much like taking away the -1 from Orc intelligence. Pretty soon every race is simply going to be the same with zero flavor.
This argument is absurd. Every race in 5E has traits that distinguish them in far more interesting ways than basic stat mods -- the stat mods were essentially meaningless anyway, because players just negated them when assigning rolls or numbers.
If in your game it's really important to you for some reason that some races be weaker or dumber than others, put a hard cap on their STR or INT, not a piffling -1 on the initial stat.
The main problem with this is the fact that the elves and humans are not races. They are species. And as the cheetah is faster than the lion, the lion is stronger than the cheetah. Gnomes are smarter. Orcs are stronger.
And now here comes the half-elf argument. But you can breed a lion and a tiger and the offspring will be the halfbreed.
It was never about race and orcs are simply dumber than humans.
How does anyone know about fantasy species?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Circle of Hedgehogs Druid Beholder/Animated Armor Level -20 Bardof the OIADSB Cult, here are our rules.Sig.Also a sauce council member, but it's been dead for a while.
much like taking away the -1 from Orc intelligence. Pretty soon every race is simply going to be the same with zero flavor.
This argument is absurd. Every race in 5E has traits that distinguish them in far more interesting ways than basic stat mods -- the stat mods were essentially meaningless anyway, because players just negated them when assigning rolls or numbers.
If in your game it's really important to you for some reason that some races be weaker or dumber than others, put a hard cap on their STR or INT, not a piffling -1 on the initial stat.
The main problem with this is the fact that the elves and humans are not races. They are species. And as the cheetah is faster than the lion, the lion is stronger than the cheetah. Gnomes are smarter. Orcs are stronger.
And now here comes the half-elf argument. But you can breed a lion and a tiger and the offspring will be the halfbreed.
It was never about race and orcs are simply dumber than humans.
Wotc: I’ve thought on the new Drow lore quite a bit… here’s where my thought have culminated to….Don’t spell check me.
I think the two new drow can add depth. I’ve never attributed the drows dark skin to Lolth influence, and we know their special attributes (glowing red eyes and shadow powers) are genetic from that Lolth fueled wendoni blood ritual.
We know elves are quasi-elemental. In the beginning, some had an affinity to shadow ( the mywhatevers). Some could have escape Lolth’s manipulations or Corelleons curse…. with help. Please please please let the aevendrow hold Eilestree in some high regard. It’s make perfect sense if her daddy gave her followers the pass on lolths bs. Like others I think she gets ignored quite a bit. But Elaine Cunningham really got my mind going on her. She is the healing the follows the pain that can come from chaos. The light in the darkness, she who gives her followers the most power when they’re at their most vulnerable. There’s something really beautiful (albeit abstract) if you build on it.
Per the retcons on Menzo: Menzo has always been the evil drow poster child…err…city. I could even see it being lolths fav. But don’t wipe the others out of existence. The Gods of Faerun get their power from their followers, Lolth has made numerous power plays which all ultimately result in her ascension to something greater. Before the last to the goddess of chaos incarnate. She was primarily feeding off Drow worship… which certainly would span nations, not just the 20-30k drow that live in Menzo.
and the marks: I saw a post suggesting the marks could be a new thing Lolth introduces to stir the pot… that would be something she’d do.
all in all: I think the biggest goof was to release this news so abruptly w/o any accompanying literature to explain… a sourcebook, a set of novels… give more for people to latch on to instead of leaving all this room for damning speculation.
Wotc: I’ve thought on the new Drow lore quite a bit… here’s where my thought have culminated to….Don’t spell check me.
I think the two new drow can add depth. I’ve never attributed the drows dark skin to Lolth influence, and we know their special attributes (glowing red eyes and shadow powers) are genetic from that Lolth fueled wendoni blood ritual.
We know elves are quasi-elemental. In the beginning, some had an affinity to shadow ( the mywhatevers). Some could have escape Lolth’s manipulations or Corelleons curse…. with help. Please please please let the aevendrow hold Eilestree in some high regard. It’s make perfect sense if her daddy gave her followers the pass on lolths bs. Like others I think she gets ignored quite a bit. But Elaine Cunningham really got my mind going on her. She is the healing the follows the pain that can come from chaos. The light in the darkness, she who gives her followers the most power when they’re at their most vulnerable. There’s something really beautiful (albeit abstract) if you build on it.
