The lore for D&D is extremely well done. Better than even a novel. The reason is because the game is all about lore, so the focus was on world building. While for a story the lore is their only to serve the story.

If there was some sort of writing Pulitzer prize just for world building, D&D would be up there.

Dungeons and Dragons is a game system, not a setting.

When you're taking about the setting that D&D 5e uses, you're taking about a setting called The Forgotten Realms.

There are actually dozens of novels set in The Forgotten Realms, going back decades, which is part of why there is so much world building done.

And believe me that while many of those novels are fun reads, none of them are winning any prizes for writing.

I'm not talking about the novels. I'm talking about the dungeons and dragons setting which is part of the game.

Forgotten realms is just one "region" in the setting. It is one universe in a multiverse of regions. This multiverse is called Planescape. All d&d games that I know about utilize that setting. In Planescape any arch way or opening can be a potential portal to another realm. You just need the right key. The key could be an object, a leaf, or a childhood memory or a song that can take you to another world when you walk through the archway of which there are an infinite amount. The forgotten realms is one of these places. But I'm repeating myself. You played torment so you know this as it takes place in the city of sigil the city that lies at the nexus of the multiverse.

I mean there are books dedicated to just describing the d&d setting and if they gave out awards for settings, these books would win. The novels aren't part of this. That's what I'm saying.

It is a good setting for running a game in, in the sense that it is an everything-setting where you can justify access to any planes. It produces a framework where you can throw ideas at the wall and they stick pretty well.

I don’t think this sort of flexibility indicates great writing in the literary sense. It is like a better thought out version of Marvel’s multiverse stuff: a really functional way of giving somebody working in a setting the latitude to select parts of that setting as needed. It is designed by an organization to achieve a goal for the game system, not to be great art.

The goal for the game system is created to facilitate great stories. It's art, and no other piece of fantasy lore matches it in depth, breadth and consistency to my knowledge.

The amount of artists and writers who created it makes it art in my eyes. There's no other utility for it other than story telling either. If that's not art, what is it? The snobs at the Pulitzer who haven't even awarded a win to sci Fi novel may think otherwise but to each their own. In terms of the topic at hand, fantasy lore, there's few that can rival d&d.

Let's be real too. Baldurs gate and torment weren't made because of the great d&d gameplay system... The creators wanted to utilize the lore.

Planescape is a good omni-setting for telling whatever type of story in whatever type of genre you want. Other systems benefit from being more focused. Glorantha is better if you want a Bronze Age sword and sandals setting, IMO, but if you want to do funky multiverse stuff it has basically nothing for you.

Anyway, I think the reason literary organizations don’t award settings is because they are generally interested in stores, and settings are just a component of that. I’m sure you could find some industry awards for setting development, and I bet Planescape stuff does well there. They are just not as interesting to outsiders.

Also I want to push back on your “the topic at hand.” I was talking about the stories themselves. You’ve changed the topic to settings. I’m not sure I want to come along on a tangent where we talk about setting in-and-of-themselves. The article was about why game writing is often bad. I think it is not settings, games often have great settings, but poor stories.

The Pulitzer never awarded a sci Fi so it tells you what they think. It's obvious why settings don't get awards it's because world building is sorta niche. Not popular enough to be considered "serious".

Agreed on your last part. Games have great setting and not as good stories.

But my point was d&d is great for what it is: settings for stories rather then the stories themselves. I think you disagree with this, and you think the setting is more subservient to the gameplay but I'll reference Warhammer then. Warhammer clearly has a focus on setting at many times over gameplay. And my argument is that d&d is largely similar.