D&D 5E Wandering Monsters: Monster Mashups

[I'm A Banana]

The variety of "generic fantasy orc" I think is pretty broad to the layman.

Sure, and if the MM is "here's a generic fantasy orc!" and a lot of the non-world-specific D&D stuff uses them, it's not a big deal. A little lame, maybe, but not a big deal.

It becomes an issue when the game assumes that every orc is going to be the generic fantasy orc in the MM and that every DM is going to use that orc unless explicitly stated otherwise. It's also an issue when that generic fantasy orc is hard-coded to be part of the brand because of something like the GSL that doesn't let you change that generic fantasy orc into some other kind of orc (or remove it entirely) if you want to advertise your book as compatible with WotC's stuff. It's also an issue when that generic fantasy orc is crammed into some setting it doesn't belong in because the brand must have a tight association. Furthermore, it doesn't reflect the reality of the actual tabletop game, where your orcs and my orcs are really not going to be the same thing, even if we're both using the MM generic fanatasy orc as the starting point, because of the different directions our own local tables are going to take them in.

That's the kind of problem that arise in having an opt-out generic fantasy orc as the default, rather than an opt-in generic fantasy orc as an example.

I also tend to believe that "generic fantasy critter" isn't a very compelling design in and of itself, and so a specific example doesn't need to be a bland critter, because it is explicitly something you aren't necessarily expected to have in your games. We see some of that issue with the proposed 5e cosmology: it's going broad to include EVERYTHING, and ending up kind of a frickin' mess. If we had an ethos of opt-in, we could instead, say, provide an entire cosmology based on the myths of ancient Egypt as filtered through a pseudo-medieval-european D&D. Which could be incredible and awesome and lead to videogames and novel lines and whatnot itself if it took off. Or be an inexpensive experiment among many if it didn't. If they're married to the idea of a highly branded cosmology, it's not something that's really even going to be tried, though: it'd run counter to the One True Way of the brand.

 

[bogmad]

...

It becomes an issue when the game assumes that every orc is going to be the generic fantasy orc in the MM and that every DM is going to use that orc unless explicitly stated otherwise. It's also an issue when that generic fantasy orc is hard-coded to be part of the brand because of something like the GSL that doesn't let you change that generic fantasy orc into some other kind of orc (or remove it entirely) if you want to advertise your book as compatible with WotC's stuff. It's also an issue when that generic fantasy orc is crammed into some setting it doesn't belong in because the brand must have a tight association. Furthermore, it doesn't reflect the reality of the actual tabletop game, where your orcs and my orcs are really not going to be the same thing, even if we're both using the MM generic fanatasy orc as the starting point, because of the different directions our own local tables are going to take them in.

That's the kind of problem that arise in having an opt-out generic fantasy orc as the default, rather than an opt-in generic fantasy orc as an example.

So if the GSL or equivalent for this edition didn't shoehorn you into the strict MM version of an orc, what's to keep your game from playing another version when you want to? Especially if it's specifically stated that you can do so? What's wrong with the DM who doesn't want to build his detailed version of an orc and would rather be able to "go with the default" as it were. There's a hell of a lot of those types of DMs I think, who'd be disadvantaged more if left with no default than the guy who wants to input his own type of orc.
After all, I heartily agree with the following:

I also tend to believe that "generic fantasy critter" isn't a very compelling design in and of itself, and so a specific example doesn't need to be a bland critter, because it is explicitly something you aren't necessarily expected to have in your games.

"Generic" could perhaps avoid being "bland" by having a lot of specific details about what an orc is?
Details you're free to change?
The only way I can imagine to have an "opt-in" type of orc that you seem to be advocating for is to have a MM containing a bunch of attributes and numbers we're expected to either write an anatomy and culture for, or else pick up a setting splatbook with all the fluff we want to use.

 

[bogmad]

It's also an issue when that generic fantasy orc is crammed into some setting it doesn't belong in because the brand must have a tight association.

agreed. If WotC decides later that Dark Sun is suddenly going to support orcs because "D&D Branding requires Orcs™" then I will rise up in revolt.

But if they can provide Dark Sun style elves and dwarves in a DS supplement that exist alongside regular style FR elves and humans, what's the problem?

