…
Therefore, there was no cultural shift with 3e. … As Mr Tweets quote states 3e is completely self referential to the existing DnD Lore.
Moving the game to being completely self-referential to the existing DnD Lore. races, monsters, classes, items, etc.
IS the cultural shift.
Because his design decision when it came to the creation of D&D lore was a distinctly different shift from what designers would use as references in previous editions.
I highly doubt Mr. Tweet thought he was making some cultural shift – he just probably thought it was a cool idea at the time. But making all the game lore completely self-referential was
by his own admission a departure from how the world building was done in every previous edition!
In 2nd Ed, the rules referred to history and to historical legends to describe the game…
This was also done in past editions. Mr. Tweet didn’t like this part of D&D.
When writing roleplaying games, I enjoy helping the player get immersed in the setting, and I always found these references to the real world to be distractions.
So he set about “fixing” D&D Lore.
Personally, one part of the process I enjoyed was describing the world of D&D in its own terms, rather than referring to real-world history and mythology.
… For example, 2E took monks out of the Player’s Handbook, in part because martial artist monks have no real place in medieval fantasy.
We put them back in because monks sure have a place in D&D fantasy. The same goes for gnomes. The 3E gnome is there because the gnome was well-established in D&D lore, not in order to represent real-world mythology.
Descriptions of weapons in 2E referred to historical precedents, …. We dropped the historical references….
D&D had such a strong legacy that it could stand on its own without reference to Earth history or mythology.
In a relatively short article, he explicitly mentions
dumping references to real world history or mythology no less than four times. Specifically contrasting his new direction to what previous editions of D&D did.
I explained at length in previous posts why this shift away from referencing and understanding real world mythology contributed to “…the prevalence of "monster" races becoming standard” Post 3e.
Note these key words form my original post:
becoming standard.
Becoming: The process of coming to be something or of passing into a state.
Not
instantly transforming the game when changes are first introduced.
Standard: Uniform and established.
Everyone knows I'm referring to standard player options in the core PHB.
Not a claim that more PC options were never available in
supplementary material.
Not a claim that PC’s did not play monster races before 3e, or that mary sue characters never existed.
It’s not that hard. Reading comprehension is a thing.
Ha, Drow Rangers are so 80s.
Wait that does not fit your narrative!
Your projection is showing.
Once again referencing supplementary material from past editions to counter claims no one is making.
“…the prevalence of "monster" races becoming standard” This concept is evidently beyond you.
You could not play a Drow straight out of the PHB in past editions.
It was not a standard option. You can in 5e.
Thus; being able to play a Drow PC
became standard in D&D.
Only you and a few others seem completely unable to grasp what I am saying.
Dealing with the stubbornly stupid indeed.