Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 3996300" data-attributes="member: 2067">I'm beginning to see more clearly where they're going with the PoL and the 'strongly suggested core' now. In many ways, it's like how FFZ ties itself to every FF game all at once (the land is called Ivalice, there's a Lifestream, there are Selkies and Bangaa, etc.): the idea is to have a point of reference for these things in the 'world,' as it were. The &quot;PoL Setting&quot; will take everything published and throw it together, much like 'greyhawk' did for 3e, but without Greyhawk's history or implied setting (4e is, as always, a step away from the &quot;Greyhawk Style&quot; of things). So they're not using the Great Wheel because this isn't Greyhawk. They're using something more generic, because this is Generica, Land of Examples, and, to the 4e team, the Great Wheel is very &quot;Greyhawk.&quot;But they don't want to publish a Points of Light Campaign Setting, because, in many ways, it would be pointless to codify it all. They don't want to define it. Being vague is it's strength, because it is, in the truest sense of the term, NOT A SETTING. It's just a collection of random proper nouns.I do think this is an idea I support, however I'm still a bit nervous about some of the more avid worldbuilders on the team sneaking 'setting-specific' information into the core rules (things like Golden Wyvern Adept, if there is a Golden Wyverns organization, for instance). The closer the rules hew to this 'not a setting,' the harder it will be to disentangle them from the setting. I bet, in many ways, it's an example of what a homebrew could be. The DMG might contain a wealth of 'worldbuilding' information that explains how to take the components from the core and transplant them to a variety of settings. And this also frees them up to do a 'Greyhawk Campaign Setting,' which I see as a distinct possibility now, with all the fans outraged at the fluff changes for 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 3996300, member: 2067"] I'm beginning to see more clearly where they're going with the PoL and the 'strongly suggested core' now. In many ways, it's like how FFZ ties itself to every FF game all at once (the land is called Ivalice, there's a Lifestream, there are Selkies and Bangaa, etc.): the idea is to have a point of reference for these things in the 'world,' as it were. The "PoL Setting" will take everything published and throw it together, much like 'greyhawk' did for 3e, but without Greyhawk's history or implied setting (4e is, as always, a step away from the "Greyhawk Style" of things). So they're not using the Great Wheel because this isn't Greyhawk. They're using something more generic, because this is Generica, Land of Examples, and, to the 4e team, the Great Wheel is very "Greyhawk." But they don't want to publish a Points of Light Campaign Setting, because, in many ways, it would be pointless to codify it all. They don't want to define it. Being vague is it's strength, because it is, in the truest sense of the term, NOT A SETTING. It's just a collection of random proper nouns. I do think this is an idea I support, however I'm still a bit nervous about some of the more avid worldbuilders on the team sneaking 'setting-specific' information into the core rules (things like Golden Wyvern Adept, if there is a Golden Wyverns organization, for instance). The closer the rules hew to this 'not a setting,' the harder it will be to disentangle them from the setting. I bet, in many ways, it's an example of what a homebrew could be. The DMG might contain a wealth of 'worldbuilding' information that explains how to take the components from the core and transplant them to a variety of settings. And this also frees them up to do a 'Greyhawk Campaign Setting,' which I see as a distinct possibility now, with all the fans outraged at the fluff changes for 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification