D&D 5E (2014) Too many cooks (a DnDN retrospective)

[technoextreme]

Manga and star trek have become fantasy archetypes too. Doesnt mean that either one belongs in the core D&D book.

I'm talking about fantasy archetypes that predate Tolkein by a couple hundred years.

 

[timASW]

I'm talking about fantasy archetypes that predate Tolkein by a couple hundred years.

Find me some steampunk from the 1600's then. And Davinci's drawings dont count. He wasnt "telling stories" he was actually trying to build those.

 

[Obryn]

Want to be a munchkin race/class? I dont care. Not a bit. A good guideline to start is, if it was in eberron, dark sun or 4e, toss it and light it.

I just ... um ... You just named at least two, and IMO three of the best things to come out of D&D's development.

I've never heard a single good reason why some character concept needs one of these bits of nonsense. No matter what the players say it always comes down to some sort of munchkinism.

I'm glad I don't get my players from that same pool! I usually play with actual adults who develop character concepts and enjoy playing them. Do you go around trying to cynically analyze all your players' motivations for wanting to do something new or different?

-O

 

[technoextreme]

Find me some steampunk from the 1600's then. And Davinci's drawings dont count. He wasnt "telling stories" he was actually trying to build those.

Why doesn't it count? People thought the philosopher's stone was really and it doesn't make it any less of a classical fantasy archetype. People used to believe gnomes were actual stone creatures.

I just ... um ... You just named at least two, and IMO three of the best things to come out of D&D's development.

I also find it mildly hilarious that I'm fairly certain that only one or two of the races in 4th edition are unique to it.

But i dont want any damn Borg or Klingons in my core book either.

What the hell? Klingons are probably the most transparently opaque version of what I can imagine is probably the only fantasy archetypes you would find acceptable. And the most hilarious fact is that I'm relatively certain that the imagery and the concepts were in core books.

 

[Manbearcat]

My game has a tiefling PC, a paladin of the Raven Queen. He deals death to anyone who asks for it (and plenty who don't), broods on the fate of his dead people and their civilisation, and gets on well with duergar (although suspects that they haven't fully internalised the consequences of their own people's dealing with devils).

Your right, that absolutely REQUIRES a tiefling. No human/elf/dwarf has ever been a paladin before. And no human civilization has ever come to an end.

You managed to leave off the second portion of the quote and you don't properly canvas the first part.

Tieflings either have infernal bloodlines at some point in their history or their ancestors may have made a pact with a greater infernal power at some point. This predisposes them toward an intense, possibly temperamental (but not rash) disposition. A Tiefling Justicar would certainly mete out justice in a different fashion than your standard Paladin, with an inherently askew (but considered) philosophy and unorthodox dogma. Dealing death to those "who don't ask for it" seems to be much more in-line with a Tiefling servant of the God of Death than that of another race. Further, (the part you omitted) given their infernal heritage/bloodline, they would have unique insight into the culture and individual mind of the duergar. There would be a natural kinship in their exile...something of a Stockholm Syndrome relative to the greater culture...even if the two races/cultures are aesthetically different and governed by an opposing moral hierarchy.

The Tiefling portion of this character would have definitive thematic implications that wouldn't necessarily be intuitive or organic with another race. So. Required? No. Legitimate and thematically compelling in play. Absolutely.

My game also has a drow PC, a chaos sorcerer and Demonskin Adept. He is a member of a secret cult of Corellon worshippers who seek the liberation of the drow from Lolth, and whose ultimate goal is to undo the sundering of the elves. On the way through it seems likely that he will try to somehow purge the taint of the Abyss from the Elemental Chaos.

So basically DRIZZT took caster levels instead of ranger ones? Why wouldnt that work with a regular elf who wanted to unite the elf race and purge elemental chaos? Something any caster could easily have as a goal?

Your (willful?) unfriendly rendering here is far, far worse than the first one.

