Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114179The "mythic underworld" has been making a comeback in recent years. It's been explained as "living dungeons" based on dungeon management simulator video games, but the concept is identical. It even shows up in anime based on D&D by way of JRPGs.

Both Delicious in Dungeon and Is it Wrong to Try and Pick Up Girls in the Dungeon have that element in some way. In DiD dungeons are apparently part of the magic cycle and mages actually have to learn how to make dungeons in order to maintain magic in the world. In DanMachi the dungeon is essentially a being unto itself and monsters spawn regularly from the very walls. The lower down the stronger they get and adventurers have to delve to kill monsters to keep them from eventually boiling up out of the dungeon. Overlord has the Death Spiral where once undead start appearing, if they arent put down then eventually stronger types appear, working progressively through the D&D undead tiers till a lich or other top tier type manifests. Log Horizon has the fantasy world linked to a fantasy MMO to try and curb a god level curse that every time an 'npc' from that world died, instead of being reincarnated, a monster was spawned. The gold players found after slaying monsters actually has a mechanism in place.

Meikyuu Kingdom is a Japanese RPG where the whole world is now one huge dungeon that acts almost like a spreading disease and has to be constantly cleared around towns and kingdoms or they and the people are converted into monsters and dungeon.

Probably others with interesting takes on the idea but those are the few Im familiar with.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1114227I don't mind some dungeons being gonzo-weird like old D&D dungeons, but I do prefer for those to be the exception rather than the norm.

The problem is that the majority of dungeons can't work without an in-universe intelligent designer, whether that be a dungeon heart, a traditional evil overlord, or the modrons. Furthermore, the "non-weird" dungeons stretch my SoD more than the weird ones. The article I linked explains this in more detail.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114263The problem is that the majority of dungeons can't work without an in-universe intelligent designer, whether that be a dungeon heart, a traditional evil overlord, or the modrons. Furthermore, the "non-weird" dungeons stretch my SoD more than the weird ones. The article I linked explains this in more detail.

I get around the non-weird suspension of disbelief by the simple expedient of a relatively recent cataclysm that wiped out a globe-spanning advanced magitech civilization.

What's left of civilization hangs by a thread inside walled compounds that are themselves typically re-purposed ruins (one of the larger towns is literally built up inside an abandoned stadium situated next to a major river because once they had the entrances fortified they had high walls to protect themselves, some pre-built areas to shelter inside and the field to keep livestock in... over time they replaced the seating sections with purpose-built structures and the vast parking lots were broken up and turned into fields for crops).

Most of the dungeons are other nearby ruins from the same overgrown city (including basements, sub-basements and tunnels) that are being used by monsters as lairs without even necessarily being aware of what's on other levels of the ruins they're inhabiting.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114179The "mythic underworld" has been making a comeback in recent years. It's been explained as "living dungeons" based on dungeon management simulator video games, but the concept is identical. It even shows up in anime based on D&D by way of JRPGs.

What I don't like are the irrational resistance to mythic underworlds and living dungeons I see occasionally. Faux realistic dungeons with ecologies can't replicate the OD&D dungeons. Why are dungeons full of slimes and undead acceptable, but explaining other monsters with things like minion hives and summoning portals is unacceptable?

The idea I've had rolling around in my head for a while, is that many (not all) dungeons are a battleground between good and evil. A no-man's land where the monsters and adventurers are the proxy agents. In order to keep it mysterious and mythical, I wouldn't blurt it out in such blatant words. Just a bit of background lore to keep in mind when stocking dungeons.

For example, the dungeon in the old AD&D Coloring album had this vibe, with armies of humanoids cursed to battle each other, and an encounter where a Ki-Rin aids the party.

http://monsterbrains.blogspot.com/2011/10/greg-irons-advanced-dungeons-and.html

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114263The problem is that the majority of dungeons can't work without an in-universe intelligent designer, whether that be a dungeon heart, a traditional evil overlord, or the modrons. Furthermore, the "non-weird" dungeons stretch my SoD more than the weird ones. The article I linked explains this in more detail.

