5.5 be like : rpgmemes

[-] Paradachshund@lemmy.today 51 points 10 months ago

Alright I'll bite. What did they do to it?

[+] ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 70 points 10 months ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

[deleted]

[-] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 14 points 10 months ago

A game about combat needs a world full of things for the players to mow down but also not feel bad about killing, and sometimes you need a bunch of Violent Dungeon Fodder that can think and plan and make tactical decisions and potentially be negotiated with.

I'm a bit confused by this. Why not have them be any other species, or combination of them? If they're capable of being negotiated with shouldn't the players feel as bad about killing them as anyone else? I feel like "self-defense" can do a lot of heavy lifting in dungeon crawls, I've never really noticed my players feeling bad about killing bandit dwarves or whatnot.

[+] ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

[deleted]

[-] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 5 points 10 months ago

Honestly, I'm a bit more confused now. I definitely agree that humans have a tendency to dehumanize others, but I wouldn't consider this a good or healthy thing that we should just accept. So having a ruleset that says, canonically, "this group of sentient creatures is inherently evil" and not "this group of sentient creatures is believed to be evil by this other group" you are encouraging the players to take an unnuanced view of the world.

However, as a gamemaster you have to allow your players to make two choices:

Are the monsters we are fighting people or not?

Does my character agree with me?

Isn't this what the lore changes encourage, by not making a factual statement about the groups, so the players should ask themselves this question on a case-by-case basis and not simply based on what type of creature they are? And I'm not sure how the changes would prevent the narrative approach you describe. Saying that goblins and orcs live in human-like societies doesn't prevent you from telling a story that's analogous to what has happened between human societies.

Maybe we're working off of different data points, what WotC material are specifically referring to for the changes?

[-] vithigar@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago

...are you calling first person shooters "shmups"?

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Paradachshund@lemmy.today 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I enjoyed reading through that, thanks!

I think I more or less agree with where you're coming from. Part of the fun of roleplaying is getting to explore darkness in a safe way. Not everyone is looking for that and that's fine, but I definitely find it weird to have the core setting lean into a more "disney-fied" setting. Seems like it should offer options.

It's probably a symptom of DND becoming so much more mainstream. You can't please everyone, so the best they can do is minimally bother everyone which can end up pretty... OK. Not great, not terrible, and mostly uninspiring.

Those are my thoughts based just on what you said. I haven't heard about any of this before now so those are just off the cuff.

[-] ppue@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

As a player, sometimes I want to settle down with an Orc and make a bunch of Half-Orc Babies, but seeing the word "species" gives me pause. I know in real life cross-breeding different species of animals rarely goes well and the children are as a rule sterile, so can i ethically bring a baby into the world that I know is going to be sterile and is probably doing to have serious health problems?

I don't get your problem here. Either the world that has half orcs declares if they are fine, or you are free to decide for yourself. Why bother yourself with some "knowledge" about the "real world"?

[-] p1llgr1mm@kafeneio.social 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

@ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling
Pretty sure this is already known but I'll throw in the tidbit that in Ad&d 2nd Dark Sun, Muls were the progeny of humans and dwarves and were explicitly sterile so this is not exactly untrodden ground. Not saying it's the way to go, just that it happened

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 9 months ago

bro basically everyone outside of africa has neanderthal and denisovan heritage, our ancestors had TONS of kids with other human species.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

Good ol' reliable undead. Trusty skeleton-to-lich scale of complexity fits every scenario. Can be evil, good, or mindless as needed.

[-] Adrius@ttrpg.network 38 points 10 months ago

The best lore is lore made at the table with the players. The rest is just gm inspiration.

[-] miracleorange@beehaw.org 7 points 10 months ago

Yeah, my friends and I always used Forgotten Realms lore as a base in homebrew settings and then just do whatever on top of it, like that one time we had chocobos in a campaign LOL

[-] Kolanaki@pawb.social 6 points 10 months ago

I read the Forgotten Realms books for 3.5 like books because most of them is lore and not necessarily rules, and I think it was pretty dope back then. I would always use it for the basis of my campaigns, but I would place it somewhere that didn't have a lot of stuff already written about it so I could kinda of do my own thing while still having all the content and the ability to use things I didn't create if it made sense to do so.

