D&D 5E What is your definition of a Vanilla setting

[Parmandur]

Peopl use "vanilla" pejoratively all the time, but I don't think it is supposed to be used that way. "Vanilla" means that is support whatever flavors you decide to make central to your sundae. Maybe you like fruit, or gummy bears, or jalapeno. Vanilla lets you have those without overpowering them like chocolate or something like Rocky Road would. Vannilla gives you control over the flavors.

Among the listed choices, Dragonlance is actually a good example of how you add toppings to vanilla (either of the other two, IMO) to get a specific flavor (in this case, Mormon Myth inspired fantasy). A "flvor" like Dark Sun is too powerful, too distinct to allow for such a thing. That's why, I think, FR is so popular: it is easy to make one's own by choosing your bad guys and your conflicts.

I think you nailed it on the head here.

 

[pemerton]

My personal definition of Vanilla would be any setting that does not, imho, deviate significantly from the basic concepts of D&D, and the presents a temperate faux-medieval/renaissance Western-ish setting as the primary location (anything that's clearly 1700s-ish or later, or the 800s or earlier is probably not Vanilla)

This also picks up a lot of other FRPGing eg default Rolemaster, Pendragon and Prince Valiant, I think WHFRP (I know it by reputation, but I think it fits this).

wherein the basic expectation is that the PCs are going to be Heroic Adventurers of a straightforward kind.

Depending exactly how you conceive of "heroic adventurers" this might leave some of those other systems behind.

Religion-wise it absolutely must have a totally naughty word ridiculous pantheon that makes ZERO sense which is really loosely conceptually inspired by bad misunderstandings of pre-Christian European paganism meeting designer power-fantasies (and FR, GH, DL, I gotta hand it to you guys, you absolutely nailed this aspect of being vanilla - I am clapping - I couldn't imagine it being nailed harder! Like, randomly including a real-world saint GH? That's some chef's kiss stuff there).

And this starts to get a bit more distinctive to D&D. Although it depends a bit how you squint when you look at it; a certain approach to this sort of ridiculous pantheon can yield something closer to REH's Conan stories.

There's other stuff too which can really amp-up that Vanilla-ness, like if most of the people in the setting are kind of acting like they're at a ren-faire or cosplaying or something rather than actually espousing any sort of alien medieval attitudes, but I dunno if that's strictly needed.

I associate this mostly with FR, but maybe that's unfair on my part? Anyway it made me laugh (likewise your swipe at St Cuthbert of the Cudgel).

 

[TheSword]

This also picks up a lot of other FRPGing eg default Rolemaster, Pendragon and Prince Valiant, I think WHFRP (I know it by reputation, but I think it fits this).

The grim dark nature and ever impending apocalypse, from both within and without, probably makes WFRP less vanilla and more raspberry ripple - if the ripples are pestilential, mutating blood narcotics.

 

[Aldarc]

None of the above.

A homebrew with small frontier town + Dungeon + PHB Races/Classes only = Vanilla setting
Expand the campaign setting as needed from there.

So... the Nentir Vale?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The use of familiar elements isn't significantly different, imho. It's mostly just that there's meaningless stuff missing. The cosmology isn't significantly different. It's just that the gods in DL some like to go into a sulk - FR's cosmology is just as "different from Vanilla" as this, I would say.

I missed this before.

Nah. This is bunk. The gods are quite different from baseline D&D, as is the cosmology in general. A symmetrical pantheon of balance, where an evil god dying means a good god has to retire/disappear because balance is the paramount priority of the gods as a whole, is not normal. It’s outright strange.

Your dismissal of other elements (what does whatever hang up you have with Kender have to do with whether or not they’re vanilla!?) is just as silly, really. You provide nothing to support the dismissal, you just declare it. Well, my reply is, you’re wrong.

 

[not-so-newguy]

So... the Nentir Vale?

I’m not real familiar with it, but probably yes.

 

[Ixal]

A vanilla setting for me is something generic which does not have a strong "flavor" or mechanics of its own and is supposed to fit everything a bit. Often goes hand in hand with kitchen sinks.

I do not know Greyhawk enough, but FR are definately vanilla. Dragonlance is not as it has a too strong internal thematic.

 

[grimslade]

Ah, a discussion of what 'vanilla' means, fantastic! I would counter that any setting is 'vanilla' until it encounters your game table. It becomes a unique setting once your players begin to interact with the setting. SO this whole poll is moot. /pedant /asshat
I picked Forgotten Realms. It is a setting I can feel comfortable running any style of game for D&D. The setting will clash with nothing. Horror? Ran werewolves and Cult of Malar hunting the party as they guarded refugees in the Vaast. Celtic historical? Moonshae. Modified Spelljammer? Lantan. Gritty crime syndicate shenanigans? Luskan or Calimshan or Amn. It is so full of every flavor, at this point, you just emphasize what you want. Currently, FR is less of a setting and more a collection of common place and character names. There is a great world setting there. Actually there are several great settings smushed together. But it is easy to feel lost in the Realms without focus.

 

[Scribe]

A vanilla setting would be high level, trope heavy, with very little world building at all, and little to nothing that deviates from the PHB.

Basic lineages, basic classes, an incomplete cosmology, few kingdoms.

Good vs Bad.

Eberron isn't vanilla, it's the opposite.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Planescape is not a Vanilla setting, sure it assumes that a bunch of the standard default assumptions are there, but then it twists, subverts or downplays them all. It's like something where one scoop of vanilla ice cream is there in the ingredients, but there's a bunch of other flavours.

It's like how sure you could play an Elf or a Dwarf in Planescape, but the books actively discourage you from playing an Elf or a Dwarf and encourages you to play a Tiefling, Githzerai, Aasimar or whatever instead. A lot of the traditional western medieval Europe tropes are downplayed in Sigil more in favour of London in the 1800's. "Romantic" ideals about the medieval are thrown out in favour of Post-Modernism. And out in the planes things get weird, everything gets twisted, and there's always a "dark" (aka secret), something from behind the scenes.

Planescape is not High Fantasy in the traditional sense, it's is of the genre called the "New Weird" which existed before such a term was coined.