If you don’t mind, I’ll repost some snips and adapt some to your example.

“Think back to when you started playing whatever game you are currently excited about – before all those sourcebooks, player manuals, and expansions were developed, when all you had was the core rulebooks. Now, go gather all the books and kit you bought since that time to expand your game. Is it a heavy backpack? Do you bring it to every session and thunk it on the floor? Is the game at the table more fun?

In most cases, it has very little effect on the game at the table at all.

Too often, gaming companies act like publishing companies, churning out product with the aim of adding more choice to sessions (or selling more widgets), and players snap it up under the assumption that it will make the game better.
[...]
Because there is frequently a long interval between game sessions in a serial campaign, I think players enjoy inhabiting that imaginative space. There’s an appeal about these expansions – particularly the player-oriented ones which turn character creation into a game of its own. Players absorb the material in these supplements and then try to formulate a brilliant or unusual character advancement strategy. There is a strangely compelling feeling to designing characters, not unlike a game of Solitaire.”

GMs like to daydream about the how’s and why’s of various settings, but these have litte to do with what actually happens next when you get to the gaming table. In cases where supplements present minute detail (ie the anatomy of a dragon) there really isn’t a gaming interface to access that information withing the context of a session. It’s not like you or a player has a rule mechanism by which that information will suddenly become relevant in a game. Those things don’t matter to an RPG session any more than they would in most movies or stories.

Those books are a pacifier that tides you over. For the amount of content that gets churned out – I think the value often isn’t there, especially when those materials aren’t balanced or playtested as well as the initial core books. If the character designs succumb to “power creep” – then it just means the gamemaster has to boost the challenge levels higher to cope. There’s not enough benefit for the hassle it causes.

Churning out endless and increasingly niche expansions for a game might sell books to players in the short term, but it doesn’t make managing or creating adventures easier, and won’t bring more games from the bookshelf to the table. “More complexity” does not equal “more easy”.

1) Forget experience with D&D. Dragons are cultural icons that people around the world are familar with. You might not have even heard of RPGs and probably would still have a pretty good concept of what a dragon is (big fearsom beast, perhaps highly intelligent).

2) This book is marketed at someone who already has the 3 core books for 4e. You already have a sense of dragons being big fearsome and intelligent beasts from those books (the artwork, the stat blocks in the MM, the freakin’ cover of the DMG, etc.).

3) Most businesses want to appeal to a broader market. That’s just good business. This fluff does not help to achieve that. You have to buy $100 worth of books first to be able to use this product. It isn’t an introductory product, it is a supplemental product. The D&D Starter’s Set is a product that might draw in new gamers, not the Draconomicon.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of the Draconomicon, be it good or bad, the point is that setting and role playing are complimentary but not substitues for each other.

That’s a very good point but keep in mind that Wizards audience isn’t just to the DM that’s been running a game since 2nd Edition. To you this may be stuff that isn’t useful but to someone who’s only experience with fantasy gaming is through MMORPGs this might be something that they would like.

I haven’t read the Dragonomicon though so I can’t comment exactly on this though. What I do know is that Wizards wants to make their products appeal to a broader audience.

But your example proves my point – setting can be used to help with the role playing. It is separate from the role playing, but compliments it when done well. I just don’t think that the Draconomicon does setting well from what little I read.

Fluff can be entertaining and interesting, and when done well it is inspiring. The fluff that I read in the Draconomicon didn’t impress me, but others might be inspired by it. To each his own.

I think that you can develop a greater sense of mystery by writing open ended material. H. P. Lovecraft was a master of horror because of what he didn’t reveal (very rarely were the horrors described in great and exact detail in his stories). Do something similar with the Draconomicon – reveal a little bit about dragons, but then offer only theories about still undiscovered details. Write things like “To this day, there are no known witnesses of a dragon’s nest. Whether the eggs are that well hidden, or if the dragons eat the witnesses is highly debated. Dragon egg shell pieces are always discovered after they have been removed from the lair by the beasts. Perhaps to prevent predators large enough to threaten a dragon from appearing, or perhaps as bait to lure large creatures with. Again, there are only theories and no proof as of this writing.” That to me adds some mystery and it is off the top of my head. I imagine an editor and talented writer could do significantly better.

