View Profile: Parmandur - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
No More Results
About Parmandur

Basic Information

Date of Birth
November 30

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
5,150
Posts Per Day
3.07
Last Post
Would you rather we get more setting neutral content than adventures? Yesterday 09:58 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
17
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 09:58 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 16th September, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
3
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Saturday, 20th April, 2019


Friday, 19th April, 2019


Thursday, 18th April, 2019


Wednesday, 17th April, 2019


Tuesday, 16th April, 2019



Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tuesday, 12th March, 2019

  • 10:33 PM - CleverNickName mentioned Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    Critical Role has been extremely diverse in guests they have brought on the show, and several of the cast members would not have been accepted as "white" a few decades ago.The core cast of Critical Role is diverse in ways that a lot of other similar content creators aren't. Nearly half the cast is female. Taliesin came out as bisexual back in 2017. Like Parmandur said: they have been extremely diverse with the guests to the show, as well. The cast is white, but I wouldn't say they lack diversity.

Tuesday, 26th February, 2019

  • 02:59 PM - oreofox mentioned Parmandur in post The New D&D Book Is Called "Ghosts of Saltmarsh" [UPDATED!]
    I suspect it's more like a very small number of posters making a lot of noise... (Quite frankly, there is good reason FR overtook Greyhawk in popularity). That's what happens when you place practically every video game in FR. And I saw more FR novels than nearly any other setting, except maybe Dragonlance. And that setting went downhill after Dragons of Summer Flame. Demetrios1453 and Parmandur : I didn't read any of the monster lore because as I stated, they were useless to me as I have my own lore for my own setting. And I figured they were FR focused since EVERY other book released has been (adventures minus Strahd, SCAG). Giving them names of Greyhawk characters really means nothing. So I made a mistake, but like I said, I didn't read the lore because it's rather useless to me. It's good to know it isn't FR focused, though.

Monday, 28th January, 2019

  • 08:20 PM - flametitan mentioned Parmandur in post These Are DDB's Most Viewed D&D Adventures
    On a related note, has Ravnica killed Eberron and Planescape and stolen their stuff? The guilds look like a mix between factions and dragonmarked houses, huge metropolis with planar gateways, magi-tech, etc. What is there left to make Eberron and Planescape special? To add on to what Parmandur said, Ravnica as a setting has no planar elements; what happens is that Ravnica seems to be a popular meeting place for planeswalkers, the primary cast of Magic's storyline. Planeswalkers cannot take anyone else with them, and there's currently no other way to hop planes without a planeswalker (with the exception of one device the antagonist stole in a whole other world). Planescape, by contrast, is all about the planes. Now, theoretically, most of what planescape has to offer can be covered in a Manual of the Planes type book; however, such a generic manual of the planes would lack the "character" of the setting. This character is primarily based on the foundational principle that belief can cause actual change, and the resulting conflicts that it brews. The Blood war continues because both sides believe that their outlook on reality is correct, and because the those who haven't taken a side believe it better for the war to continue than for either side to win. The gods are in a ne...

Tuesday, 20th November, 2018

  • 12:14 AM - darkbard mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    I have to admit, it's really, REALLY funny watching people who hate a game, hardly if ever played a game, trying to argue with people with hundreds if not thousands of hours of experience with the game. It really is amusing. Even though I awarded you XPs for this already, it's worth restating. Imaro, Parmandur, etc. seem to be here for the argument (for argument's sake) as they've proven over the course of many, many threads like this in the past (as well as this one) that they have no real interest in 4E ... other than to jump in on the hate.

