Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TerraDave" data-source="post: 8752243" data-attributes="member: 22260">Great topic. There is absolutely an implied or default setting. Maybe quite a specific one. And one that isn't really like anything in fantasy literature, unless of course written to be like D&amp;D.AD&amp;D had a very strong default setting. It also was one of the worst for saying: the DM can do whatever they want, but for AD&amp;D, things work this way. The MM, DMG, and PHB had lots of detail for the implied setting, and the named entities, artifacts, and planar information made it less implied and more just the setting. Throw in Deities and Demigods, and things start to get really out there, with&nbsp; implications of many kinds of settings, and one very crazy multiverse. Speaking of which, the currently morphing edition is leaning back into that. Multiverse is the setting. 2E probably tried hardest to be generic. It still had the stuff noted in the OP, but it tried really hard to be a more vanila base for more specific settings that you would also buy. No Asmodeus. It made the core rules sort of a snooze fest. No Asmodeus! And there was the most tension between how the game really worked, as per the OP, and the various settings and campaign advice, which often tried to push in a different direction.&nbsp; Setting building blocks...paladins, owlbears, the teleport spell...give you something to work with and are pretty cool. Things like Asmodeus, Sigal, the Rod of Seven Parts, are both more motivating and more optional. But more motivating. Another way to think about it, outside of some very generic task resolution rules, what you are getting out of the game is the default setting. Thats the value added!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TerraDave, post: 8752243, member: 22260"] Great topic. There is absolutely an implied or default setting. Maybe quite a specific one. And one that isn't really like anything in fantasy literature, unless of course written to be like D&D. AD&D had a very strong default setting. It also was one of the worst for saying: the DM can do whatever they want, but for AD&D, things work this way. The MM, DMG, and PHB had lots of detail for the implied setting, and the named entities, artifacts, and planar information made it less implied and more just the setting. Throw in Deities and Demigods, and things start to get really out there, with implications of many kinds of settings, and one very crazy multiverse. Speaking of which, the currently morphing edition is leaning back into that. Multiverse is the setting. 2E probably tried hardest to be generic. It still had the stuff noted in the OP, but it tried really hard to be a more vanila base for more specific settings that you would also buy. No Asmodeus. It made the core rules sort of a snooze fest. No Asmodeus! And there was the most tension between how the game really worked, as per the OP, and the various settings and campaign advice, which often tried to push in a different direction. Setting building blocks...paladins, owlbears, the teleport spell...give you something to work with and are pretty cool. Things like Asmodeus, Sigal, the Rod of Seven Parts, are both more motivating and more optional. But more motivating. Another way to think about it, outside of some very generic task resolution rules, what you are getting out of the game [I]is [/I]the default setting. Thats the value added! [/QUOTE]

Verification