In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.
The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.
This is an idea worthy of stealing
Having stolen it myself (well, adapted it), I wholeheartedly approve.
Quentin Small WotC Online Community Coordinator All around helpful simian
In my campaign, Drow originally came from the Shadowfell and not the Feywild. The Drow in and from the Shadowfell are not generally considered evil although like any race they are made up of individuals and some of those are in fact evil. The Drow from the Underdark are generally considered evil by surface dwellers, though these Drow just consider themselves superior to all other races.
Pretty close to how I do it (though I don't have an Underdark). The three Naya* races (elves, eladrin, and drow) are 'linked' to the Natural world, Feywild, and Shadowfell, respectively.
*I wanted 'elf' to refer specifically to 'ELF'-the-race, so I adopted a term to refer to those three races collectively.
In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.
The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.
This is an idea worthy of stealing
Not at all.
A pan of a book went "Parts of the book were original and parts were good. Unfortunately the parts that were good were not original and the parts that were original were not good." The same applies to most original ideas. They are bad. The creator may think they are great, and his players are not likely going to complain because they need somebody to run the game and they can tolerate a lot of bad fluff if it means the game gets played. But the original idea is routinely a drawback for the game. A generic drawback is that you are no longer playing in the normal D&D world, but rather in some particular world, which makes all that official material worthless. The DM must create his own, or do without. The official stuff has its flaws of course, but it is there, easily adopted and used. [& no, you rarely can do better, or you would be working for WOTC.] A complete copy of the official text is much superior on average. Now in this particular case, we have several problems. Our drow is now hated only a tiny bit more than elf or eladrin, and instead of 3 playable races, we only have one. Nothing desirable here.
In my settings, the Underdark's Drow are basically like The Old Republic's Sith Empire, replace sith lords for priestess of Lolth. The priestess of Lolth are evil and have their own agenda and will try to undermain and exploit the other priestess of lolth for more power (and other drow houses), but most of the Drow are not exactly evil, it's just how things works in the underdark afterall, it's the trope of "For my Country, Right or Wrong"
Dave, That is insultingly false on so many levels. All official (non-rules) material is worthless. Period. End of Concept. I have not, and will not ever, pay someone else to create a fictional world which I intend to use in it's entirety for home games.
The DM Created world is inherently superior to the cannonical setting because it empowers the DM to make new stories, as opposed to empowering "whoever reads more cannon fiction". I don't know how many times I've been in/run a campaign based in an official setting only to have a player say "But according to X book, Y and Z have an ABC relationship, so what you're doing makes no sense", which forces the DM to either capitulate, or depart from cannon (or come up with a plot reason for the event to occur). Settings must be created content in order for the DM to have creative control, it's an absolute necessity for all but a dedicated Gamist campaign; subjecting yourself and your players to the confines of a pre-generated campaign world is only desireable if you are a newer group needing the comfort of defined aspects or need some sort of universal consistency (and financial backing) as with the RPGA.
The reason I don't work for WotC, despite believing my self-created campaign worlds are superior is because ... the two have nothing to do with each other. Forgotten Realms having decades of fiction by professional writers and descriptive texts (including an amusing Atlas complete with an interview with Eliminster!) has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I can run a better game by deciding the campaign specifics for myself. People who work for WotC are not automatically more creative than anyone else, I pay WotC for their system and content for the exact same reason I am paid for my job, not everyone has the time to do everything and so we pay other people to do them for us, horray business!
And you are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion about monkey's statement that Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Mimbari. Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Elves in D&D, they are also all separate races (with sub-races to boot!) so assuming that the different castes remain separate in the exact same way is absurd pessimism.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
90% of everything is crap, including all campaign worlds, official or homebrew. That's one reason I kinda like PoL - there's not much there at all, just a vague "the world is dangerous" notion, which I like. Other than that, I don't feel the need to craft a whole world as an exercise in self-gratification because most folks I play with want the game to revolve around them, not my world.
On the other hand, 4e is the first edition of D&D where I actually don't hate Drow because they're not prone to being exploited by munchkins. They're not special snowflakes and they don't get free superpowers. This tends to disappoint new players who suddenly discover Drow (DRIZZT!!!!) only to realize, wait, they don't win everything.
Also, when I DM for Drow PCs, the NPCs pretty much just treat them like everyone else. Some folks get very disappointed when they're not hated and oppressed.
OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player. 3E challenged the character, not the player. Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM. That's why I love 4E.
"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."
When I shared my version of drow, it was in the spirit of sharing creative ideas. Some folks may like the idea and want to use it, for others it may not be their cup of tea.
Regardless, DMs who create their own settings are indulging in a playstyle that is just as valid as using a published setting. Neither way is right or wrong. Using the published "fluff" or creating your own from scratch are both ways to enjoy the game.
In other words, lets keep it civil.
Thanks.
Quentin Small WotC Online Community Coordinator All around helpful simian
