There should absolutely be a player-facing side to that; which belongs in the PH. Players shouldn't make their characters in a vacuum; devoid of information. You want to strip them of that agency.
Predefined cultures in the PHB doesn't add any agency for the players, it just removes agency from the DM. If you want to grant agency to players, let them define their origin culture. There's no shortage of times when my reaction as a DM is "Hm, I really hadn't thought about how X's fit into this setting; why don't you make up some fluff and if it sounds good we'll call it truth".
There should absolutely be a player-facing side to that; which belongs in the PH. Players shouldn't make their characters in a vacuum; devoid of information. You want to strip them of that agency.
Predefined cultures in the PHB doesn't add any agency for the players, it just removes agency from the DM. If you want to grant agency to players, let them define their origin culture. There's no shortage of times when my reaction as a DM is "Hm, I really hadn't thought about how X's fit into this setting; why don't you make up some fluff and if it sounds good we'll call it truth".
We're not writing up a thesis. We're talking about "X might tend to...to take advantage of Y feature".
All you want is a listing of their features and traits. Not even their names, because names are culture. That's boring as hell. They wouldn't even know where to begin.
There should absolutely be a player-facing side to that; which belongs in the PH. Players shouldn't make their characters in a vacuum; devoid of information. You want to strip them of that agency.
Predefined cultures in the PHB doesn't add any agency for the players, it just removes agency from the DM. If you want to grant agency to players, let them define their origin culture. There's no shortage of times when my reaction as a DM is "Hm, I really hadn't thought about how X's fit into this setting; why don't you make up some fluff and if it sounds good we'll call it truth".
That works for some people, but others like having pre-existing building blocks to work with, and you can’t really remove a DMs agency with lore when Rule Zero is “What the DM says goes”. As I have repeatedly said, DMs are free to use or disregard material as it suits them, but having the material in the first place helps support people who don’t have the time or inclination to worldbuild from scratch and/or make it all up as they go. Again, not precluding that approach, just pointing out it’s not what everyone wants and the material existing does not itself preclude a DM from taking another path if they so choose.
Actually, what I’m saying is that having some broad strokes guidelines for cultures makes it easier to kick off role playing distinct races as distinct races, as opposed to just humans with scales, pointy ears, stocky builds and beards, etc.
There should absolutely be advice on creating cultures. It just shouldn't be linked to race.
What, because cultures have never broken down across ethnic lines in all of human history? It’s most definitely not 1-to-1, but it’s not a fictional concept either, and it’s a perfectly reasonable basis to build from, particularly in medieval-esque period before the setting has advanced to the point of allowing for ready intermingling on a large scale. Keep in mind one of the pillars of a D&D setting is that the world is relatively small pockets of civilization broken up by large tracts of untamed wilderness. Obviously the peoples of the setting aren’t just going to all keep to their own lane, but your typical citizens won’t be popping over to vacation in the neighboring country/kingdom/what have you for a week every other year.
A Pole, an Australian, and a white South African
walk into a bar.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
And, given that nearly every race has what amounts to a supernatural power even if it’s not described as such, that trait will influence how the culture develops
So... then Sweden must be a basketball fanatic nation b/c they are the tallest in Europe and being all makes you good at basket ball. While Irish must love swimming because they are shorter and being shorter is advantageous for swimming. Except no, they aren't. Because culture is more powerful than genetics.
Dwarves have resistance to poison b/c they are based on the English stereotype of Scottish people drinking all the time, they have rock-traits b/c they are miners b/c the British coal industry was predominantly in the north/Scotland. Elves have long straight hair b/c they are based on the "Oriental" stereotype of Tolkien-era England, the live a long time b/c of that same stereotype of the Buddist monks that live for ages in their remote temples in mountain valleys.
Sigh... no that's probably not going to convince you of anything either, ok let's make this super simple: D&D is a cartoon-y game based on stereotypes, tropes, cultural motifs, and commonly known mythology. It is designed so that you don't need to think about the world b/c arguing about economics, politics, biology, or anything else complicated is not what it is about. It is a dumb game for people to have fun with in their few hours of spare time without having to invest much time into it. It makes to sense to argue "but racial traits would affect culture" but ignore the fact that dragons, giants, and world-changing magic exists. Because you know what shapes culture a lot more than whether you can see in the dark or not? The existence of giant dragons than can obliterate an entire city from the air. If you really apply IRL logic to D&D it all fall apart. Walls are a stupid waste of money when griffons can be domesticated and used as mounts, and even a 3rd level character can teleport 30 ft straight up onto the top of the walls, or a 9th level druid can turn those walls into mud in 6 seconds flat. The existence of castles in D&D makes no logical sets whatso ever. Political leaders should live inside a Magnificent Mansion protected by a wall of Glyph of Warding. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are so obsessed with having IRL logic and science to this one tiny aspect of the game, and not the hundreds of other things that would so radically alter society that it would be unrecognizable as a "medieval" setting.
