Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 8040765" data-attributes="member: 7635">Ok, I want to home in right here. I'll start with a flat-out statement. I HATE the notion of a flavorless Core Rules. HATE IT! You are not the first person to suggest the Toolbox method to D&D (throw all the toys in a box, let the DM/setting pull out what's needed) and I despise that kind of game design. D&D is not generic, its actually quite poor at being generic. There is a lot of baked in assumptions throughout the game. In classes, magic, races, monsters, etc. There is lore, and that lore is what makes the game interesting. I remember the 2e Monstrous Manual filling me with dozens of great ideas for my own setting, I didn't touch a published setting (beyond Ravenloft modules and Planescape for the planes) until Eberron came out in 3.5. I lived on that lore found in the MM, the PHB, the generic splatbooks, etc. To me, that is D&D; every setting is just flavors of it. I don't want the PHB to lose that flavor and be a bunch of bland statblocks. The 4e Monster Manual was nearly this, and it's the worst D&D book I own. Sure. There has always been a drumbeat as to whether the monk, barbarian, and paladin are generic enough to be in the default game. The recent discussions about OA and cultural appropriation has added to the idea that D&D classes should be generic and not try to emulate specific archetypes, esp ones that could be viewed as insensitive. So far, the three mentioned and druid are getting a bit of the rough housing for being too culturally specific (one Eastern, two Western, one just "outsider") and like many of these discussions, it mixes with people who want those classes removed for other reasons. However, I fear adding "X class is problematic" to the chorus will lead to those classes being cut in the next iteration.  D&D has newfound popularity (much like it had in the early 80's when cartoons and toys brought it fame) and with newfound fame brings newfound scrutiny. TSR went with kneejerk reactions to this scrutiny and set up 2e to alienate its base. I pray WotC has more foresight in handling this than TSR did. And I would have thought a devil reference wouldn't offend someone who has the literal Mark of the Beast in thier user-handle. ;-)</blockquote>

Verification