Per the retcons on Menzo: Menzo has always been the evil drow poster child…err…city. I could even see it being lolths fav. But don’t wipe the others out of existence. The Gods of Faerun get their power from their followers, Lolth has made numerous power plays which all ultimately result in her ascension to something greater. Before the last to the goddess of chaos incarnate. She was primarily feeding off Drow worship… which certainly would span nations, not just the 20-30k drow that live in Menzo.
and the marks: I saw a post suggesting the marks could be a new thing Lolth introduces to stir the pot… that would be something she’d do.
all in all: I think the biggest goof was to release this news so abruptly w/o any accompanying literature to explain… a sourcebook, a set of novels… give more for people to latch on to instead of leaving all this room for damning speculation.
Wotc: I’ve thought on the new Drow lore quite a bit… here’s where my thought have culminated to….Don’t spell check me.
I think the two new drow can add depth. I’ve never attributed the drows dark skin to Lolth influence, and we know their special attributes (glowing red eyes and shadow powers) are genetic from that Lolth fueled wendoni blood ritual.
We know elves are quasi-elemental. In the beginning, some had an affinity to shadow ( the mywhatevers). Some could have escape Lolth’s manipulations or Corelleons curse…. with help. Please please please let the aevendrow hold Eilestree in some high regard. It’s make perfect sense if her daddy gave her followers the pass on lolths bs. Like others I think she gets ignored quite a bit. But Elaine Cunningham really got my mind going on her. She is the healing the follows the pain that can come from chaos. The light in the darkness, she who gives her followers the most power when they’re at their most vulnerable. There’s something really beautiful (albeit abstract) if you build on it.
Per the retcons on Menzo: Menzo has always been the evil drow poster child…err…city. I could even see it being lolths fav. But don’t wipe the others out of existence. The Gods of Faerun get their power from their followers, Lolth has made numerous power plays which all ultimately result in her ascension to something greater. Before the last to the goddess of chaos incarnate. She was primarily feeding off Drow worship… which certainly would span nations, not just the 20-30k drow that live in Menzo.
and the marks: I saw a post suggesting the marks could be a new thing Lolth introduces to stir the pot… that would be something she’d do.
all in all: I think the biggest goof was to release this news so abruptly w/o any accompanying literature to explain… a sourcebook, a set of novels… give more for people to latch on to instead of leaving all this room for damning speculation.
Agree with your last paragraph.
@Johnnyboy100, dug your post and I know you didn't ask for spellchecks, but I think th equivalent of a poster child in the instance of a city is a post card ;)
Re your and Penelope's sentiment on the last paragraph. I feel you sort of got it backwards. Everything on WotC pages introducing this expansion to the story of the Drow is basically "sizzle" something designed to get people talking ... so that people can buy the novels Salvatore's been contracted to write addressing this. As I said way back in this thread, it's probably better to debate these changes when the substance of the changes (lore presented in the novels) have been published and can be discussed at a level deeper than speculation based on teasers. Ironically the folks claiming "who moved my cheese?" level injury in these discussions are actually getting the changes more into public conscious and curiosity to see what the buzz is about and buy the books. Well played, WotC, but that's what happened when complainants contest with a game manufacturer.
I imagine the nuDrow will get some more formal game treatment beyond novels in due time. Whatever product that takes shape, I'm still hoping for a barber background and maybe special Drow barbering feats to bring back the old school stylings.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I imagine the nuDrow will get some more formal game treatment beyond novels in due time. Whatever product that takes shape, I'm still hoping for a barber background and maybe special Drow barbering feats to bring back the old school stylings.
Whether they do or not, I fully intend to homebrew a Path of the Lemmy* drow barbarian subclass.
* Not really new territory for me, as one of the players in the campaign I'm DMing is a sorcerer using a homebrew Nightbird subclass that basically makes her Stevie Nicks
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I imagine the nuDrow will get some more formal game treatment beyond novels in due time. Whatever product that takes shape, I'm still hoping for a barber background and maybe special Drow barbering feats to bring back the old school stylings.
Whether they do or not, I fully intend to homebrew a Path of the Lemmy* drow barbarian subclass.
* Not really new territory for me, as one of the players in the campaign I'm DMing is a sorcerer using a homebrew Nightbird subclass that basically makes her Stevie Nicks
"Electric" (magically amped) music is actually a thing in my game world. Githyanki tend to be the best rockers, since they've cultivated a sort of jaundiced David Bowie ennui in limbo, Githzerai are more like Radiohead. I could see Drow being some pioneering metal rockers ... though I've said this recently, we're still talking about the Devil's music so the real virtuoso's thrash much further below.