That works for some people, but others like having pre-existing building blocks to work with, and you can’t really remove a DMs agency with lore when Rule Zero is “What the DM says goes”.
If you're putting lore in the PHB and asserting that the lore is useful, you're removing DM agency. If you're putting lore in and saying it's useless, why are you doing it? If people want prebaked lore, that's what setting books are for.
That works for some people, but others like having pre-existing building blocks to work with, and you can’t really remove a DMs agency with lore when Rule Zero is “What the DM says goes”. As I have repeatedly said, DMs are free to use or disregard material as it suits them, but having the material in the first place helps support people who don’t have the time or inclination to worldbuild from scratch and/or make it all up as they go. Again, not precluding that approach, just pointing out it’s not what everyone wants and the material existing does not itself preclude a DM from taking another path if they so choose.
Yes, actually. Yes, it kinda does.
A constant with interviews from Jeremy Crawford and other high-level D&D development people is that they are fighting an endless battle to convince a majority of their players that the books are not ironclad LAW. That you're allowed to change the material in a book or even throw it out and so long as you make the effort to pull your game together, it'll still work. For a very, very large percentage of the playerbase, if it's in the book? It's canon, and it cannot be changed.
Most of those players don't spend time on the DDB forums, or on the forums in general. They're the Casual Crowd who plays D&D once a week and otherwise goes about their life without spending tens of extra hours every week absorbing content for the game. We all know that shit is pointless fluff and can be thrown out without a care. The majority of the game's active playerbase does not. If the book says "all elves are serenely beautiful and supernaturally graceful, living in arboreal cities in ancient forests where they commune with nature and pursue high art. Elves rarely venture into the world beyond their forests, and when they do they take up the ways of the druid, the ranger, or occasionally the wizard"? Then to a large percentage of the playerbase, that is all elves are and all they will ever be.
That works for some people, but others like having pre-existing building blocks to work with, and you can’t really remove a DMs agency with lore when Rule Zero is “What the DM says goes”.
If you're putting lore in the PHB and asserting that the lore is useful, you're removing DM agency. If you're putting lore in and saying it's useless, why are you doing it? If people want prebaked lore, that's what setting books are for.
Or, alternatively, you’re saying “here’s some stuff you can use to get started if you want”.
And, given that nearly every race has what amounts to a supernatural power even if it’s not described as such, that trait will influence how the culture develops
So... then Sweden must be a basketball fanatic nation b/c they are the tallest in Europe and being all makes you good at basket ball. While Irish must love swimming because they are shorter and being shorter is advantageous for swimming. Except no, they aren't. Because culture is more powerful than genetics.
Dwarves have resistance to poison b/c they are based on the English stereotype of Scottish people drinking all the time, they have rock-traits b/c they are miners b/c the British coal industry was predominantly in the north/Scotland. Elves have long straight hair b/c they are based on the "Oriental" stereotype of Tolkien-era England, the live a long time b/c of that same stereotype of the Buddist monks that live for ages in their remote temples in mountain valleys.
Sigh... no that's probably not going to convince you of anything either, ok let's make this super simple: D&D is a cartoon-y game based on stereotypes, tropes, cultural motifs, and commonly known mythology. It is designed so that you don't need to think about the world b/c arguing about economics, politics, biology, or anything else complicated is not what it is about. It is a dumb game for people to have fun with in their few hours of spare time without having to invest much time into it. It makes to sense to argue "but racial traits would affect culture" but ignore the fact that dragons, giants, and world-changing magic exists. Because you know what shapes culture a lot more than whether you can see in the dark or not? The existence of giant dragons than can obliterate an entire city from the air. If you really apply IRL logic to D&D it all fall apart. Walls are a stupid waste of money when griffons can be domesticated and used as mounts, and even a 3rd level character can teleport 30 ft straight up onto the top of the walls, or a 9th level druid can turn those walls into mud in 6 seconds flat. The existence of castles in D&D makes no logical sets whatso ever. Political leaders should live inside a Magnificent Mansion protected by a wall of Glyph of Warding. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are so obsessed with having IRL logic and science to this one tiny aspect of the game, and not the hundreds of other things that would so radically alter society that it would be unrecognizable as a "medieval" setting.