[-] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 31 points 10 months ago

Slightly unpopular opinion: All official lore is crap and should be generally ignored. (Even the stuff I kind of like) If I want to play in a world where what I can do is limited by the generic, inoffensive, middle-of-the-road, crowd-pleasing writers at some corporation I'll just play a AAA video game. The ability to be participatory in the creation and evolution of the in-game world is what makes TTRPGs different from consumer media. Why would you give that part up, but still leave yourself with all the cognitive load?

[-] MimicJar@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

I disagree. I think having a base to work from is helpful, both to players and DMs.

For example I don't want to create a pantheon of gods. I might want to create a few unique gods within my setting, and if they conflict I'll change some rules accordingly, but I want something to build off of. Similarly if a player wants to create a paladin or cleric they can just pull from the standard list.

Also if the official lore is fun, it's more fun to build off of. I'll enjoy reading it more and I'll enjoy using it.

[-] d20bard@ttrpg.network 3 points 10 months ago

Absolutely agree. I set a game in the real(ish) world once, so it was a setting where everyone knew the base "lore." It was so nice! I could reference things, name-drop countries, and introduce old grudges without having to exposition it all. People just got things. We've since done enough games on the sword coast that that works too, now.

load more comments (6 replies)

[-] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 4 points 10 months ago

This is probably why Greg Stafford, the guy most responsible for Runequest and Glorantha's deep and wide lore came up with his sort of prime directive: "Your Glorantha Will Vary". He presented his version of the lore but wanted people to re-write it to their hearts' content.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Old world of darkness lore slapped though

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] cikano@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

I'm gonna need some context

[-] kbal@fedia.io 7 points 10 months ago

https://www.enworld.org/threads/drow-orcs-removed-from-the-monster-manual.711175/

https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/lore-change-purple-dragon-knight-playtest

[-] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 10 months ago

Play Pathfinder, like an adult.

[-] BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 34 points 10 months ago

Pathfinder is superior to D&D ethically, morally and mechanically. Fight me.

[-] porl@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

I'll fight you! In a game of Pathfinder of course.

[-] BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 10 months ago

Roll Lore: Gaming for initiative!

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I got two wizards and a skull. What the fuck is up with these dice

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 16 points 10 months ago

Let people play what they want to play.

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 34 points 10 months ago

Sure, but every time someone's like "I'm going to do a game of secret modern day vampires doing political intrigue in DND" I'm going to judge them.

[-] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 10 months ago

Sorry, wanted it to come off as a joke. I think Pathfinder is better, but I love dnd too.

[-] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 10 months ago

Doesn't mean people can't give and receive recommendations!

[-] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 2 points 10 months ago

Right, but I don't think calling people children for playing one game over another is the way to do it.

[-] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 2 points 10 months ago

No, that's true.

[-] ObsidianZed@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

Branch out and play all kinds of systems!

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Atlas48@ttrpg.network 10 points 10 months ago

I'm over here enjoying Changeling: the Dreaming.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago

Play GURPS, like a real adult.

[-] Aielman15@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

I have the same reaction with the gameplay as well.

They somehow managed to add more crunch and complexity without improving neither the balance nor the turn-to-turn variety. I'm honestly impressed by their sheer incompetence.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 5 points 10 months ago

Them: "We'll be taking advice from the community!!!!"

Me: Oh no. Oh well, Pathfinder it is!

[-] Eiri@lemmy.ca 10 points 10 months ago

Ergh, I always ignore the lore anyway.

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 11 points 10 months ago

I sometimes steal pieces of it, if only for inspiration, but I love worldbuilding and making up my own settings.

I'm currently running an adventure in a Spelljammer setting where most of the previous D&D campaigns I've run over the years exist on different planets, with elements of all of them now able to make cameos or interact with each other. It's wild.

[-] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 4 points 10 months ago

I'm reminded of the story of Garg and Moonslicer, and I wish more publishers would lean in to this approach to good and evil. A purely lore approach would be enough to frame the conflict around, some races are naturally social creatures, and some races are naturally antisocial. Both have hierarches, but not all races have the same natural concepts of fairness and justice. Any individual can embrace either world view or a mix, but one comes more naturally to each race. Even if humanity is naturally a good race (debatable, but whatever), members can obviously deviate significantly.

Ultimately it doesn't mater what race the slavers are, I'm not going to worry about the ethics of self-defensing a party of slavers to death as PC or GM.

RPGMemes