D&D (2024) Should There Be a Core Setting?

[tetrasodium]

I mean games like blades in the dark, apocalypse world, or even osr games like mork borg that have a relatively specific setting or genre in mind and create, or at least intend to create, a play experience centered around that genre. Then there are games like fate, white hack, or (reputedly, because I haven't looked at it much) gurps that are more toolkits that allow for players to match mechanics to their preferred genre.

5e has produced a lot of content for the forgotten realms, but there are disconnects between the core rules and the FR. But then, it's not clear to me that FR is very internally coherent as a setting to begin with, so maybe I'm reacting more to that than to the implicit 5e setting.

If you look at something like acquisitions incorporated, especially the past couple of years where they are bouncing around between various planes and different settings, what genre is that? Whatever genre that is, I think it's a good fit for 5e mechanics (even though it is a stage show and so very different from home games)

I'm familiar with them but there's a pretty significant chasm between 5e's FR & FR-like hefty slant & gurps or something. Past editions of d&d managed to float somewhere in that chasm 5e isn't just focused on the genre of FR, it's focused on one specific type of FR or FR-like setting campaign

 

[Yaarel]

I feel the Players Handbook can do much to feel more setting neutral.

Importantly, the player-facing text can tell the player that most settings dont have all of the options that are in the Players Handbook. The DM typically chooses specific races and classes to be in a setting, and to consult with the DM to see how a character concept that seems atypical for that setting might fit in.

Give examples from official settings, for how different settings can be, like Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun, and Magic The Gathering.

The Players Handbook is more useful when avoiding setting assumptions, like how the multiverse works or belief systems work. This kind of stuff belongs in the DMs Guide as part of a setting-building toolkit.

Of course, the DM can always use an official setting as a pregen. But official settings differ significantly, and ideally the DM homebrews ones own.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I am still somewhat impressed that the "yes, 5e's way is fine" and "no, but some concessions are okay" options remain basically neck-and-neck, and then the next step down is both of the more extreme positions: "there should be more of it" and "no, but talking about setting-specific examples is fine."

Like...I know this poll is unrepresentative and stuff. But I don't think I could ask for a more dramatic demonstration of a bimodal distribution. Some people want a presumed core setting that is inherently baked-in, others want books as setting-neutral as possible but make some allowances. I'm...not sure it's actually possible to properly please both groups.

 

[TwoSix]

Like...I know this poll is unrepresentative and stuff. But I don't think I could ask for a more dramatic demonstration of a bimodal distribution. Some people want a presumed core setting that is inherently baked-in, others want books as setting-neutral as possible but make some allowances. I'm...not sure it's actually possible to properly please both groups.

It isn't. I think that's why they default to a light touch, it's easier to attach more specific setting info in supplements than to detach the setting info embedded into the core if you want to use another setting.

I mean, I can't imagine trying to play PF1 or PF2 and not use Golarian, the rules are simply too focused on establishing the setting.

 

[Neonchameleon]

But the most obvious thing about D&D - what the hell with the "cleric" class, ie armed and armoured healing priests? How is that generic?

One of the missed opportunities I felt from Tasha's was allowing clerics an optional class feature to give up all armour and shields and allow their wisdom to AC.

 

[Vaalingrade]

A neutral core and more frequent and detailed setting books would probably come close.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I feel the Players Handbook can do much to feel more setting neutral.

Importantly, the player-facing text can tell the player that most settings dont have all of the options that are in the Players Handbook. The DM typically chooses specific races and classes to be in a setting, and to consult with the DM to see how a character concept that seems atypical for that setting might fit in.

Give examples from official settings, for how different settings can be, like Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun, and Magic The Gathering.

The Players Handbook is more useful when avoiding setting assumptions, like how the multiverse works or belief systems work. This kind of stuff belongs in the DMs Guide as part of a setting-building toolkit.

Of course, the DM can always use an official setting as a pregen. But official settings differ significantly, and ideally the DM homebrews ones own.

This. It would be great if the core books were more clear that a DM isn't expected to have every option in the books available for every campaign. As it is, players almost always expect they can grab anything in official 5e and the DM has to let it in.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I am still somewhat impressed that the "yes, 5e's way is fine" and "no, but some concessions are okay" options remain basically neck-and-neck, and then the next step down is both of the more extreme positions: "there should be more of it" and "no, but talking about setting-specific examples is fine."