Out of curiosity, if I tell you once more that I’m not speaking in all or nothing terms, will you listen this time or just disregard it to draw fallacious equivalent correlations to what I say? Also, considering D&D emulated Tolkien who in turn drew more than a bit of his body of lore from Norse mythology, I’m not sure you have the evidence to prove a number of those points.
And, regardless of how most of your points seem to veer away from the thrust of my own, it stands that given that it is a massively used and accepted trope for different races to originate in different parts of the world, it then logically follows that their original cultures will be rather distinct as they developed separately, even before you get into the part where in most D&D lore they were created by different pantheons who have their own different attitudes they attempt to pass on to their mortal progeny. In short, it is completely reasonable for different races to have distinct cultures. And, despite all this talk about DMs being locked in, you yourself demonstrably prove that people can see this content without feeling locked into it.
Or, alternatively, you’re saying “here’s some stuff you can use to get started if you want”.
Nope. That would be putting it in the DMG. Putting it in the PHB implies that players can make use of it without specific consultation from the DM.
And by that logic DMs shouldn’t have NPCs or enemies with spells because those are in the PHB, not the DMG. The DMG is for material that only the DM needs to use when setting up play. Race details are a part of character design, and so both ends need access to them.
And by that logic DMs shouldn’t have NPCs or enemies with spells because those are in the PHB, not the DMG. The DMG is for material that only the DM needs to use when setting up play. Race details are a part of character design, and so both ends need access to them.
Cultures are not race details. Cultures are setting information.
Do players need setting information to create a character? Absolutely. Does this mean setting information should be baked into the PHB? No. Setting information should go where it belongs -- in a setting book.
To step in and mediate some stuff, it seems to me like a lot of friction is being created because everybody has their own idea of how sample cultures would be implemented for species. I think it would be best to point to how WotC has done it most recently; in the Character Origins Playtest, each species has its own little "of Many Worlds" sidebar that gives some examples of how a species interacts with its environment in the contexts of different settings.
Personally, I would really like it if this made it into the 2024 PHB (with a couple extra paragraphs), because it helps a character get a quick sense of what they're signing up for when they're browsing different species, but it's also not taking the Forgotten Realms lore and acting like it applies to all settings. It doesn't have the problem that Yurei keeps pointing to, in that it makes it clear that cultures are setting-specific.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
And by that logic DMs shouldn’t have NPCs or enemies with spells because those are in the PHB, not the DMG. The DMG is for material that only the DM needs to use when setting up play. Race details are a part of character design, and so both ends need access to them.
Cultures are not race details. Cultures are setting information.
Do players need setting information to create a character? Absolutely. Does this mean setting information should be baked into the PHB? No. Setting information should go where it belongs -- in a setting book.
Then get rid of all the references to language in the PH, since language is part of culture.
You literally cannot built a character, using only the PH, without a tacit acknowledgement of culture.
Then get rid of all the references to language in the PH, since language is part of culture.
Good idea. The only thing stupider than racial languages is alignment languages.
Hang on, slow your horses. First of all, optional rules and 1D&D have made it clear that not every elf has to know Elvish, and it's always been true that you can know Elvish and not be an elf. It's just a term for a language primarily spoken by elf cultures around the world. Second of all, language is universally pretty weird in D&D. Ancient languages tracing back to when different species were created still being used after said species spread out across the globe is much more logical than a universal language that pretty much everybody speaks, and I don't think getting rid of Common would be at all good for the health of the game. Third of all, there's no such thing as "alignment languages," like every lawful good character goes around speaking Chivalrese. I'm genuinely not sure what you mean by that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Then get rid of all the references to language in the PH, since language is part of culture.
Good idea. The only thing stupider than racial languages is alignment languages.
I can’t tell if this is some kind of joke I’m not getting or if that’s supposed to be serious.
