Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jasamcarl" data-source="post: 1032232" data-attributes="member: 1251">So you are basically saying that any straying from genre would constitute a betrayal of some 'genre' reason unless they went into inane detail to explain why this and why that? I have news for you; DND does not simulate fantasy, but merely evokes it. First and foremost it acts as a game with real mechanical rewards costs. But beyond that I would say this; most players and dms don't really give a damn about coherence and details beyond having set rules for aforementioned rewards and costs. The appeal in creating hybrid fantasy (as oppossed to sci-fi settings) is not to justify the coexistence of themes and conventions, but merely to see how they interact. The wierdness and irrational play on genres is what makes such settings popular and truly 'fantastic'. Creating literalist detail and obvious coherence destroys that, and robs readers/players/dms from making up their own minds about how things should be done. Its the inconsistencies of the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk which make them popular as settings and not merely modular material. This looks to do the same. As long as the setting can maintain this type of mystique while evoking SOMETHING, it will have more going for it than uninspired 'rational' settings like Kingdoms of Kalamar and its ilk.</blockquote>