Why do so many settings settle on the existence of a single dominant

>>54893778
>proverbial kitchen
Kitchen sink, of course.

>>54893778
Because that would be a thematic clusterfuck and play like shit.

>>54893798
A lot of popular settings are already thematic clusterfucks. I fail to see how you can ruin a bucket full of shit with another spoonful of it.

>>54893831
>it's already bad
>so instead of trying to make it better let's just make it worse

File: sorcerer's guide.jpg (312KB, 875x1231px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 875x1231px

>>54893778
Talislanta has over 15 different magical traditions, including Crystalomancy and Rhabdomancy, among weird others and more classical stuff like Wizardry & Witchcraft.

Because magic systems tend to contradict each other.

>>54893778
>Why do so many settings settle on the existence of a single dominant flavor of magic instead of throwing every occult tradition in existence into the proverbial kitchen?

'Cause you'd have to come up with separate rules for all of those and that would turn into a clusterfuck mechanically. It would also be a huge headache for the DM just to keep track of all that crap in the story.

>>54893778
It's important for world building and willing suspension of disbelief to have a consistently applied set of non-contradictory rules.

>>54893778
Because you're looking for things to rules lawyer if you want this.

>>54893778
Real answer?
Because it's more work and people are lazy. Most can't even bother to properly balance a single magic system let alone multiple.

>>54893778
Because crunch is crunch and the tradition a magic user practices still results in MAGIC. It's window dressing.

Why don't you try doing it, OP, and get back to us with the results.