Friday, 16th November, 2018

  • 11:40 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Two further comments: (1) If, as Parmandur suggested upthread is widespread according to Mearls, someone wants to have an RPG experience which is mostly about GM-mediated fiction and story revelation, then conflict resolution/closed scene resolution will be unnecessary, and task resolution with no system-established finality will be fine - the skill check in effect becomes an element of colour that the GM weaves into the unfolding narration of the ingame situation. This seems to me to be an assumption many modules from the mid-80s on make about how the game will proceed, at least out of combat. (Eg if the PCs fail to find the dirt in the safe because they fail their safecracking roll, then they'll find it in the waste paper bin or in a note on a dead henchman or whatever.) It's hard to see how the "path" in an AP would work without this sort of thing. (2) Contra Lanefan and maybe some others, it's simply not true that differential XP tables in AD&D made fighters stronger than wizards at mid-to-upper levels. A 6th level wi...
  • 09:07 AM - Hussar mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Hit dice, short rests, healing potions (assumed in the PHB) Cleric spell slots...did you notice the part where at Level 18 the Champion becomes Wolverine and will never be below half HP in a day, before considering Hit Dice...? Hit Dice are limited resources in 5e. You only replenish half on a long rest. Which means that after the first adventuring day, you're down resources. Cleric spell slots? Umm, so, you're adventuring day rests on the cleric's ability to recharge your resources? And, hey, 18th level, congratulations, you finally get to do half of what a caster has been able to do since about 4th level. :erm: Let's compare shall we Parmandur, since you've repeatedly talked about how epic it is for a 17th level fighter to shoot 12 arrows in 2 rounds. Let's not forget though, that it took you 12 levels just to catch up to the monk who has been getting 8 attacks over 2 rounds (12 over three, which equals a 16th level fighter) since 5th level. And, at the same time you get to shoot 12 arrows, that monk can instantly kill 5 opponents per short rest. How come your Hawkeye or Green Arrow cannot so much as slow down a monster with an arrow (something that the characters do in the comics all the time) yet our monk is instantly killing dragons? And you consider this to be equal? Or, let's wander over to the Ranger. At 11th level, the archer ranger has up to 25 attacks in a single round (every target within 5 feet of your original target builds a nice 5x5 square, you don't include the original target in the area of effect). Granted that's extremely rare, but, 5 or 6 attacks in a single round isn't. Congratulations, it onl...

Thursday, 15th November, 2018

  • 12:22 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Don't agree with your summary of what was expressed. the game provides tools to challenge high level spellcasters just like high level martials. If you choose not to employ all of said tools for challenging spellcasters you shouldn't be surprised that they are more powerful because of it. Parmandur was responding to Manbearcat mentioning some particular tools - anti-magic zones and spellbook issues. Here is Manbearcat's post: This is assuming a GM isn’t pulling out all kinds of the classic, shallow, obnoxious Anti-Magic blocks and adversarial, endless army of thieves stealing spellbooks moves. Assuming you aren’t transparently taking away their tools left and right as a kludge to deal with their cosmic power. And here is Parmandur's reply to those words: Your final assumption would be incorrect. That is literally the DMs job. There is only one possible reading of this: Parmandur things that it is literally the GM's job to deploy anti-magic zones and spellbook-stealing thieves and other similar devices that block the use of spells by the player of a high-level wizard. This is bull... ritual caster alone makes casters more effective than martial PC's in 4e.Is this based on your actual play experience? (1) Not all casters in 4e have ritual casting. (2) I...

Wednesday, 14th November, 2018

  • 04:42 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    in all editions casters have - or can have, depending on spells known - the advantage; and I've never claimed otherwise. Other posters (eg Imaro, Parmandur, Sadras) seemed to be disagreeing with me when I said that in this respect 4e differs from 5e (because what you say is not generally the case in 4e, at least as I have experienced it). If in fact they do agree with you that in 5e casters have the advantage in these non-combat, no-time-pressure situations, then most of the discussion is over. Because that's the whole difference I've been talking about with the discussion of DC-by-level, skill challenges and the like. I can't see how this would be any different in 4e than in 5e or 1e or 3e.Then reread some of my posts in this thread, some actual play reports, etc. Manbearcat has already rehearsed the bulk of it in a post not far upthread. It's not rocket science - this is RPG design tech that was pioneered over 20 years ago.
  • 03:39 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...ous Anti-Magic blocks and adversarial, endless army of thieves stealing spellbooks moves. Assuming you aren’t transparently taking away their tools left and right as a kludge to deal with their cosmic power. Your final assumption would be incorrect. That is literally the DMs job. I mean, yes, the game works best when played as intended. More on this at 11.OK, this is the first time in this thread that anyone has posted that the way 5e is "intended" to work is by having the GM block a high level wizard player's capabilities in various ways. Personally I don't enjoy that sort of play, either as GM and player. So let me note another strength of 4e not yet commented on in this thread: it preserves an intraparty balance of mechanical effectiveness even when every player is doing his/her thing in accordance with his/her resources resulting from PC build. EDIT: I saw this: in no-pressure situations the casters are likely to rule the roost. Fair enough With likes from Imaro and Parmandur. So just to be clear - is it now uncontroversial that in fact, in a whole suite of non-combat situations (which would include something "no pressure" like reforging a hammer at one's leisure) 5e spellcasters are more effective than martial PCs? Because that's certainly not true in 4e. But when I've been asserting that the two systems are different in this respect, I thought that was widely denied. So I'm confused.

