D&D 5E Should the "core" world be centered around the classic races?

[ImperatorK]

Only humans should be "Core". Other races should be optional, maybe even in the DMG instead of the PHB.
There should be no fluff in "Core" books (or at least only a bare minimum, or maybe limit it only to the DMG for the new DMs to learn how to make a game), just rules. Fluff should be reserved for setting books.

 

[pemerton]

I dunno, they're both fairly "low" magic, but with very different flavors, IMO. Tolkien is far more "mythological" or "fairy tale", though

This is (partly) what I meant by the high magic/low magic contrast.

The strange thing to me is that I know several guys who seem to think of them as very similar or even the same...thus the D&Dism of playing Conan in a Tolkienesque world, I guess.

I see them as pretty far apart, myself. Apart from anything else, Conan is extremely modern in ideology, whereas Tolkien is reactionary-romantic.

 

[Sunseeker]

To me this is somewhat backwards.

Tolkien is higher magic than REH Conan, and is more likely to have elves, dwarves, hobbits etc with their own kingdoms and cultures and languages and histories. Whereas I think REH is more likely to have tieflings, carnivorous apes, and probably warforged as well (they're pretty pulpy with a hint of gothic horror), as deviant or "fallen" examples of humans (and no distinct culture or language).

I would certainly not consider Tolkein to be "high magic" at least not at the time of the primary books. Spell-slinging is rare outside of intensely magical or ancient communities. I am not familiar with Conan's world lore to be honest.

What I would say is that "high magic" and "low magic" are merely one scale on a multiple-scale system. I would expect more exotic creatures(humanoids and bests) to be more likely in a high-magic setting, but that's not necessarily true. We could add a scale on the basis of civilization, and I think that in less civilized worlds and societies we're more likely to see exotic creatures, and possibly there is some other scale to account for here, maybe population or something.

But you're right that the amount of magic in a world is clearly not the only measure.

 

[Sunseeker]

First of all, this is not true IMXP. When I started DMing I had no setting books, and I went straight to homebrewing because I actually believed that that was what DMing is about! I found a large map on the web, printed it, and told the players "you live here" while pointing a finger at a town on the map, and that's how we started. As far as I know, none of the other DM I've gamed with started with a defined setting, but rather just focused on adventures, and only think later, after the first bunch of adventures, what kind of world do the players really live in.

This is how I started as well, and how I have remained. I don't mind playing through "official" material, but I don't enjoy running it because I've always assumed that it was the DMs job to "get creative" to help engage the players. I'd hate to feel like I'm resting on my laurels when one of my players goes "hey, that doesn't make sense!" and my response is "Well that's what the book says."

 

[ForeverSlayer]

when one of my players goes "hey, that doesn't make sense!" and my response is "Well that's what the book says."

Had this happen with "damage on a miss".

 

[Sunseeker]

Had this happen with "damage on a miss".

I'm sure it could happen on any rule, even rules I agree with. But I think there's a fair bit of difference between saying "Well, that's what the book says." when you personally as the DM may also find it inconsistent, but don't want put the effort into thinking about it, and when the DM says "Well that's how we're doing things at my table." You (hypothetical "you" as DM) always have DM Privilege, but I suppose I worry that with a pre-made story I wouldn't take as much time to think about the what's and why's of said story and just go with because "that's the story." I can do that as a player, simply because I don't need to think about it, but I find it internally inconsistent with what I feel is expected of me as a DM.

Anyway, discussion of specific rules, particularly "damage on a miss" is probably better for another thread.