I think it’s hard to make something more mysterious by writing 250 pages about them.

I don’t see how fluff does anything but help one to play the role of the dragon, even if said fluff doesn’t directly speak to how a dragon behaves (although this material is in the book).

Take the anatomy, for instance. “Due to their scales and thick hides, chromatic dragons have a poor tactile sense. Hence, a dragon can be comfortable sleeping on a jagged pile of treasure, as long as the pile vaguely conforms to the dragon’s shape. Dragons are, however, sensitive to pain. Anything capable of penetrating their hide and scales receives their full attention.”

Now, think of what this means if you’re playing a dragon. You don’t get scratched. Things which could really irritate a human do nothing to you. When you see humans carefully working through your lair, shielding eyes from the light of magma, coughing from the smoke, and grimacing in pain when they snag skin on spurs of rock, you don’t empathize at all. You never experience such things. To you, humans are weak and need constant coddling. They deserve nothing from you.

Sure, an author could say simply, “Dragons are very proud and arrogant,” but that’s meaningless. I find the sections on anatomy, life cycle, etc. very useful for playing the role of dragon because they set up the experiences of dragons.

It’s the old writing axiom: Show, don’t tell. By providing so much fluff about dragons, the book is really giving you the context to understand a dragon’s mind and life.

Example: If a GM doesn’t use all of the WotC books, he is being a lazy GM.

@DeadGod – I think a role playing aid product would be focused on characters. Motivations and relationships would be the emphasis, and stat blocks (mechanics) and descriptions (setting) would receive less attention.

@Vagnaard – Yes, the setting may lead to role playing. That was not the point though. The point is that it is not role playing. Just as the driver and the automobile are not the same thing, yet when you put them together you can see the obvious benefits. You need to understand where one ends and the other begins in order to reap the most rewards from them IMO.

@BryanB – Actually, the player was just making a comment so please don’t think that he was trying to prove a point. He was just taking a friendly poke at my whining, but his comment was inspiring!

Again, I’m not saying that the Draconomicon is a bad/good product. I’m not saying that setting material isn’t incredibly useful. I’m just saying recognize that setting and role playing are two different things, and that recognizing the dfference between the two can help you to become a better GM.

My point exactly. I can see groups for which this information can be a good roleplaying aid and other who would find it stupid.

I think you cannot discredit informations just because at first sight it doesnt seem usable. You never know.

I can see a few places where setting information like this can be a role-playing aid. You could hand the book out as the journal of some dragonologist, or have it available as the result of a successful gather info check. It doesn’t make for role-playing though. I much prefer books where there are things more relevant to the game being played detailed like that. Then again, whose to say what is relevant to the game being played on a group by group basis?

Many people I’ve met have purchased the Draconomicon simply because it’s chock full of dragon goodness. These are artists, fantasy readers, movie goers, etc.

I think the intent of the book is not so much gaming material, but perhaps to serve the same purpose as other ‘coffee table’ books and the like.

Why ?

Because it can help me stimulate roleplaying. I will take your example to try and explain what I mean. You are running a campain where dragons are paramount in their might and godliness… That is cool, but it would be interesting for the players, while trying to find a way to defeat a particular dragon, to have an “expert” on dracologie come to them and explain his theories (which bypass most of the magical explanations and goes more into the mundane) about dragons. This way, the players with the setting information you gave them, can come with a realistic plan to defeat the dragon.

And the funny thing is that the so called expert may himself be a dragon that wanted to give false but believable information to the players to get them killed.

This way, the setting did help me add drama in the game.

Regarding the new Dragonomicon: there is a bit in there detailing roleplaying a dragon. It goes on for a handful of pages, detailing the average dragon’s goals and perspectives on the world around him. Something akin to how people view the milling about of hamsters or rabbits. That said, a good part is extra fluff, tons of stat blocks, then fluff and stats for dragons from other settings throughout DnD. Not a bad buy, but not very necessary.