I read your article, but I do not entirely agree with it. If the majority don't work, then I don't use them and replace them with what does work. It probably wouldn't be the game you're looking for, but it's still D&D.

I read through the last couple of pages and nearly all the complaints are about the "stuff" the lists of classes, races, magic items, etc along with how they are used in various campaigns like the Adventurer's League.

I believe Adventure in Middle Earth decisively settled what you can do with the D&D system provided you are willing to do the work changing the "stuff" to suit your idea. Pick any of the other style or campaign ideas mention thus far here and you can alter 5e to suit.

As for RAW, I had no issues using it with two Majestic Wilderlands campaign. I do not emphasized the same things in the same way as the Adventurer's League does or the published WoTC adventures do. Instead I did what I always I done with any RPG I used for my setting and focused on the elements that work with the setting.

In general if you allow the entire contents of the kitchen expect some issues with any specifics of a fantasy setting you designed that didn't take into account the ideas behind the stuff of RAW 5e. However with reasonable editing, 5e can be adapted to a wide variety of campaigns without having to come up with a AiME worth of new "stuff".

Which is why, when my players wanted to play a kitchen sink 5e campaign, I opted to use Blackmarsh and not the Majestic Wilderlands. I wrote Blackmarsh with the D&D tropes in mind so it was easy to fit in the vast majority of the "stuff" from 5e.

However given my interest I have worked on a Majestic Wilderlands for 5e enough to see what it's design is broad also very specific in some area. For example the 20 level class progression. This multiplied the work enough compared to alternatives that I haven't been interested in coming out a 5e supplement. Although I continue to create material here and there and may have enough now to do some kind of supplement.

For example the Halfling Shadow.

Quote from: Bren;1114230I may be crankier than usual, but I do get tired of people explaining  OD&D to me. Unless you played the game before it was published in 1974 you aren't telling me anything I didn't at one time know.
.

He wasn't explaining OD&D to you. He was pointing out how oddball races existed from the start of the hobby. For example Gronan playing a Balrog PC.

Why should today's mix should be considered unusual?  Especially one knowledgeable about the history of the hobby.

I remember the party with the "token" human was present in the days of AD&D 1st edition.

Quote from: estar;1114301He wasn't explaining OD&D to you. He was pointing out how oddball races existed from the start of the hobby. For example Gronan playing a Balrog PC.

I don't understand why there is so much opposition to oddball races. Why exactly would Tolkien races be kosher, but tieflings, warforged, and dragonborn not?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114303I don't understand why there is so much opposition to oddball races. Why exactly would Tolkien races be kosher, but tieflings, warforged, and dragonborn not?

Why personal weariness is with the continued accummulation more than anything.

It's not Tieflings instead Elves.  It's Tieflings AND elves.

Quote from: estar;1114301Why should today's mix should be considered unusual?

Simply, because it seems unusual to me.

You or anyone else are entitled to have motley patchwork parties in your kitchen sink campaign. I'm entitled to dislike kitchen sink settings and motley patchwork parties. Out of curiosity, is that sort of patchwork party typical of your Majestic Wilderlands?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114303I don't understand why there is so much opposition to oddball races. Why exactly would Tolkien races be kosher, but tieflings, warforged, and dragonborn not?

Because people like what they like and I don't happen to like them.

I like consistency. Open worlds and gonzo kitchen sink settings sacrifice consistency to include everything.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114303I don't understand why there is so much opposition to oddball races. Why exactly would Tolkien races be kosher, but tieflings, warforged, and dragonborn not?

My view it is an arbitrary preference little different then if I like red paint on my car and if you like blue paint job.

The only objective considerable is how much time do you want to spend explaining your particular setup. If you going with Jorune, you better have a good writeup. If you go with elves, dwarves, and halflings, chances are players will "get" right off.

The problem is that people equate the "stuff" as being the system. That if I include Tieflings as one of the main races then you have to let players play tiefling if you use that RPG.

Now I can understand gripes about something common not being included or having an inferior presentation. That likely generate work for a good many referees who were expecting X to be included.

However omitting stuff is generally easily. System could be designed where everything a integrated whole and if you omit something it fall apart. However D&D in the form of 5th edition is not such a system. In fact purposely over designed to support different styles of play from multiple eras of the D&D hobby.

