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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jdrakeh" data-source="post: 3777099" data-attributes="member: 13892">I guess the original Wilderlands and the first printing of Greyhawk (as a setting versus the original rule supplement for OD&D) illustrate best what I mean. Both were essentially  collections of maps and small footnotes detailing major town/cities. They both assumed the use of core AD&D rules and thus were nearly identical on a mechanical level, sharing more points of commonality (e.g., races, classes, spell lists, etc) than they did points of divergence. That is, aside from geography, both settings were pretty similar.  Now, granted, settings (even Vanilla ones) have evolved quite a bit since then and it would be dishonest of me to say that all Vanilla fantasy settings share this many points of commonality today, though I do still feel that the points of commonality outnumber the points of divergence. For the most part, settings such as the Wilderlands and Aldea still cleave to the core RAW with little divergence. In modern Vanilla settings, the major points of differentiation are still geography and cosmology, though a small peppering of slightly tweaked core classes or race variants (none of which are very wild departures from the core counterparts) have been added to the mix. Now, for the record, I am not saying that this is bad -- to the contrary, sharing a vast many points of commonality makes Vanilla fantasy setting ideal for many people, as there isn't a great deal to re-learn when you move from one such setting to another. This makes such settings far more accessible than Talislanta or Tekumel, wherein the points of commonality with other settings are so few that you really have to work in order to find them. Settings like that can be a total PITA for the gamers in a time-crunch, hobby newcomers, or any other number of people who would benefit from this familiarity. And that's the flipside of the coin. Vanilla settings are all very familiar (hence the term Vanilla) due to the large number of commonalities that they share. This can be a total PITA for the jaded sensationalist who is looking to experience something new and different every time that they sit down to play. Which, I guess, is where I fall on the spectrum -- hence my inability to identify on a personal level with the people who prefer Vanilla to a wide selection of flavors and/or new and different flavors that haven't been tried (hey, I tried squid-flavored ice cream a month or two back). Basically, I want to know why people who prefer Vanilla do so. And, yeah, "I think chocolate tastes like ass!" is a valid reply. As I mention earlier, I'm not looking to judge anybody or dictate that everybody like squid-flavored ice cream (I did, BTW). I'm just trying to better understand the reasons that one may be inclined to stick exclusively to Vanilla. And while "I like it!" is certainly a valid response, it doesn't actually explain much of anything to me. Why do you like it?.</blockquote>

Verification