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

[Parmandur]

Well, put it this way.

If you knew the CEO and CFO of a hundred different companies, and they were all white, would you assume that there are non-white CEO's and CFO's? Because that's far closer to what we have for Forgotten Realms. Hundreds and hundreds of named NPC's. And zero (or close to zero) named NPC's who are Dragonborn. Heck, I have more DROW named NPC's in Waterdeep than Dragonborn. And nobody is suggesting that Drow are commonly found in Forgotten Realms.

It's like saying you know the CEO and CFOnare old white dudes and assuming there cannot be any young African-American female employees or the company that employs 100,000 people.

What lore? That there's a Dragonborn in the Flaming Fist? Whoopee. What rank? Where does that dragonborn come from? When did he/she join the Flaming Fist? What has he/she done for the Flaming Fist? What can you tell me about that Dragonborn? Where does he/she live? What are his/her duties? What can you tell me about that Dragonborn?

That part you get to make up, using the established bits about the Dlaming Fist and Drafonboen mercenaries.

I could just as easily have ANY species in the ranks of the Flaming Fist and it would be equally valid and leverage exactly the same amount of lore.

Yes, exactly!

 

[Hussar]

Why are we just looking at species for a connection of any kind to an NPC when background can also do the very same thing?

Because while EVERY other PC can have a connection to a NPC through a background, ONLY certain PC's can have a connection through species because only those species are actually represented in the canon of the setting.

That's what I've been arguing for all the way along. Yes, there are MANY ways you can connect to NPC's. I know that. I've acknowledged that over and over again.

But, what no one seems to want to acknowledge is that there are certain species that have not been given any sort of presentation within some settings.

Which is why I think that a PHB based setting is a very good idea.

But, I think I need to walk away from this. This is just too frustrating to discuss. I've made my point and I cannot make it any more clearly than I have. Maybe someone else can try pushing this boulder up the hill one more time, but, I'm done.

Might check back in in another ten or fifteen pages to see if folks have managed to move past this point.

 

[Parmandur]

And, whiff, there goes the point off over the horizon again.

It's not the only way. Good grief. Of course not.

But, if I choose to play a human or an elf or a drow or a dwarf or a gnome or any other PHB race, I can connect to an existing, canon NPC in the setting IF I SO CHOOSE. There is no "must" or "only" or "need". It's that the OPTION EXISTS while it DOES NOT EXIST FOR SOME RACES.

In a setting built based on the current PHB, then ALL PLAYERS WOULD HAVE AN OPTION REGARDLESS OF WHAT SPECIES THEY CHOOSE!!!!!! As it stands now, because these settings are so old and based on editions long out of print, NOT ALL PLAYERS HAVE THE SAME OPTIONS.

Is that clear enough? Yes, you can adapt. Yes you can create. Yes you can do all sorts of things. BUT YOU CANNOT LEVERAGE LORE THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

So the sort of connection you ste looking fir is provided in 2024 books, following the example of the 2024 DMG, on the basis of Background, not Species. The Free City of Greyhawk has hooks provided gir NPC connections for any of the Backgrounds in the PHB. WotC seems to be working to emphasize Species as much as possible, and focus on Backgrounds as the loci of character connections. So the new FR books are full of Background appropriate connections on the major locations to leverage, not Species so much.

Since that is the approach on the core books, to go back to the OP...a new 2024 specific Setting would focus more on Factions and Organizations tiedto Backgrounds, and leave Species pretty well alone.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

ONLY certain PC's can have a connection through species because only those species are actually represented in the canon of the setting

As has been pointed out several times, there are several named Dragonborn in official FR publications. Not very many - as you would expect, they are a very rare species.

Which is why I think that a PHB based setting is a very good idea.

I think it would be unlikely for any new setting to make Dragonborn anything other than a very rare species, and therefore would not have many named NPCs. I can’t see there being much demand for a setting in which all PHB species are well represented across the board, since that would mean reducing humans to a 10% minority group. And you would still have a bunch of PC races that were very rare, since everything from the 2014 rules that hasn’t been updated is still game-legal.