But if one has trouble separating stuff from system then complaints will ensue.

Another problem is organized play and published adventures. At some point for each book or each season of league play, a creative decision has to be made as to what it will be about. Like movies, novels, etc, it not hard to imagine that X sucks because the creative ideas behind it are bad.

Published RPG supplement do labor under a constraints similar to that have comics. That there is an estabilshed canon while flexible it has bounds. There only so far you can go with Superman, or Captain America before people go this may be interesting but it not a X book.

With RPGs you are contained by the stuff presented in your core books. While flexible it is also as bounds.  Imagine the next adventure book where only Wizards are focused on. All other character classes would be at a distinct disadvantage. A lot of hobbyists would gripe because many don't have any interest in playing Wizards. So D&D adventures may mix it up, most of the core classes will support one way or another in the adventure.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1114303I don't understand why there is so much opposition to oddball races. Why exactly would Tolkien races be kosher, but tieflings, warforged, and dragonborn not?

**GENERALLY**

Because the conception of the world of Middle-Earth has all these races as part of the creation-myth.

Tieflings, Warforged, and Dragonborn - were more or less, like all of the other races that creeped in via other settings - tacked on.

Individually I have no problem with any of them. But when you start to hit maximum capacity of a world with all these new races, you lose the "vibe" of the setting. ALL of these races have very specific conceits to them that inherently makes me squint when thinking of them just running around the Realms or Greyhawk. I mean I find it ludicrous that Tieflings would just be "accepted" without batting an eye in those settings. But if you create a setting specifically - like in Golarion where you have devil-worshipping nations... it makes a lot more sense. And even then...

 Planescape and Spelljammer are huge exceptions to this. Gonzo to the max. I've let all kinds of crazy into those campaigns I've run.

Aesthetics tastes are subjective, but they can have patterns and reasons that can be objectively discussed.  Some groups can share these reasons.  

For example, I enjoy something like D&D wood elves or high elves for player races, something like fairy tale amoral elves (e.g. Anderson's "Three Hearts and Three Lions", but any number of stories will do) as NPCs or foes, and don't care for "urban fantasy" elves as either PC or NPC or monster.   I also don't like "elf quest" elves and any number of other twists on them, whether subverted from the original or something else.  It's a taste thing, and I know it.

No doubt the taste is partially rooted in my various views, both from reality and fantasy (e.g. how human nature works, how narratives work, what it means to be "done well" as a concept, etc.).  Which is why my view is largely shared by everyone in my gaming groups.  

When oddball races are wildly appreciated this is usually a sign that the person appreciating them is coming from a different set of views.  It's not 100%, of course, because people that are otherwise aligned can have those areas where they have their own twists on the thing.  My appreciation for classic Warner Brothers cartoons affects my views on comedy in fantasy RPGs in ways that do not exactly align with everyone in my gaming groups.  Other players tolerate it in me because it is a small thing that doesn't manifest itself very often.  By the same token, I've yet to meet a single person that was gung ho about playing a tielfling that would also have enjoyed any of our games.  Not saying it is impossible, but it would be highly unlikely.

Of course, I'm temperamentally disinclined to suffer a player that thinks the purpose of the game is to let them play anything they want, without regards to the setting or the work the GM has put into it.  Since I have 20 odd players that are quite happy to use the constraints of a setting to springboard their creativity in the characters they do play, I have no drive to accommodate such players, either.

So I think you'll find that the extreme dislike for tielfings (and to a lesser extent dragonborn and other such options) is a function of both aesthetic dislike for the thing itself and a strong suspicion that the player wanting to play it is not a good fit for the group.  Thus why I've said before that I have no issue with them being in the system, since they serve as useful "tells" while I happily exclude them.  

Finally, I think it important to note that these decisions exists on a gradient.  I'll not allow tieflings in any case, but I will grudgingly allow dragonborn occasionally--particularly with younger players who seem to get really excited about them.

Quote from: tenbones;1114314Planescape and Spelljammer are huge exceptions to this. Gonzo to the max. I've let all kinds of crazy into those campaigns I've run.

