Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8813427" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Haha, it is funny because it entirely misses the point. Uh-huh. Well, weirdly as a DM and player at multiple different tables I've never been directly involved in the writing process for the Player's Handbook. Done a few surveys but somehow they've never consulted me on writing actual lore. /sNow, yes, obviously individual tables can do whatever it is individual tables want to do. But if you individual table wants to keep Hobbits exactly as they are in the game, then that doesn't mean that the rest of us need that for the book published by WoTC. And we can discuss the fact that halflings aren't utterly perfectly designed and try and improve upon them I would hope. Well, I really don't hope because it seems that even getting to the point of recognizing there is a problem means slogging through endless repititions of "it isn't a problem, you are a problem" Sure it isn't a small accomplishment. I can name at least three, nope five authors, wait dang it, I ca go to seven authors... Well, let's suffice to say that he isn't the only author to have ever created enough lore to have his own mythos.You keep saying "self-referential" like it is a bad thing. Was WoW inspired by DnD? Certainly. Leveling systems in just about every medium come exclusively from DnD. Elves and Orcs come from DnD. As do trolls. But WoW orcs aren't DnD orcs. WoW elves aren't DnD elves. WoW trolls aren't DnD trolls. WoW Draenei don't look like DnD anything. And since DnD takes from general fantasy, looking at the good ideas WoW had won't hurt DnD. It can't hurt DnD. i'm not saying mirror everything they ever do, but if they are doing good storytelling and interesting concepts, you can be inspired by that. DnD has already evolved past what it once was, it has changed, it will change again. You know those "bajillion subcommittees" you mentioned? They are all self-referential DnD content. They make new content, DnD takes the things they are doing and adapts, and then they make new content off of the things DnD made in response to them. This is how things are made. Again, how is this in any way bad? You keep saying "self-referential" like it is always 100% bad. For an example I can trivially think of, the New Star Trek shows likely looked at the successes and popular decisions of modern Science Fiction shows which were inspired by Star Trek. Because of course they did. The writers would be idiots to only look at Star Trek material and not to take inspiration from works that came later and improved on Star Trek stories. There are many media companies that SHOULD be more self-referential. Thinking of Marvel and DC, they absolutely should be looking at some 3rd party superhero content and seeing how they can change, instead of always doing what they have always done for 70 years. Who cares how much influence they took from DnD?! That doesn't matter. If they have good ideas then they are good ideas, this isn't genetics, you can't in-breed stories by taking in ideas from outside sources. I'm not talking about a denial of history. I'm talking about getting rid of what doesn't work. I don't deny the history of transportation. But I also don't think going to work in an ox-drawn wagon is terribly useful, and I don't think we need to continue having Ox-drawn wagon making factories in the modern United States. We have other tools that work better. You may love your Spider-Horse DnD monster, and it is part of DnD's history for sure, but I see zero reason to look forward to it being published in a monster manual any time soon, because I think everyone will agree it isn't something we really need in the game anymore. I also don't need 100 different flavors of elf, seems excessive and pointless. That isn't denying history, that is simply saying we don't need those things anymore. We aren't denying history by not reprinting them. And if you think that 100% of every single thing ever published for DnD must be brought forward into each new edition of DnD,c ompletely unaltered... well, then you and I have very different and completely incompatible ideas of what DnD should look like, because there is a lot in DnD's history that I do not want to see republished, whether because it sucks or for other reasons.</blockquote>

Verification