Satine Phoenix had a kickstarter for all an Bard sort of rock campaign, and there's a similarly themed work already in print called the Red Opera. I haven't checked them out myself, but have been curious.
I like that it's been proven in this thread no matter how edgy they may be in entrenched lore, Drow can be fun too.
Re your and Penelope's sentiment on the last paragraph. I feel you sort of got it backwards. Everything on WotC pages introducing this expansion to the story of the Drow is basically "sizzle" something designed to get people talking ... so that people can buy the novels Salvatore's been contracted to write addressing this. As I said way back in this thread, it's probably better to debate these changes when the substance of the changes (lore presented in the novels) have been published and can be discussed at a level deeper than speculation based on teasers. Ironically the folks claiming "who moved my cheese?" level injury in these discussions are actually getting the changes more into public conscious and curiosity to see what the buzz is about and buy the books. Well played, WotC, but that's what happened when complainants contest with a game manufacturer.
That's part of the reason I called the thread Thoughts on the New "Drow" Lore, because indeed we don't yet have the full picture and there's gaping hole waiting be filled. But I feel there's enough information so far to have thoughts, and even though we may end up being mistaken, there's nothing wrong to share thoughts and speculate even without all the information.
I’m not a big fan of Oerth, but the current holder of the intellectual property has the right to retcon stuff and say it never happened.
They certainly are, and we, as their customers, are perfectly free to tell them to cram it where the Sun don't shine and refuse to pay for any new products.
much like taking away the -1 from Orc intelligence. Pretty soon every race is simply going to be the same with zero flavor.
This argument is absurd. Every race in 5E has traits that distinguish them in far more interesting ways than basic stat mods -- the stat mods were essentially meaningless anyway, because players just negated them when assigning rolls or numbers.
If in your game it's really important to you for some reason that some races be weaker or dumber than others, put a hard cap on their STR or INT, not a piffling -1 on the initial stat.
The main problem with this is the fact that the elves and humans are not races. They are species. And as the cheetah is faster than the lion, the lion is stronger than the cheetah. Gnomes are smarter. Orcs are stronger.
And now here comes the half-elf argument. But you can breed a lion and a tiger and the offspring will be the halfbreed.
It was never about race and orcs are simply dumber than humans.
How does anyone know about fantasy species?
So this is a specious argument about species. We know about fantasy species because there is a common mythology in games and books. You are certainly welcome to make elves the dumb ones and goblins the smart ones. You can make the drow good and high elves evil. But only in your own world. The WOTC Police are not going to chase you down.
However, when playing with others, they come to the table with a general perception through common mythology that elves are smart, goblins are dumb, drow are evil and elves are good. Messing with the common mythology is generally disliked because you have disrupted the mythology. Why is mythology important? Because it takes away from the learning curve and therefore lets the player focus on gameplay and not rules. Try telling your players that in your world everyone rolls a d8 to hit and a d20 for damage and see what reaction you get. Better to entice a change to a mythology by presenting something attractive, rather than forcing a significant change through edict.
I’m not a big fan of Oerth, but the current holder of the intellectual property has the right to retcon stuff and say it never happened.
They certainly are, and we, as their customers, are perfectly free to tell them to cram it where the Sun don't shine and refuse to pay for any new products.
Try telling your players that in your world everyone rolls a d8 to hit and a d20 for damage and see what reaction you get.
Amazing. This analogy is somehow even more absurd than the argument it's attempting to defend.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
By asking the fantasy author in question, and then judging them for their answer. For example, let's take the fantasy species Gabblegork, which is one I just made up. Here's a sliding scale downwards (so best is first) of how I can tell you about the majestic Gabblegork's predilections towards cheese:
I write a story, and in it, I portray Gabblegorks as refusing to eat cheese unless it has been properly toasted.
I write a story, and in it I use ham-fisted exposition to tell the reader Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese.
Full-on J.K. Rowling: I write a story which contains Gabblegorks, but no cheese. Later, I claim in public - e.g. on Twitter - that Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese, as if my opinion of canon matters outside of my stories. Fans debate whether or not to consider my opinion canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then Tweet that they only eat toasted cheese. Fans universally reject my opinion as factually false.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I never explain myself. Pre-Disney Star Wars "canon" was basically entirely this, so fans had to cherry-pick their canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I explain it in the second story as "things were always this way", as though my fans are goldfish and lack memory.