These are not so much exceptions, but stronger proof to your well-explained aesthetic rule. These settings HAVE THE SPACE for these demographics; they were built with such by their very cosmology. They are merely far more vast play scopes, emphasizing that coherency needs rationale and consistency. Planescape and Spelljammer have them due to an explained enormous size shortened by a playable conceit.

It is hard to make a better aesthetic argument than you already made here.

Quote from: Bren;1114312Simply, because it seems unusual to me.

You or anyone else are entitled to have motley patchwork parties in your kitchen sink campaign. I'm entitled to dislike kitchen sink settings and motley patchwork parties.

Same here, but I long learned it is futile to debate it, as it is a preference issue.

Quote from: Bren;1114312Out of curiosity, is that sort of patchwork party typical of your Majestic Wilderlands?

No, in general parties are majority humans. Because it very clear to the players from the materials I provide and my answers to their question about the setting that my take on the Wilderlands is dominated by humans.

It took a couple of decades to tweak this for the campaign along with a handful of mechanics. Most of the critical development of my version of the Wilderlands was done under Fantasy Hero and GURPS where you have to PAY to a member of a different races. By the time I started using D&D 3.X and Swords & Wizardry. I had tons of interesting roleplaying background options for human characters.

In the current set of rules I am using based on Swords & Wizardry, I do give humans a +15% XP bonus.  This is more of a sweetener than absolutely necessary.  I played around with different numbers for 5 years until I found +15% being the sweet spot.

I am however prepared if a party is majority non-humans. I have notes on all the races I allow and there are enough regions dominated by non-humans that I could run a campaign without the players having to deal (much) with human civilization.

My experience that there is a small group of hobbyist who enjoy roleplaying specific races and will do so even if not favored by the mechanics of the system.

Finally, in my current OD&D campaign, I had a player picked a full blood Virdian ( a demonic race) largely because it benefited him mechanically in terms of Swords & Wizardry. In the middle of summer he leapt at the chance of being turned into human because he was tired of his social status.

Similarly the players went hogwild with the polymorph spell and transformed themselves into a variety of monsters. For example doppleganger. At first they really exploited this but as the campaign wore on they founded what it truly meant to be a doppleganger and reverted back to their original form (or human in the case of the ex-Viridian).

I was willing to continue the campaign with most of the group transformed as doppleganger. But I wasn't going to cut any slack as to the consequences.

Specifically the dopplegangers have a hive mind. Eventually the characters would lose their individuality and become one with one of the clans. This was represented by periodic saving throws and a small bit of roleplaying.

Quote from: Bren;1114312I like consistency. Open worlds and gonzo kitchen sink settings sacrifice consistency to include everything.

You can be consistent with the kitchen sink nor does it has to be gonzo. But you can't just shove it into an arbitrary setting and expect it to work. I share the same basic preference as you on this.

I have a battered notebook where I categorized all the monsters from MM, MMII, and Fiend Folio. I found that there are dozens of culture forming races listed through just those three books.

I did this at the time when AD&D 1st was my main system (early to mid 80s). This many races posed a quandary. So while I pared the list somewhat over the years, my solution was to have most of them. Their existence was justified by the adding that during the Uttermost War at the dawn of Time between the gods and demons, the demons mutated mankind into all the races listed in their quest for the perfect servitor race.

Because I was using the Wilderlands with its 18 huge fucking maps, because I just recently expanded the scale from 5 miles to 12.5 mile (Harn). I was able to find various areas where cultures for these races existed. In a way that preserved the fact that the Wilderlands were dominated by humans. Which was due because most of my early campaigns ended in wargame exercises where the players conquered a region as their characters.

Over time I consolidated races like bugbears, hobgoblins, kobolds, etc into just orc and goblins with multiple cultures. So my "hobgoblins" are goblin with better technology and more organized society. Bugbears were replaced by orc tribes that noted for physical size and ferocity.

With Blackmarsh and the Points of Light settings, I just built in multiple races in from the get go. But I also limited myself to the list in Swords & Wizardry so didn't have to go crazy finding spots for a multitude of cultures.