Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 5931412" data-attributes="member: 5100">In my limited run with 4e, I got the vibe that they wanted to frame the "implied setting" as a kitchen sink setting where any and all rules from any and all sources could be pulled with wild abandon. That's not necessarily a bad thing and I see no problem with someone running a home brew game including a kender templar with the mark of warding. Where I did start to have an issue was that the kitchen sinkiness was more explicit than implicit. IMO, anyone who is creating their own setting is unlikely to need to be told stuff doesn't have to be exactly this way. The setting books should be written to frame the setting they serve.For myself, I'm much more likely to reveal a new bearer of the Mark of Death than to play three card monte with the other dragonmarks, and I don't see me ever including the Mark of Death. Of course, since I see dragonmarks as one of the defining features of a setting I rather like, I can't imagine I'd ever yoink them for my home brew. If I did, it'd be specifically to create a hybrid of my favorite elements, so I'd probably keep the racial restrictions anyway.So, shorter answer to the poll: Go 3.5 style, with explicit restrictions. If someone breaks the rules, they aren't "doing it wrong". I just think the standard setting tropes should be explicit.</blockquote>