Alignment languages was from an early edition to the game. For example, Lawful meant you were part of civilization. It was like speaking Latin in Rome, and someone who is Chaotic would know the equivalent of Gaulish. An interesting idea implemented in a dumb way.
What they're now advocating for is a PH where you cannot make a functional character. As in now you need two books to play the game.
Languages in D&D are really weird, we've never really used them in any of the games I've played in.
E.g.
Why do Fire Elementals, Air Elementals, Water Elementals, and Earth Elementals speak different dialects of the same language? They originate from completely different planes of existence!
Why do Giant Owls (and I think Giant Elk) have their own languages?
Why do Shadar Kai, Astral Elves, Drow, and High Elves all speak elvish? They have been separated from each other for thousands of years!
Why doesn't each plane of existence have their own Common language like the Underdark does?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Predefined cultures in the PHB doesn't add any agency for the players, it just removes agency from the DM. If you want to grant agency to players, let them define their origin culture. There's no shortage of times when my reaction as a DM is "Hm, I really hadn't thought about how X's fit into this setting; why don't you make up some fluff and if it sounds good we'll call it truth".
We're not writing up a thesis. We're talking about "X might tend to...to take advantage of Y feature".
All you want is a listing of their features and traits. Not even their names, because names are culture. That's boring as hell. They wouldn't even know where to begin.
That works for some people, but others like having pre-existing building blocks to work with, and you can’t really remove a DMs agency with lore when Rule Zero is “What the DM says goes”. As I have repeatedly said, DMs are free to use or disregard material as it suits them, but having the material in the first place helps support people who don’t have the time or inclination to worldbuild from scratch and/or make it all up as they go. Again, not precluding that approach, just pointing out it’s not what everyone wants and the material existing does not itself preclude a DM from taking another path if they so choose.
walk into a bar.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
So... then Sweden must be a basketball fanatic nation b/c they are the tallest in Europe and being all makes you good at basket ball. While Irish must love swimming because they are shorter and being shorter is advantageous for swimming. Except no, they aren't. Because culture is more powerful than genetics.Dwarves have resistance to poison b/c they are based on the English stereotype of Scottish people drinking all the time, they have rock-traits b/c they are miners b/c the British coal industry was predominantly in the north/Scotland. Elves have long straight hair b/c they are based on the "Oriental" stereotype of Tolkien-era England, the live a long time b/c of that same stereotype of the Buddist monks that live for ages in their remote temples in mountain valleys.Sigh... no that's probably not going to convince you of anything either, ok let's make this super simple: D&D is a cartoon-y game based on stereotypes, tropes, cultural motifs, and commonly known mythology. It is designed so that you don't need to think about the world b/c arguing about economics, politics, biology, or anything else complicated is not what it is about. It is a dumb game for people to have fun with in their few hours of spare time without having to invest much time into it. It makes to sense to argue "but racial traits would affect culture" but ignore the fact that dragons, giants, and world-changing magic exists. Because you know what shapes culture a lot more than whether you can see in the dark or not? The existence of giant dragons than can obliterate an entire city from the air. If you really apply IRL logic to D&D it all fall apart. Walls are a stupid waste of money when griffons can be domesticated and used as mounts, and even a 3rd level character can teleport 30 ft straight up onto the top of the walls, or a 9th level druid can turn those walls into mud in 6 seconds flat. The existence of castles in D&D makes no logical sets whatso ever. Political leaders should live inside a Magnificent Mansion protected by a wall of Glyph of Warding. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are so obsessed with having IRL logic and science to this one tiny aspect of the game, and not the hundreds of other things that would so radically alter society that it would be unrecognizable as a "medieval" setting.
If you're putting lore in the PHB and asserting that the lore is useful, you're removing DM agency. If you're putting lore in and saying it's useless, why are you doing it? If people want prebaked lore, that's what setting books are for.
Yes, actually. Yes, it kinda does.
A constant with interviews from Jeremy Crawford and other high-level D&D development people is that they are fighting an endless battle to convince a majority of their players that the books are not ironclad LAW. That you're allowed to change the material in a book or even throw it out and so long as you make the effort to pull your game together, it'll still work. For a very, very large percentage of the playerbase, if it's in the book? It's canon, and it cannot be changed.