In the above list, 1 is good writing, and 2 is bad writing. Everything from 3 to 6 is escalating levels of fan abuse, although 3 is extremely minor. But let's not pretend fantasy species are intrinsically unknowable; in fact, one technique a competent author uses is avoiding over-explanations. Deliberately leaving something unknowable due to lack of story content leaves the window open for filling in that story content later, including if your fans fill it in for you. Fantasy writing is about rendering the unknowable (your story) knowable, and choosing how and what to reveal.
You can have a setting with smart orcs, and write stories in it. You can do the same with dumb orcs, and with average intelligence orcs. It's all up to you. But if you write about orcs, their intelligence will be knowable - the more you write, the more knowable, in fact. And retcons are never ok. If you write yourself into a corner, it's on you to write yourself out of it.
I suppose I'll have to write up stats on Gabblegorks and the fact they're Evil foot soldiers of the malevolent god Foonglu, the Chaos god of slaughter, deceit and toasted cheese. I have to wonder how long it will be before Gabblegorks will be declared to be problematic....
It was never about race and orcs are simply dumber than humans.I
Not just that, but in 1E AD&D DMG your stats changed due to the age you rolled and it included everything but Charisma though none of them could exceed maximums (or minimums).
By asking the fantasy author in question, and then judging them for their answer. For example, let's take the fantasy species Gabblegork, which is one I just made up. Here's a sliding scale downwards (so best is first) of how I can tell you about the majestic Gabblegork's predilections towards cheese:
I write a story, and in it, I portray Gabblegorks as refusing to eat cheese unless it has been properly toasted.
I write a story, and in it I use ham-fisted exposition to tell the reader Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese.
Full-on J.K. Rowling: I write a story which contains Gabblegorks, but no cheese. Later, I claim in public - e.g. on Twitter - that Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese, as if my opinion of canon matters outside of my stories. Fans debate whether or not to consider my opinion canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then Tweet that they only eat toasted cheese. Fans universally reject my opinion as factually false.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I never explain myself. Pre-Disney Star Wars "canon" was basically entirely this, so fans had to cherry-pick their canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I explain it in the second story as "things were always this way", as though my fans are goldfish and lack memory.
In the above list, 1 is good writing, and 2 is bad writing. Everything from 3 to 6 is escalating levels of fan abuse, although 3 is extremely minor. But let's not pretend fantasy species are intrinsically unknowable; in fact, one technique a competent author uses is avoiding over-explanations. Deliberately leaving something unknowable due to lack of story content leaves the window open for filling in that story content later, including if your fans fill it in for you. Fantasy writing is about rendering the unknowable (your story) knowable, and choosing how and what to reveal.
You can have a setting with smart orcs, and write stories in it. You can do the same with dumb orcs, and with average intelligence orcs. It's all up to you. But if you write about orcs, their intelligence will be knowable - the more you write, the more knowable, in fact. And retcons are never ok. If you write yourself into a corner, it's on you to write yourself out of it.
“Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...”
Emerson (English major lol)
I like the new idea and I’m looking forward to some source material that more fully fleshes it out.
I mean, for real. I run a 5e Forgotten Realms campaign and my players are not gonna flip if I tell them there are two new drow societies that have never been discovered before. They’re just not.
And I disagree. Retcons are a good thing. Or at least they can be.
By asking the fantasy author in question, and then judging them for their answer. For example, let's take the fantasy species Gabblegork, which is one I just made up. Here's a sliding scale downwards (so best is first) of how I can tell you about the majestic Gabblegork's predilections towards cheese:
I write a story, and in it, I portray Gabblegorks as refusing to eat cheese unless it has been properly toasted.
I write a story, and in it I use ham-fisted exposition to tell the reader Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese.
Full-on J.K. Rowling: I write a story which contains Gabblegorks, but no cheese. Later, I claim in public - e.g. on Twitter - that Gabblegorks only eat toasted cheese, as if my opinion of canon matters outside of my stories. Fans debate whether or not to consider my opinion canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then Tweet that they only eat toasted cheese. Fans universally reject my opinion as factually false.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I never explain myself. Pre-Disney Star Wars "canon" was basically entirely this, so fans had to cherry-pick their canon.
I write a story in which Gabblegorks eat cheese which is not toasted, then write another story in the exact same setting in which they only eat toasted cheese, and I explain it in the second story as "things were always this way", as though my fans are goldfish and lack memory.