Personally, I have never known a player try to write a backstory that connected their character to a named NPC, and I would be leery of allowing it. The player may be trying to cheat an advantage by making themselves the heir of someone rich and powerful.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I know this probably isn’t directed at me specifically but don’t get me wrong - I love new settings and welcome them. I’m just saying a new setting based around a new system for the purpose of highlighting said system may not work out if the system isn’t really that different from the preceding one.

But it is very different. 5e is massively different from 4e or 3e.

And the most we have gotten is Infinite Staircase and Radiant Citadel, both of which are more mini-sigil than real setting.

 

[Maxperson]

And, whiff, there goes the point off over the horizon again.

It's not the only way. Good grief. Of course not.

But, if I choose to play a human or an elf or a drow or a dwarf or a gnome or any other PHB race, I can connect to an existing, canon NPC in the setting IF I SO CHOOSE. There is no "must" or "only" or "need". It's that the OPTION EXISTS while it DOES NOT EXIST FOR SOME RACES.

In a setting built based on the current PHB, then ALL PLAYERS WOULD HAVE AN OPTION REGARDLESS OF WHAT SPECIES THEY CHOOSE!!!!!! As it stands now, because these settings are so old and based on editions long out of print, NOT ALL PLAYERS HAVE THE SAME OPTIONS.

Is that clear enough? Yes, you can adapt. Yes you can create. Yes you can do all sorts of things. BUT YOU CANNOT LEVERAGE LORE THAT DOES NOT EXIST.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

I'm not understanding because race is generally irrelevant to having a connection with someone, and you keep using the word connected. Do you mean relation, because my Dragonborn won't be related to the head of the Flaming Fist, but he can easily be connected to him and any other NPC I want.

 

[Minigiant]

You all gotta remember many DMs don't like players injecting in their chosen setting and many players cannot depend their character appropriately without examples.

Examples matter.
Examples matter.

D&D as a whole isn't a fiction first and fiction forward collaborative RPG.

 

[Maxperson]

So yeah, your dragonborn character cannot have a connection to an official dragonborn named NPC, but they can have a connection to other dragonborn living nearby and to some of those named NPCs.

That's actually not true. MtG is part of the D&D multiverse and I found one named Dragonborn from the Sword Coast that comes from MtG. Vrondiss. I also found Dark Urge, an evil Dragonborn from the Sword Coast. He's from Baldur's Gate III, Blood in Baldur's Gate, and Idle Champions of the Forgotten Realms. And lastly, I found Saarvin who currently dwells in the north, but in the past lived in various places along the Sword Coast. He is from Storm King's Thunder, but has also appeared in two comics and the video game Warriors of Waterdeep.

Now, that's still pretty darn sparse, but you could forge Sword Coast connections with those three if you wanted to be related by blood/race to your connection.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm not understanding because race is generally irrelevant to having a connection with someone, and you keep using the word connected. Do you mean relation, because my Dragonborn won't be related to the head of the Flaming Fist, but he can easily be connected to him and any other NPC I want.

Why are we just looking at species for a connection of any kind to an NPC when background can also do the very same thing? If your character has the Mercenary background, you could have a connection to a client who hired out your company's services. You could have a connection to a person who brought you into the mercenary company. You could have a connection to one of higher ups in your company. Etc. You could be a member of any species within that background and still have the same connections as anyone else who is a part of it.

Okay I'll just say it

One of the BIGGEST vibes of D&D 5th edition is equality of choice.

You should be able to be an orc wizard and be as good as an elf wizard. You can be a human farmer fighter and be as good as a human noble fighter.

Therefore the choice of species, background, or class must be equally valid in mechanical and lore strength.

So if a 5th edition coded setting would equalize visibility of all its included species, classes, and backgrounds.

 

[Maxperson]

Okay I'll just say.

One of the BIGGEST vibes of D&D 5th edition is equality of choice.

You should be able to be an orc wizard and be as good as an elf wizard. You can be a human farmer fighter and be as good as a human noble fighter.

Therefore the choice of species, background, or class must be equally valid in mechanical and lore strength.

So if a 5th edition coded setting would equalize visibility of all its included species, classes, and backgrounds.

And it's already that way. There's plenty of lore regarding Dragonborn in Tymanther. There does not need to be equality of lore choice for every country, city, town and village in the entirety of the Realms. If you choose to make yourself a stranger in a strange land, you are not going to have as much local lore for your race as the locals do.