Most of those players don't spend time on the DDB forums, or on the forums in general. They're the Casual Crowd who plays D&D once a week and otherwise goes about their life without spending tens of extra hours every week absorbing content for the game. We all know that shit is pointless fluff and can be thrown out without a care. The majority of the game's active playerbase does not. If the book says "all elves are serenely beautiful and supernaturally graceful, living in arboreal cities in ancient forests where they commune with nature and pursue high art. Elves rarely venture into the world beyond their forests, and when they do they take up the ways of the druid, the ranger, or occasionally the wizard"? Then to a large percentage of the playerbase, that is all elves are and all they will ever be.
Why do you actively desire this?
Please do not contact or message me.
Or, alternatively, you’re saying “here’s some stuff you can use to get started if you want”.
Nope. That would be putting it in the DMG. Putting it in the PHB implies that players can make use of it without specific consultation from the DM.
Out of curiosity, if I tell you once more that I’m not speaking in all or nothing terms, will you listen this time or just disregard it to draw fallacious equivalent correlations to what I say? Also, considering D&D emulated Tolkien who in turn drew more than a bit of his body of lore from Norse mythology, I’m not sure you have the evidence to prove a number of those points.
And, regardless of how most of your points seem to veer away from the thrust of my own, it stands that given that it is a massively used and accepted trope for different races to originate in different parts of the world, it then logically follows that their original cultures will be rather distinct as they developed separately, even before you get into the part where in most D&D lore they were created by different pantheons who have their own different attitudes they attempt to pass on to their mortal progeny. In short, it is completely reasonable for different races to have distinct cultures. And, despite all this talk about DMs being locked in, you yourself demonstrably prove that people can see this content without feeling locked into it.
And by that logic DMs shouldn’t have NPCs or enemies with spells because those are in the PHB, not the DMG. The DMG is for material that only the DM needs to use when setting up play. Race details are a part of character design, and so both ends need access to them.
Cultures are not race details. Cultures are setting information.
Do players need setting information to create a character? Absolutely. Does this mean setting information should be baked into the PHB? No. Setting information should go where it belongs -- in a setting book.
To step in and mediate some stuff, it seems to me like a lot of friction is being created because everybody has their own idea of how sample cultures would be implemented for species. I think it would be best to point to how WotC has done it most recently; in the Character Origins Playtest, each species has its own little "of Many Worlds" sidebar that gives some examples of how a species interacts with its environment in the contexts of different settings.
Personally, I would really like it if this made it into the 2024 PHB (with a couple extra paragraphs), because it helps a character get a quick sense of what they're signing up for when they're browsing different species, but it's also not taking the Forgotten Realms lore and acting like it applies to all settings. It doesn't have the problem that Yurei keeps pointing to, in that it makes it clear that cultures are setting-specific.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Then get rid of all the references to language in the PH, since language is part of culture.
You literally cannot built a character, using only the PH, without a tacit acknowledgement of culture.
That would unironically be a perfectly good idea.
Good idea. The only thing stupider than racial languages is alignment languages.
I can’t tell if this is some kind of joke I’m not getting or if that’s supposed to be serious.
Hang on, slow your horses. First of all, optional rules and 1D&D have made it clear that not every elf has to know Elvish, and it's always been true that you can know Elvish and not be an elf. It's just a term for a language primarily spoken by elf cultures around the world. Second of all, language is universally pretty weird in D&D. Ancient languages tracing back to when different species were created still being used after said species spread out across the globe is much more logical than a universal language that pretty much everybody speaks, and I don't think getting rid of Common would be at all good for the health of the game. Third of all, there's no such thing as "alignment languages," like every lawful good character goes around speaking Chivalrese. I'm genuinely not sure what you mean by that.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Alignment languages was from an early edition to the game. For example, Lawful meant you were part of civilization. It was like speaking Latin in Rome, and someone who is Chaotic would know the equivalent of Gaulish. An interesting idea implemented in a dumb way.
What they're now advocating for is a PH where you cannot make a functional character. As in now you need two books to play the game.
I'm done with this lunacy.
Languages in D&D are really weird, we've never really used them in any of the games I've played in.
E.g.
Why do Fire Elementals, Air Elementals, Water Elementals, and Earth Elementals speak different dialects of the same language? They originate from completely different planes of existence!
Why do Giant Owls (and I think Giant Elk) have their own languages?
Why do Shadar Kai, Astral Elves, Drow, and High Elves all speak elvish? They have been separated from each other for thousands of years!
Why doesn't each plane of existence have their own Common language like the Underdark does?