As I'm certain you know, a typical Drow society is (dis)organized around a Lolth-centric regime. Worshiping Corellon would, of course, be as heretical as anything you could do. Reuniting elvenkind into a singular people again is clearly this characters primary motivation/quest. That is is his end. His means? His natural power source is derived from the Elemental Chaos. However, perhaps somewhere along the way he found that source insufficient to the breadth of the task before him. He's made a hefty gamble. Pilfering from the Abyss (where Lolth resides) its very power (Demonskin Adept augmenting, and twisting, his power from his Chaos Sorceror bloodlines) toward an end that the lesser powers, the greater powers, and Lolth herself will inevitably oppose him with unmitigated force. Perhaps his cultural history with demons and their summonings has desensitized him toward the revolting horror of a "deal with the devil (demon/abyss)". Perhaps where a human or elf would be afflicted by horror at the idea of harnessing demonic power to undermine a demon lord's agenda...a drow is inclined to unflinchingly feel that the ends justifies the means.

Purging the Elemental Chaos of the Abyss is likely an idea borne of self-interest as much as anything else. His entire life will involve tapping into the power of the Elemental Chaos (even after his quest is finished and he can shed his Demonskin cloak and therefore never tap into the Abyss again). If demons have access to the Elemental Chaos by way of the Abyss, he leaves a potential opening for retribution every time his bloodline activates its sorcerous power.


Point being, in less you aren't trying, its quite easy to see how each aspect of these PC builds and their corresponding thematic color and agenda fit together. I know nothing about pemerton's campaign and I can throw that together completely off the cuff at a moment's notice. And it has nothing to do with "munchkinism" as any choice they make is just as powerful as the one they do not choose (given 4e's balance amoung build choices).

 

[timASW]

Why doesn't it count? People thought the philosopher's stone was really and it doesn't make it any less of a classical fantasy archetype.

It does. He wasnt telling stories or trying to entertain. He was doing engineering. It wasnt a "fantasy archetype" anymore then a modern physics class is "sci-fi"

I also find it mildly hilarious that I'm fairly certain that only one or two of the races in 4th edition are unique to it.

They were monster manual fodder before, not core PC classes. world of difference.

What the hell? Klingons are probably the most transparently opaque version of what I can imagine is probably the only fantasy archetypes you would find acceptable. And the most hilarious fact is that I'm relatively certain that the imagery and the concepts were in core books.

Klingons are fine for sci-fi. Not for D&D. And I'm extremely certain that neither tieflings nor dragon men, nor robots were core PHB classes in anything D&D before 4e.

 

[Lanefan]

And yet I, and all the people I mentioned in my post, are posting on this thread as GMs, not players.

I've kind of been trying to post as both at once, but I'll readily admit it's probably not obvious.

Personally I'd be happy, seeing as I find them irritating outside of Tolkien. [...] My game has a tiefling PC, a paladin of the Raven Queen. He deals death to anyone who asks for it (and plenty who don't), broods on the fate of his dead people and their civilisation, and gets on well with duergar (although suspects that they haven't fully internalised the consequences of their own people's dealing with devils).

My game also has a drow PC, a chaos sorcerer and Demonskin Adept. He is a member of a secret cult of Corellon worshippers who seek the liberation of the drow from Lolth, and whose ultimate goal is to undo the sundering of the elves. On the way through it seems likely that he will try to somehow purge the taint of the Abyss from the Elemental Chaos.

That points out a major difference between us, I think; in that I like to see D&D as a sort of Tolkein with extras. You see as core what I see as extra, or un-needed.

And any Elf PC in its right mind is going to have trouble adventuring with a Drow: "I've spent most of my multi-century adult life learning how to kill these things and now I'm expected to run with one? Nuts to that! It leaves or I do!"

if WotC has rules that make both Vancian and non-Vancian wizards mechanically and thematically viable, what is the point of hiding one behind an "optional and at your own risk" sign?

Just make them different classes and lock in the mechanics, for crying out loud. For arcane: Vancian = Wizard. Non-Vancian = Sorcerer. For divine: Vancian = Cleric. Non-Vancian = Shaman.

Which seems simple enough, until someone tries to take the Vancian classes (which have a built-in disadvantage just by being Vancian) and make them non-Vancian, thereby getting the best of both without the drawbacks. Sorry, folks, if it's balance you want then every class has to have its advantages and drawbacks.