In the above list, 1 is good writing, and 2 is bad writing. Everything from 3 to 6 is escalating levels of fan abuse, although 3 is extremely minor. But let's not pretend fantasy species are intrinsically unknowable; in fact, one technique a competent author uses is avoiding over-explanations. Deliberately leaving something unknowable due to lack of story content leaves the window open for filling in that story content later, including if your fans fill it in for you. Fantasy writing is about rendering the unknowable (your story) knowable, and choosing how and what to reveal.
You can have a setting with smart orcs, and write stories in it. You can do the same with dumb orcs, and with average intelligence orcs. It's all up to you. But if you write about orcs, their intelligence will be knowable - the more you write, the more knowable, in fact. And retcons are never ok. If you write yourself into a corner, it's on you to write yourself out of it.
Three major modern religions grew out of the Middle East some time ago. One is a retcon of the first, the third is a retcon of the other two. When theologians who are "believers" in the net configuration explain why they're building on past inaccuracies usually some sort of doctrine of "revelation" is used to explain the growth out of inconsistency. Analogy is apt because from a secular anthropological point of view we can look at the those religions as mythos that keep expanding rejiggering as the world changes. Sort of like an elf/drew creation myth that's maintained by the elf/drow civilizations that maintain animosity and spread their narratives to other members of the "known world" ... a world which is very easy to insert places off the map where other witnesses to that event may exist in a fashion that challenges that narrative. And whether any of those folks are absolutely correct? Probably not.
Here's other continuity travesties:
Launcelot's introduction into the story of King Arthur.
Boba Fett was a Clone of his father, the genetic template of the Clone army
Darth Maul died on Naboo, oh wait
Ahsoka Tano was an unknown third to Anakin and Obi Wan's Clone Wars exploits. (also merge this and the above with possibly the best duel in the series, they even brought Ray Park back for the mocap)
(let's not get into it and just all admit that it wasn't genius but a daring retcon stunt to drop the "_I_ am your father" bomb, ya think maybe Brackett and Kasdan may have had some invention there despite what the cult of Lucas claims, despite what's actually in the archives about Luke Starkiller and the original conception of the saga?)
Quintessons, Alpha Trion, Galactus, the Negative Universe ... all of this was introduced into Transformers lore
Snake Eyes wasn't just a Viet Nam vet disfigured in a botched Delta Force mission, he's always been a ninja and Storm Shadows sword brother
Yes, comic books particularly are notorious for Spider man clone conspiracy / Scarlett Spider sort of hijinks I think sometimes it's intentional (and I've been meaning to ask Spideycloned about his name's origins); but really expanding _lore_ isn't really retconning. Lore are stories, and those stories existed in the world. In game world, it just turns out the world is bigger than just the places known by the caretakers of those stories and beyond the boundaries of those traditions, there are other versions. In RL, we're talking 3-4 generations of gaming, narrative shifts happen when author names change. D&D has never been hermetically sealed and actually was never near as internally consistent as Greyhawk die hards claim it was (speaking of retcons under original authors). D&D has never been, nor ever will be a sealed narrative. No living fictional space is. New content mandates the ability to create new within old. Otherwise, you are talking religion and D&D I feel shouldn't be a "faith." It's a game played literally on "make believe." If you fail to be convince by new lore, that's fine. You can still play your way and dismiss the hitherto unknown enclaves. But the novels will sell, and that does represent buy in.
Again, as I've said in this thread, I get it, disappointment in how something one feels creatively or imaginatively invested in gets recast happens. I think it's good for the spirit of a discussion to express disappointment and how one may wish things had played out different in supported products. However the refusal to comprehend how this can actually make narrative sense to a property that wants to expand the Drow, there's an insistence on an orthodoxy that the mainline production of D&D just doesn't support, and I really don't see the game suffering for the heresy. It's just the level of invective thrown at the heretics by the orthodox, as if this were a disagreement of biblical proportions just seems off a tad to me.
Don't forget Leia being Luke's sister for the retcon list ;)
As for your main point, I think I see where you're going. And yes, retcons happen all the time and it's quite often not that big a deal, or at list is cools down and gets sortta forgotten (or at least accepted) with time. I doesn't mean every retcon is good -- though what's good or not is entirely subjective so it's not the best measure. The best we can do is try to judge new piece of lore (be it new additions or retcons) by how well they work with what's already there. Sure Forgotten Realms is a mess a lore and its quite often contradicts itself, but it's not a reason to try and find a way to make it work.
