will be mushy and sparse of detail.Of course, there is also the option of implied nuance.  I personally think it's perfectly acceptable to give a short form description of a society like the drow that paints them as evil, matriarchal worshipers of a demon goddess, and then allow the reader to come to the understanding that the evil isn't a biological imperative through detailing drow followers of Elistraee and other groups and individuals who have broken away or otherwise chosen a different lifestyle.  I'd still prefer the long format that gives me more to work with, but if we're getting short format anyway, I'd prefer writing that gives a strong impression over a weak one.</blockquote>

Verification