D&D 5E Whimsy in your game?

[Zaran]

I don't care one way or another. GMs can tone their games like they want. People need to stop complaining about the content they give us. I just wish they would give us more.

 

[Greg K]

I dislike it in D&D. I am sorry to see Green Ronin and Steve Kenson attached to this as I prefer both to WOTC and its designers. It is just one more reason that I think the WOTC story team and, with 5e, requiring purchasing WOTC adventures to get the Demons Princes, are poor ideas.

 

[God]

Humor and/or weirdness = Yes. Whimsy/silliness = No.
One or two demon lords + the Underdark = Hell yes! ALL the demon lords + Alice in Underland = Pass.
Demonically-possessed slime monsters = Sure. Pudding Kings and talking mushrooms named "Something-dump" and "Stool" = No bueno.

Edit: My opinion, obviously. But as much as I REALLY like the 5E rules, the product line otherwise continues to miss the mark for me. Gimme something serious, gritty, nostalgic, original or epic (pick three), not in the Forgettable Realms, that doesn't misappropriate a story line from another beloved campaign setting, and I will happily throw some bucks to Wizards.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So far 80% is OK with it. From an RPG product perspective, that was a clear right decision on their part. 20% disapproval among gamers is pretty darn low

 

[Jester David]

D&D takes itself too serious sometimes, and I approve of some whimsy. A little wonder and fantasy is good.
... but not in the Underdark.

A lot of places can have whimsy. The Feywild seems perfect for this. Some dungeons and even a few realms of the Outer Planes. But the hostile, alien subterranean world of the Underdark? Nope.

 

[Greg K]

The Feywild seems perfect for this.

This is the one place that I mind not don't mind it depending upon how it was done.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Depends on how its done. D&D is full of goofy stuff that I love and some I don't.

 

[Zil]

I do like whimsy in the right circumstances: a short adventure, an interlude, or encounter in a longer adventure. As a sustained element in an Underdark adventure that is supposed to be all about demons, it felt more than a bit wrong to me, so I voted no. Maybe I'll be surprised when we see the full thing, but I wasn't all that impressed with the NPCs in the Forbes article.

On a related note, I remembered liking an old short Planescape adventure based on Lewis Carroll's Jaberwocky poem that I ran many years ago so I just took it off the shelf and was surprised to see that the author was Chris Perkins. Looks like he has had a thing for Lewis Carroll and Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass for a while!

 

[Shemeska]

There's a time and a place for humor and whimsy in a campaign. There's also a line at which point it just comes across as out of place, poorly conceived, and gauche.

You can do it right (Pathfinder goblins for instance), but comedy in D&D often very much overdoes it and does it in places where it's terribly out of place. The award for that level of unintentional self-parody lurching into what-were-you-thinking territory would be 1e's H4 (Saint Sollars...) and much of 2e's comedy module Castle Greyhawk. IMO, your taste may vary of course.

 

[rets82]

Voted like it. Very much looking forward to this book coming out. Even thought the underdark is a very serious place normally, demon madness could make the place very whimsy/crazy. I mean its demon madness what can't it do?