In the end it gets down to our own appreciation of each bit of lore. Some will draw a hard line somewhere and not accept anything further, some will accept anything new and overwrite the old, others will cherry pick what they like, and then some will try to make sense of it all. I don't mean it's pointless to discuss change and new things, I think it's great and important to share our views (be it positive, negative, neutral, optimistic, pessimistic, etc...) but eventually will end with the personal choice to like or not a piece of lore.
To quickly go back to my original point about the new "Drow" enclave, I'm not saying they're bad because it appears from nowhere. We only have fragmented information so I can't tell, only speculate. Maybe it's great and make sense, maybe it's not and makes no sense, maybe it's in between. So far, it just (to me) feels like the often lazy excuse of "oh well, they were always there but you didn't know, no one knew". It can be pull off, but it's difficult to do it satisfyingly and right now I don't have much faith in WotC & R.A. Salvatore to pull it off satisfyingly.
Maybe I'm wrong. Kinda hope I am. Will have to wait and see.
Try telling your players that in your world everyone rolls a d8 to hit and a d20 for damage and see what reaction you get.
Amazing. This analogy is somehow even more absurd than the argument it's attempting to defend.
So I present an ad absurdum argument and you call it absurd, hmm...This doesn't seem to advance the conversation much. Why don't you explain why having a common mythology (and common rules) is not important to D&D?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I’m not a big fan of Oerth, but the current holder of the intellectual property has the right to retcon stuff and say it never happened.
How does anyone know about fantasy species?
The Circle of Hedgehogs Druid Beholder/Animated Armor Level -20 Bard of the OIADSB Cult, here are our rules. Sig. Also a sauce council member, but it's been dead for a while.
Exactly!
Wotc: I’ve thought on the new Drow lore quite a bit… here’s where my thought have culminated to….Don’t spell check me.
I think the two new drow can add depth. I’ve never attributed the drows dark skin to Lolth influence, and we know their special attributes (glowing red eyes and shadow powers) are genetic from that Lolth fueled wendoni blood ritual.
We know elves are quasi-elemental. In the beginning, some had an affinity to shadow ( the mywhatevers). Some could have escape Lolth’s manipulations or Corelleons curse…. with help. Please please please let the aevendrow hold Eilestree in some high regard. It’s make perfect sense if her daddy gave her followers the pass on lolths bs. Like others I think she gets ignored quite a bit. But Elaine Cunningham really got my mind going on her. She is the healing the follows the pain that can come from chaos. The light in the darkness, she who gives her followers the most power when they’re at their most vulnerable. There’s something really beautiful (albeit abstract) if you build on it.
Per the retcons on Menzo: Menzo has always been the evil drow poster child…err…city. I could even see it being lolths fav. But don’t wipe the others out of existence. The Gods of Faerun get their power from their followers, Lolth has made numerous power plays which all ultimately result in her ascension to something greater. Before the last to the goddess of chaos incarnate. She was primarily feeding off Drow worship… which certainly would span nations, not just the 20-30k drow that live in Menzo.
and the marks: I saw a post suggesting the marks could be a new thing Lolth introduces to stir the pot… that would be something she’d do.
all in all: I think the biggest goof was to release this news so abruptly w/o any accompanying literature to explain… a sourcebook, a set of novels… give more for people to latch on to instead of leaving all this room for damning speculation.
Agree with your last paragraph.
@Johnnyboy100, dug your post and I know you didn't ask for spellchecks, but I think th equivalent of a poster child in the instance of a city is a post card ;)
Re your and Penelope's sentiment on the last paragraph. I feel you sort of got it backwards. Everything on WotC pages introducing this expansion to the story of the Drow is basically "sizzle" something designed to get people talking ... so that people can buy the novels Salvatore's been contracted to write addressing this. As I said way back in this thread, it's probably better to debate these changes when the substance of the changes (lore presented in the novels) have been published and can be discussed at a level deeper than speculation based on teasers. Ironically the folks claiming "who moved my cheese?" level injury in these discussions are actually getting the changes more into public conscious and curiosity to see what the buzz is about and buy the books. Well played, WotC, but that's what happened when complainants contest with a game manufacturer.