Like...I know this poll is unrepresentative and stuff. But I don't think I could ask for a more dramatic demonstration of a bimodal distribution. Some people want a presumed core setting that is inherently baked-in, others want books as setting-neutral as possible but make some allowances. I'm...not sure it's actually possible to properly please both groups.

Which is why the presentation will probably remain the same. Well, that and a desire on WotC's part to keep product identity and branding front and center.

 

[GuyBoy]

With the rider that I think, and hope, that 6e is several years away, I voted yes. This raises the question of what the core setting should be.

If it was up to me, I’d go for Greyhawk because it ticks all my grognard boxes, is both vanilla enough and large enough to accommodate multiple cultures and it resonates with the rich history of the game from Acererak to Tenser and from the Steading to Hommlet.
And this is why it should up to me.....or anyone else as an individual for that matter.

There are as many arguments against Greyhawk as there are for it. The same can be said for FR, Eberron, Dark Sun etc. Just imagine the setting wars on these messageboards!
If 6e is going to have a core setting, it needs to be as new as 6e. The best comparison would be Nentir Vale for 4e.

I am trusting enough of WOTC to believe they would come up with a setting that worked, and was supported by campaign books, adventures, novels etc.
Of course, not everyone would like it and that would be fine. One could always play FR, Eberron or a 3PP setting or whatever suited.

For me, I’d try the new setting if I liked it, or you might find me DMing in Steampunkette’s S&S setting....or maybe in the Yatil Mountains.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The most important source for Vancian magic, "Mazirian the Magician", feels D&D-y in a way that almost all other fantasy fiction doesn't: not only does the protagonist encounter many different monsters and other dangers, these are gathered together in a small geographic area. D&D and "Mazirian the Magician" are monster dense.

This post describes the resemblances between Jack Vance's short story "Mazirian the Magician" and D&D in more detail. It was published in 1950 as part of The Dying Earth. The spell memorisation and casting is very similar to D&D. But it's also a story about resource management, and those resources getting used up by a large number of encounters with monsters and other dangers.

"Mazirian the Magician", like D&D, distinguishes between spells known and spells memorised. The former are much greater than the latter:

Only a few more than a hundred spells remained to the knowledge of man. Of these, Mazirian had access to seventy-three.​

​

Mazirian, by dint of stringent exercise, could encompass four of the most formidable, or six of the lesser spells.​

​

Mazirian made a selection from his books and with great effort forced five spells upon his brain: Phandaal's Gyrator, Felojun's Second Hypnotic Spell, The Excellent Prismatic Spray, The Charm of Untiring Nourishment, and the Spell of the Omnipotent Sphere.​

The story mostly consists of a pursuit thru a very dangerous wilderness. Mazirian is chasing T'sain, with the aim of imprisoning and enslaving her.

Mazirian's spell use is as follows:
He uses Phandaal's Gyrator to kill a deodand. "Thrang the ghoul-bear" is slain by the Excellent Prismatic Spray. Mazirian casts the Charm of Untiring Nourishment to follow T'sain underwater. When he is trapped beneath stone blocks he frees himself with the Spell of the Omnipotent Sphere. He uses his last magic, Felojun's Second Hypnotic Spell, to deal with "vampire-weed". Now out of spells he is killed when he encounters animate trees that use their branches like whips, and T'sain is able to escape.

Resource management is explicitly a concern: "Mazirian paused indecisively. It was not good to use so many spells and thus shear himself of power."

Mazirian's Live Boots, similar to Boots of Speed or Boots of Striding and Springing in D&D, are also a limited resource: "The spring and drive began to leave the Live Boots, for they had come far and at great speed." "Mazirian made one effort to follow, and discovered that his Boots hung lax and flaccid—dead."

It can be seen from the examples above that this story, like D&D, features a lot of monsters and a lot of magic. Outside, there are also Twk-men, who are tiny and ride dragonflies, and pelgranes, dangerous flying beasts. Mazirian's mansion contains a carnivorous plant, a miniature dragon – which Mazirian uses to threaten Turjan, a wizard he has imprisoned and miniaturised – and an artificial man, like a homunculus. T'sain is also an artificial being, created by Turjan in a previous story. T'sain had two spells memorised – "the Charm of Untiring Nourishment and a spell affording strength to her arms" – and also possessed an anti-magic rune that protected her from Mazirian's spells.

The only other comparably 'monster dense' story from the same period I know is Manly Wade Wellman's "The Desrick on Yandro" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction (June 1952). This has many brilliantly weird monsters – the Toller, the Flat, the Bammat, the Behinder, the Skim, and the Culverin. However they are all part of a single encounter.