 

[bogmad]

Actually though KM's argument does make sense to me in some regards enough that it almost makes sense to me to just say FR is the "default" setting since it's really the only one supported with new product at launch, and foreseeably the entries in the MM won't contradict anything in current FR lore. Then you could just say "we're not playing in that setting" when a problematic player says "Orcs aren't like that!" or "according to the MM, Aranea's are evolved forms of ettercaps!"

Not sure that solution really makes me happy though. I don't know if there is an optimal solution, but I think having a clear brand identity across settings is obviously something WotC has decided to go for, and I can't fault them for it.

 

[Blackwarder]

I do hope some [or even one] of the developers peruse this thread before things go to far. Since it seems a hands-down across-the-board agreement that the aranae transformation is a non-starter/highly disliked...a rare case of near-universal agreement among ANYthing D&D! lol...So, hope they see this and ditch it.

What it seems is that folks who bothered to comment on this thread dislike the idea

I personally like the Aranea transformation, it's a creature that always been a wtf creature to me and that I never used and now it got a place in my games, heck the entire Ettercap write up is pretty amazing to me, it basically gives me an entire idea for a small adventure all by itself + it give enough information to make players excited (yay pixies around)/cringe in fear (OMG an Hag!!!! run for the hills!)

Warder

 

[steeldragons]

I thought it was established, some time months ago, that FR was going to be the default setting. Jon Shindehette's art articles certainly seemed to say so.

 

[steeldragons]

What it seems is that folks who bothered to comment on this thread dislike the idea

Um...Yeah...So?

I personally like the Aranea transformation,

Yes. As did 1of3 [the lil' Borg it is], as soon as I made that claim. Hence why I needed to say "near-universal agreement." Naturally, the dissenters would come out of the woodwork as soon as I said it.

it's a creature that always been a wtf creature to me and that I never used and now it got a place in my games, heck the entire Ettercap write up is pretty amazing to me, it basically gives me an entire idea for a small adventure all by itself + it give enough information to make players excited (yay pixies around)/cringe in fear (OMG an Hag!!!! run for the hills!)

Warder

Right. And after that adventure, Warder, what do you do with them? You've used the pixie dust thing. You've used the hag. The spiders? WELL, they've been herded up by the ettercaps, of course. So, you've killed them. Now what do you do with ettercaps the next time? Pixies? Hags? Oh! There's no "next time"! What makes this write-up nothing but a big ole player yawn after that first adventure? [or not even then if they get a MM and read all of this stuff before you run it?]

 

[bogmad]

I thought it was established, some time months ago, that FR was going to be the default setting. Jon Shindehette's art articles certainly seemed to say so.

I got the sense that they were trying to have their cake and eat it too by saying all settings will be supported and there will be no default, BUT the Forgotten Realms will be the only setting supported with new products at launch and the "default" creatures and art style will all be in line with what you might see there.

 

[steeldragons]

I got the sense that they were trying to have their cake and eat it too by saying all settings will be supported and there will be no default, BUT the Forgotten Realms will be the only setting supported with new products at launch and the "default" creatures and art style will all be in line with what you might see there.

Riiiight. So Forgotten Realms won't be the default...how exactly?

 

[Blackwarder]

Um...Yeah...So?



Yes. As did 1of3 [the lil' Borg it is], as soon as I made that claim. Hence why I needed to say "near-universal agreement." Naturally, the dissenters would come out of the woodwork as soon as I said it.



Right. And after that adventure, Warder, what do you do with them? You've used the pixie dust thing. You've used the hag. The spiders? WELL, they've been herded up by the ettercaps, of course. So, you've killed them. Now what do you do with ettercaps the next time? Pixies? Hags? Oh! There's no "next time"! What makes this write-up nothing but a big ole player yawn after that first adventure? [or not even then if they get a MM and read all of this stuff before you run it?]

I tend to run "Schrödinger's cat" sandbox games, I don't really know what's in a region before the players gets in there so I tend to roll a lot of random places, in my games there are enough generic orcs/goblins/what have you that throwing a new twist into it really through my players off.

Land to be honest this base description can be morthped into a lot of interesting things and used with other ecologists, for example what would happen if the legendary black dragon and the Ettercap would be in the same vicinity?

Warder