I imagine the nuDrow will get some more formal game treatment beyond novels in due time. Whatever product that takes shape, I'm still hoping for a barber background and maybe special Drow barbering feats to bring back the old school stylings.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Whether they do or not, I fully intend to homebrew a Path of the Lemmy* drow barbarian subclass.
* Not really new territory for me, as one of the players in the campaign I'm DMing is a sorcerer using a homebrew Nightbird subclass that basically makes her Stevie Nicks
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
"Electric" (magically amped) music is actually a thing in my game world. Githyanki tend to be the best rockers, since they've cultivated a sort of jaundiced David Bowie ennui in limbo, Githzerai are more like Radiohead. I could see Drow being some pioneering metal rockers ... though I've said this recently, we're still talking about the Devil's music so the real virtuoso's thrash much further below.
Satine Phoenix had a kickstarter for all an Bard sort of rock campaign, and there's a similarly themed work already in print called the Red Opera. I haven't checked them out myself, but have been curious.
I like that it's been proven in this thread no matter how edgy they may be in entrenched lore, Drow can be fun too.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
That's part of the reason I called the thread Thoughts on the New "Drow" Lore, because indeed we don't yet have the full picture and there's gaping hole waiting be filled. But I feel there's enough information so far to have thoughts, and even though we may end up being mistaken, there's nothing wrong to share thoughts and speculate even without all the information.
They certainly are, and we, as their customers, are perfectly free to tell them to cram it where the Sun don't shine and refuse to pay for any new products.
So this is a specious argument about species. We know about fantasy species because there is a common mythology in games and books. You are certainly welcome to make elves the dumb ones and goblins the smart ones. You can make the drow good and high elves evil. But only in your own world. The WOTC Police are not going to chase you down.
However, when playing with others, they come to the table with a general perception through common mythology that elves are smart, goblins are dumb, drow are evil and elves are good. Messing with the common mythology is generally disliked because you have disrupted the mythology. Why is mythology important? Because it takes away from the learning curve and therefore lets the player focus on gameplay and not rules. Try telling your players that in your world everyone rolls a d8 to hit and a d20 for damage and see what reaction you get. Better to entice a change to a mythology by presenting something attractive, rather than forcing a significant change through edict.
Very true
Amazing. This analogy is somehow even more absurd than the argument it's attempting to defend.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
By asking the fantasy author in question, and then judging them for their answer. For example, let's take the fantasy species Gabblegork, which is one I just made up. Here's a sliding scale downwards (so best is first) of how I can tell you about the majestic Gabblegork's predilections towards cheese:
In the above list, 1 is good writing, and 2 is bad writing. Everything from 3 to 6 is escalating levels of fan abuse, although 3 is extremely minor. But let's not pretend fantasy species are intrinsically unknowable; in fact, one technique a competent author uses is avoiding over-explanations. Deliberately leaving something unknowable due to lack of story content leaves the window open for filling in that story content later, including if your fans fill it in for you. Fantasy writing is about rendering the unknowable (your story) knowable, and choosing how and what to reveal.
You can have a setting with smart orcs, and write stories in it. You can do the same with dumb orcs, and with average intelligence orcs. It's all up to you. But if you write about orcs, their intelligence will be knowable - the more you write, the more knowable, in fact. And retcons are never ok. If you write yourself into a corner, it's on you to write yourself out of it.
Interesting....
I suppose I'll have to write up stats on Gabblegorks and the fact they're Evil foot soldiers of the malevolent god Foonglu, the Chaos god of slaughter, deceit and toasted cheese. I have to wonder how long it will be before Gabblegorks will be declared to be problematic....
Not just that, but in 1E AD&D DMG your stats changed due to the age you rolled and it included everything but Charisma though none of them could exceed maximums (or minimums).
“Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...”
Emerson (English major lol)
I like the new idea and I’m looking forward to some source material that more fully fleshes it out.
I mean, for real. I run a 5e Forgotten Realms campaign and my players are not gonna flip if I tell them there are two new drow societies that have never been discovered before. They’re just not.
And I disagree. Retcons are a good thing. Or at least they can be.
Three major modern religions grew out of the Middle East some time ago. One is a retcon of the first, the third is a retcon of the other two. When theologians who are "believers" in the net configuration explain why they're building on past inaccuracies usually some sort of doctrine of "revelation" is used to explain the growth out of inconsistency. Analogy is apt because from a secular anthropological point of view we can look at the those religions as mythos that keep expanding rejiggering as the world changes. Sort of like an elf/drew creation myth that's maintained by the elf/drow civilizations that maintain animosity and spread their narratives to other members of the "known world" ... a world which is very easy to insert places off the map where other witnesses to that event may exist in a fashion that challenges that narrative. And whether any of those folks are absolutely correct? Probably not.
