Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Voadam" data-source="post: 8508110" data-attributes="member: 2209">Which is odd, because it was an explicit part of what I said.Yep. I too would definitely place Djinn second in prominence over Marid and Dao.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Sure. I think Barbarians (berserker vikings) and Elves (light and dark) and Dwarves are more prominent, particularly as core heroic PC options, but opinions can vary on whether Tolkien derived elves and dwarves count or not. There is also the whole Norse Pantheon in the 5e PH.If Giants as evil Frost Giant and Fire Giant monsters were considered the predominant Scandinavian representation in Core D&amp;D it could be taken as linking evil monsters with Scandinavians and one could imagine a Scandinavian feeling demonized.In WFRP for example the Norscans are explicitly demonically warped Chaos worshipping berserker barbarians. People could feel that is fine or that demonizing them is problematic. Just as I think D&amp;D's use of genies is generally fine I think the WFRP treatment is also generally fine, but I can see a basis for someone to feel differently than me.Not quite.There are core baseline assumptions like the races and classes and monsters from the Monster Manual.You can core do D&amp;D in a points of light D&amp;D setting without setting it in a bigger context.It is perfectly reasonable to talk about the context of the assumptions of the three core rulebooks where there are Barbarians and Dwarves and Paladins and Frost Giants and Efreeti.Like 3e with Greyhawk officially, or 4e with the World Axis Cosmology and points of light, and as some argue is the case with 5e and FR (I don't).I don't feel a need for a 5e core setting, but I also feel fine examining things from the perspective of the defaults of the 3 core books.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Voadam, post: 8508110, member: 2209"] Which is odd, because it was an explicit part of what I said. Yep. I too would definitely place Djinn second in prominence over Marid and Dao. ;) Sure. I think Barbarians (berserker vikings) and Elves (light and dark) and Dwarves are more prominent, particularly as core heroic PC options, but opinions can vary on whether Tolkien derived elves and dwarves count or not. There is also the whole Norse Pantheon in the 5e PH. If Giants as evil Frost Giant and Fire Giant monsters were considered the predominant Scandinavian representation in Core D&D it could be taken as linking evil monsters with Scandinavians and one could imagine a Scandinavian feeling demonized. In WFRP for example the Norscans are explicitly demonically warped Chaos worshipping berserker barbarians. People could feel that is fine or that demonizing them is problematic. Just as I think D&D's use of genies is generally fine I think the WFRP treatment is also generally fine, but I can see a basis for someone to feel differently than me. Not quite. There are core baseline assumptions like the races and classes and monsters from the Monster Manual. You can core do D&D in a points of light D&D setting without setting it in a bigger context. It is perfectly reasonable to talk about the context of the assumptions of the three core rulebooks where there are Barbarians and Dwarves and Paladins and Frost Giants and Efreeti. Like 3e with Greyhawk officially, or 4e with the World Axis Cosmology and points of light, and as some argue is the case with 5e and FR (I don't). I don't feel a need for a 5e core setting, but I also feel fine examining things from the perspective of the defaults of the 3 core books. [/QUOTE]

Verification