Lanefan

 

[timASW]

Dealing death to those "who don't ask for it" seems to be much more in-line with a Tiefling servant of the God of Death than that of another race.

Actually it sounds just like the very human inquisition.

Further, (the part you omitted) given their infernal heritage/bloodline, they would have unique insight into the culture and individual mind of the duergar. There would be a natural kinship in their exile..

No one cares about duergar, but even if they did dwarves and deep gnomes would also have "unique insight" into their culture. As would any other underdark race.

And exile is when someone throws you out. Tieflings messed up their own country. They arent exiles, they are refugees with no one to blame but themselves.

The Tiefling portion of this character would have definitive thematic implications that wouldn't necessarily be intuitive or organic with another race. So. Required? No. Legitimate and thematically compelling in play. Absolutely.

Not really. Having a hair trigger and a lack of patience and mercy are hardly unique to tieflings. You could draw up an orc, human or dwarf with the exact same traits without going even slightly off base from their archetype.

You could in fact make the exact same story with any character, get rid of the racial munchkin powers though and you'll find no one would play that character. Try it sometime, tell the player he can have the exact same character, same story, same everything. But no munchkin powers and watch him howl and scream.

Your (willful?) unfriendly rendering here is far, far worse than the first one.
Perhaps where a human or elf would be afflicted by horror at the idea of harnessing demonic power to undermine a demon lord's agenda...a drow is inclined to unflinchingly feel that the ends justifies the means.

Oh yes, humans were so full of horror at the idea of working with demons that they interbred with them enough to create an entire race large enough to have a sustainable genome, allowing the other munchkin character to exist.

or....

Wait....

that doesnt make any sense at all. Perhaps this character could ALSO just be looking for munchkin powers. All that culture/society drow stuff means exactly zilch unless your campaign is heavily interacting with the drow in and around their cities and the difficulties of that come up all the time.

Which would mean that your other players characters arent getting their stories followed, because this one player is busy hogging the spotlight.

Or maybe the munchkin just came up with a short story he knew wouldnt ever really matter in play to justify his kewl powerz.

 

[pemerton]

And no human civilization has ever come to an end.

To the best of my knowledge, not as a result of dealing with infernal powers.

You just basically described the standard fantasy elf or dwarf, but instead of brooding about orcs and ruined cities it was bad magic and ruined cities.

I think there's a difference between brooding about orcs - which are an external threat to a dwarf or elf - and brooding about the failings of your own people that caused your downfall. A closer example in mainstream fantasy might be the sons of Feanor Maedhros and Maglor.

Further, (the part you omitted) given their infernal heritage/bloodline, they would have unique insight into the culture and individual mind of the duergar. There would be a natural kinship in their exile...something of a Stockholm Syndrome relative to the greater culture...even if the two races/cultures are aesthetically different and governed by an opposing moral hierarchy.

This is more-or-less how it played out in my game, yes.

The PCs have dealt with the duergar twice - once earlier in the campaign to redeem some slaves that the duergar had purchased from a hobgoblin slaving ring, and then in the last few sessions - impressed by the PCs' prowess, and also the ability of the PC invoker to wield the Sceptre of Law (= Rod of Seven Parts), of which the duergar themselves possess one piece, the duergar have given the PCs shelter in their hold. The tiefling and the invoker (who serves, among other gods, Bane and Erathis) get on well with the duergar, though the tiefling also has a certain distance from them due to his sense that they don't understand their own tragic situation.

The party also has a dwarf PC - a fighter-cleric of Moradin - as well as the drow and an elf ranger-cleric, and the relationship to the duergar of the dwarf (who has to tolerate constant jibes at the inadequacy of Moradin as a protector of the dwarves) and the chaos drow (who is, rightly, seen as a threat to the order that the duergar uphold) is very different from that of the tiefling and invoker.

No doubt interesting brooding PCs who are dwarves, elves and humans can be created - and I've GMed some of them over the years! - but the tiefling origin story introduces a distinctive thematic element.