Here's other continuity travesties:
Launcelot's introduction into the story of King Arthur.
Boba Fett was a Clone of his father, the genetic template of the Clone army
Darth Maul died on Naboo, oh wait
Ahsoka Tano was an unknown third to Anakin and Obi Wan's Clone Wars exploits. (also merge this and the above with possibly the best duel in the series, they even brought Ray Park back for the mocap)
(let's not get into it and just all admit that it wasn't genius but a daring retcon stunt to drop the "_I_ am your father" bomb, ya think maybe Brackett and Kasdan may have had some invention there despite what the cult of Lucas claims, despite what's actually in the archives about Luke Starkiller and the original conception of the saga?)
Quintessons, Alpha Trion, Galactus, the Negative Universe ... all of this was introduced into Transformers lore
Snake Eyes wasn't just a Viet Nam vet disfigured in a botched Delta Force mission, he's always been a ninja and Storm Shadows sword brother
Yes, comic books particularly are notorious for Spider man clone conspiracy / Scarlett Spider sort of hijinks I think sometimes it's intentional (and I've been meaning to ask Spideycloned about his name's origins); but really expanding _lore_ isn't really retconning. Lore are stories, and those stories existed in the world. In game world, it just turns out the world is bigger than just the places known by the caretakers of those stories and beyond the boundaries of those traditions, there are other versions. In RL, we're talking 3-4 generations of gaming, narrative shifts happen when author names change. D&D has never been hermetically sealed and actually was never near as internally consistent as Greyhawk die hards claim it was (speaking of retcons under original authors). D&D has never been, nor ever will be a sealed narrative. No living fictional space is. New content mandates the ability to create new within old. Otherwise, you are talking religion and D&D I feel shouldn't be a "faith." It's a game played literally on "make believe." If you fail to be convince by new lore, that's fine. You can still play your way and dismiss the hitherto unknown enclaves. But the novels will sell, and that does represent buy in.
Again, as I've said in this thread, I get it, disappointment in how something one feels creatively or imaginatively invested in gets recast happens. I think it's good for the spirit of a discussion to express disappointment and how one may wish things had played out different in supported products. However the refusal to comprehend how this can actually make narrative sense to a property that wants to expand the Drow, there's an insistence on an orthodoxy that the mainline production of D&D just doesn't support, and I really don't see the game suffering for the heresy. It's just the level of invective thrown at the heretics by the orthodox, as if this were a disagreement of biblical proportions just seems off a tad to me.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Don't forget Leia being Luke's sister for the retcon list ;)
As for your main point, I think I see where you're going. And yes, retcons happen all the time and it's quite often not that big a deal, or at list is cools down and gets sortta forgotten (or at least accepted) with time. I doesn't mean every retcon is good -- though what's good or not is entirely subjective so it's not the best measure. The best we can do is try to judge new piece of lore (be it new additions or retcons) by how well they work with what's already there. Sure Forgotten Realms is a mess a lore and its quite often contradicts itself, but it's not a reason to try and find a way to make it work.
In the end it gets down to our own appreciation of each bit of lore. Some will draw a hard line somewhere and not accept anything further, some will accept anything new and overwrite the old, others will cherry pick what they like, and then some will try to make sense of it all. I don't mean it's pointless to discuss change and new things, I think it's great and important to share our views (be it positive, negative, neutral, optimistic, pessimistic, etc...) but eventually will end with the personal choice to like or not a piece of lore.
To quickly go back to my original point about the new "Drow" enclave, I'm not saying they're bad because it appears from nowhere. We only have fragmented information so I can't tell, only speculate. Maybe it's great and make sense, maybe it's not and makes no sense, maybe it's in between. So far, it just (to me) feels like the often lazy excuse of "oh well, they were always there but you didn't know, no one knew". It can be pull off, but it's difficult to do it satisfyingly and right now I don't have much faith in WotC & R.A. Salvatore to pull it off satisfyingly.
Maybe I'm wrong. Kinda hope I am. Will have to wait and see.
So I present an ad absurdum argument and you call it absurd, hmm...This doesn't seem to advance the conversation much. Why don't you explain why having a common mythology (and common rules) is not important to D&D?