D&D 5E (2024) WotC Should Make 5.5E Specific Setting

[Maxperson]

They didn't have dwarven wizards, elven high clerics or halfling... well just about anything... because they didn't HAVE to ban them in the setting. The game itself did that. Adding in a platoon of dwarven wizards to Greyhawk would be a major rewrite of the setting. Dwarves never had wizards. They did not exist. There's a very good reason that there is not a single named spell in AD&D that isn't named for a human. Because only humans could be magic users of any significant power.

An elven high priest of Correlon? Doesn't exist in Greyhawk OR Forgotten Realms until 2e rolls along and they start rewriting the setting. Had to blow up the entire setting (the first time) in order to shoehorn the new mechanics in.

Alright, answer me this. Why is there a major Realm Shaking Event every time there is a new edition? Why ONLY when there is a new edition? Why do we never get RSE's in the middle of an edition?

No. It requires no rewrite of the setting. There was nothing written in the setting about dwarves being unable to be wizards. The Forgotten Realms, by far the most defined setting, is less than 1% defined. Greyhawk isn't even close to that. You can throw in a dozen companies of dwarven wizards without rewriting a thing, because lack of mention doesn't equate to a setting definition. Just because 1e didn't mention dwarven wizards, doesn't mean that they weren't there for 5e. They just weren't mentioned because the edition of that time didn't have dwarven wizards.

Settings are not tied to core mechanics at all. If they were, I would not be able to run Greyhawk with 5e, because 5e is very different from 1e and it would be tied to 1e mechanics.

There's a new major event every edition in FR because the designers like to do it, not because it's necessary in any way.

 

[mamba]

OMG, for all the hoopla about the importance of canon, it sure doesn't seem to matter very much does it?

Not all canon is equally important. Knights having mustaches can easily be removed, it holds no value whatsoever.

The cataclysm being caused by the Kingpriest’s hubris however has to stay

Or, is it canon only matters if I personally care about the canon being changed?

to me it is about how important to the setting and stories it is. 5e DL is recognizably DL.

The only change that touches canon in a meaningful way is that they fudge the timeline because the adventure takes place before the Heroes of the Lance ‘discover’ the gods.

WotC does a song and dance routine to obfuscate that, but if you pay attention it is clear. I would have preferred if they had not done that, any other change they made I could not care less about its impact on canon, and I like DL

 

[Scribe]

Ultimately this is always the problem with "race as hat" argument. What else can they be? They are made and played by humans. I don't think players would want to even try to play a mind that isn't somewhat identifiable, like a species that cannot feel empathy or a species who see the world only in inverted colors.

They can be focused tropes, as always intended.

 

[mamba]

However, all that aside, I'd point out the path of the argument. The argument was that settings have never been defined by the mechanics. That settings were always mechanically neutral. My point was that the changes they had to make to make Dragonlance work in 5e D&D proves that this is 100% false.

I disagree, DL works just the same as it did in 1e/2e, the changes they made are irrelevant to the setting, they are technical updates because of the differences between 1e and 5e, the setting remained unchanged

 

[mamba]

They didn't have dwarven wizards, elven high clerics or halfling... well just about anything... because they didn't HAVE to ban them in the setting. The game itself did that.

so it is not part of the setting but part of the game, and a new version of the game can change it without changing the setting, the two are independent

 

[Azzy]

Sigh.

They didn't have dwarven wizards, elven high clerics or halfling... well just about anything... because they didn't HAVE to ban them in the setting. The game itself did that. Adding in a platoon of dwarven wizards to Greyhawk would be a major rewrite of the setting. Dwarves never had wizards. They did not exist.

But here's the thing... The absence of something in previous edition doesn't mean that the setting is encased in amber and not allowed to grow with and assimilate new options introduced to the game. Adding in a platoon of dwarven wizards doesn't rewrite the setting, it just introduces a new facet that was afore unbeknownst.

There's a very good reason that there is not a single named spell in AD&D that isn't named for a human. Because only humans could be magic users of any significant power.

Well, actually... There's Melf and his favorite acid arrows.

An elven high priest of Correlon? Doesn't exist in Greyhawk OR Forgotten Realms until 2e rolls along and they start rewriting the setting.

You mean during 1e, when Unearthed Arcana allowed elves to become high priests (assuming they have the necessary ability scores).

Had to blow up the entire setting (the first time) in order to shoehorn the new mechanics in.

They didn't have to at all, they just decided (without my input, no less ) and ruined things in so doing. They could have simply hand-waved the differences away and no one would have blinked.

Alright, answer me this. Why is there a major Realm Shaking Event every time there is a new edition?

Because they unwarrantedly believe that they needed to do that in the change from 1e to 2e for some reason I cannot fathom. However, FR was spared a RSE when it was upgraded to 3e.

Why ONLY when there is a new edition? Why do we never get RSE's in the middle of an edition?

Well, Dark Sun and Ravenloft both had RESs in the middle of an edition. And FR had the Horde shaking some realms.

 

[Hussar]

Not all canon is equally important. Knights having mustaches can easily be removed, it holds no value whatsoever.

I'm going to say that there was not a single non-human cleric in the ENTIRE WORLD of Ansalon until 5e comes along is something of a rewrite of the setting. In the entire history of the setting, from the very first days, to the changes brought in by 3e, there is not a single non-human priest in Krynn. Not a single MU that isn't an elf or a human.

Or, we could play silly buggers like @Maxperson and pretend that there really WAS a dwarven Master of the Tower of High Wizardry, but, he was just conviently not talked about. Ever. Not once. Not even hinted at. In the HUNDREDS of novels set in Dragonlance, not a single whisper of one.

Same as Greyhawk. THOUSANDS of pages of material. Centuries of history. And not even a merest hint of a suggstion of an Elven high priest or a dwarven wizard in all that material. But adding it in doesn't change the setting at all. Nope, not at all.

Come on, be serious.

 

[Hussar]

But here's the thing... The absence of something in previous edition doesn't mean that the setting is encased in amber and not allowed to grow with and assimilate new options introduced to the game. Adding in a platoon of dwarven wizards doesn't rewrite the setting, it just introduces a new facet that was afore unbeknownst.

Oh, I totally agree.

I'm not the one arguing that settings are not based in the mechanics that they were designed for. I'm not the one saying that settings are totally system agnostic. Adding a platoon of dwarven wizards does rather change the setting though, because, unless these are the first wizards EVER in the setting, then one really does have to start asking the question about why we never saw a single dwarven wizard in all the millennia of history for the setting.

And, of course, when you start adding this sort of stuff, it can only ever be added in the margins. Dwarven wizards must be incredibly rare, since, that's why we didn't ever see them before. Just like Dragonborn must be incredibly rare and from far away. Because that's not the system defining the setting... nope, not at all.