So basically DRIZZT took caster levels instead of ranger ones? Why wouldnt that work with a regular elf who wanted to unite the elf race and purge elemental chaos?

Maybe it would, but it would be a different PC. For example, the elf you describe probably wouldn't be an exile. S/he wouldn't have to be a member of a secret society, because s/he could probably be open about his/her goals. And there would not be the same relationship with Lolth and the Abyss.

As I'm certain you know, a typical Drow society is (dis)organized around a Lolth-centric regime. Worshiping Corellon would, of course, be as heretical as anything you could do. Reuniting elvenkind into a singular people again is clearly this characters primary motivation/quest.

<snip>

Purging the Elemental Chaos of the Abyss is likely an idea borne of self-interest as much as anything else.

<snip>

If demons have access to the Elemental Chaos by way of the Abyss, he leaves a potential opening for retribution every time his bloodline activates its sorcerous power.

The bit about heresy is certainly right. It fits with the general persona of the PC (he is also the party Bluff-bot, and notorious for dropping his Cloud of Darkness in combat without full regard to the welfare of his fellow party members).

The relationship to the Elemental Chaos is still being explored. The PC certainly wants its power, but is also interested in the idea and importance of change and transformation. I think it is likely that, downstream in the campaign, there may be conflicts between this PC and the invoker of Erathis.

Essentially they took basic fantasy tropes and found some excuse why they needed kewl powerz in order to play them.

Huh? All races in 4e have access to racial abilities. And tieflings are generally regarded as one of the weaker racial choices, as best I have a sense of the optimisation boards.

its quite easy to see how each aspect of these PC builds and their corresponding thematic color and agenda fit together. I know nothing about pemerton's campaign and I can throw that together completely off the cuff at a moment's notice. And it has nothing to do with "munchkinism" as any choice they make is just as powerful as the one they do not choose (given 4e's balance amoung build choices).

As I've indicated, you're pretty much on target with your diagnoses. I've never claimed that the thematic material in my game is particularly surprising or unpredictable! - I follow the standard fantasy tropes pretty closely - but I can't see any connection to munckinism. These are completely legitimate PCs that are interesting in play. And interesting in play is my number-one criterion for a well-built PC.

And that half elf would suck too, but for entirely mechanical reasons. I.E. it would just suck at everything.

There is nothing particularly sucky about 4e half-elves, but the PC was a feylock, which is a hard class to play well. Hence at 3rd level, when the PC died, the player brought in the drow sorcerer in its place.

Klingons are fine for sci-fi. Not for D&D.

I think you may have missed [MENTION=6680305]technoextreme[/MENTION]'s point, which was that Klingons aren't a sci-fi archetype at all. They are a fantasy archetype - the brutal but honourable warrior culture - with the thinnest veneer of sci-fi painted over them. (Other examples of this sort of sci-fi veneer over fantasy include the Fremen in Dune, the Hawkmen in Flash Gordon, the Jedi in Star Wars and Cthulhu in the HPL short story.)

 

[pemerton]

No one cares about duergar

<snip>

You could in fact make the exact same story with any character, get rid of the racial munchkin powers though and you'll find no one would play that character. Try it sometime, tell the player he can have the exact same character, same story, same everything. But no munchkin powers and watch him howl and scream.

<snip>

All that culture/society drow stuff means exactly zilch unless your campaign is heavily interacting with the drow in and around their cities and the difficulties of that come up all the time.

Which would mean that your other players characters arent getting their stories followed, because this one player is busy hogging the spotlight.

Or maybe the munchkin just came up with a short story he knew wouldnt ever really matter in play to justify his kewl powerz.

As far as I know you've never posted any actual play from your own game, so I have no idea how sophisticated or shallow it is.

So I don't know if you're projecting from your own (apparently unhappy) experience, or just conjecturing about the games of others without any evidence as to what is going on in them.

Here are some links to actual play reports that I've posted from my own game. Maybe you could have a read of them and then get back to me on what is or isn't important in my game, what role PC backstory and thematic material does or doesn't play, and how "munchkinism" is even a relevant analytic category for understanding what is going on in it.