Sunday, 11th November, 2018

  • 01:40 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Bounded Accuracy allows one to "influence the fiction" over a greater range of mechanical difficulty. If it's true that all DCs are set by GM fiat (as Parmandur said and you seemed to agree with) then what does it mean to say that bounded accuracy allows one to "influence the fiction". Eg if the GM decides that the DC for the holding the hammer in the forge is 15 for the 15th level fighter, but the 1st level fighter doesn't get to roll for it and automatically burns his/her hands off, what work was bounded accuracy doing? I'm not sure why pemerton you are trying to continually push it as having been stated as an all or nothing type thingI'm just trying to understand what is being said. Some posts say that bounded accuracy means that the DC is the same for the 1st and the 15th level PC. And other posts say that the GM can decide that the 1st level PC automatically fails while setting a DC for the 15th level PC which the player of the 1st level PC might succeed at if allowed to roll against it. That second approach does not seem to involve bounded accuracy; in fact it seems directly at odds with it!

Saturday, 10th November, 2018

  • 01:51 AM - pemerton mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    ...as an immediate success whereas a lower level PC might be asked to make a roll.OK, that all may be true. It reinforces my view that it's not clearly the case that there are level appropriate DCs, or indeed a clear methodology for determining what might be possible for a 15h level fighter along the lines I've described upthread. To wit . . . I don't think that's true... I think your question was a little unclear. Mechanically there are certain DC's a first level fighter can never attain. However the first step of determining whether there is even the possibility of a check in 5e is in the hands of the DM. I assumed you were familiar with the play procedures of 5e so I didn't think it was relevant to rehash the fact that the DM decides what a 1st level fighter vs. a 15th level fighter is capable of making a check for... I assumed you were asking what DC range was attainable by a fighter at 15th level vs. one at 1st level.Upthread a number of posters - you in an earlier post, Parmandur, I think others too - have said that 5e uses bounded accuracy, in the sense that the DC for task X doesn't change across levels. (More than one poster has compared this to AC - the AC of a goblin is the same whether the to hit check is made by a 1st level or 15th level PC). If now you're saying that DCs are in fact "subjective" - for non-combat, at least, if not for combat - then the difference from 4e seems to be more about the absence of a clear framework for bundling a series of level-appropriate DCs into an overall resolution framework (ie the skill challenge). Anyway I've intended my claim to be clear: that 4e has a system that makes it straightforward for martial prowess to be displayed and resolved in a way that mitigates against tendencies in fantasy RPGing for playes of spellcasters to have a greater range of possibilities open to them, especially once we get into "epic" territory. I posted an actual play illustration. I think the range of responses that has generated...

Friday, 9th November, 2018

  • 08:24 PM - Imaro mentioned Parmandur in post Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked
    Yeh I am calling it so far from being perfect as to be insulting. Note we arent discussing details like how to make it feel like the person has one "secret" vulnerable spot without making it ridiculously over powered. Even giving innate damage resistance would be hard pressed not to be. Takes extra damage from critical hits would not be a great off set but it would have the flavor. Well that's your call. For me 5e gets the feel close enough (while still maintaining playability of the game) using the methods Parmandur described above that it's not a concern for me.

Monday, 5th November, 2018

  • 10:51 AM - MechaPilot mentioned Parmandur in post WotC President Chris Cocks Talks Magic and D&D
    Granted that each edition is a separate product line, it is unheard of in D&D for year four to be the biggest year of an edition. 3.0 and 4E were already gone by the same point, and 5E is on Pace to surpass 3.5 timr in print in a matter of months. Did I say it wasn't impressive? Also, @bedir than, it's odd that you give @Parmandur XP for stating that each edition is a separate product line, while giving me a hard time about making that exact same statement. Is your real issue with my post that you don't think I'm impressed enough by their growth?

Saturday, 6th October, 2018

  • 05:33 AM - pukunui mentioned Parmandur in post Updated errata will be released within the next month!
    Parmandur: You do realize that now I have no choice but to go back and rewatch that part of the Dragon+ episode to see what exactly it was JC actually said ... sigh ... EDIT: OK, here's the episode: Dragon+ July 31st episode Around the 25-minute mark, Greg reads a question someone has posted about whether they will be putting out another UA on alternative class features. Jeremy replies that they don't want to proceed rapidly down that road until they do another overall game satisfaction survey, as it's been a while since the last one, and the old data might prove to be wrong (e.g. Enough people might actually be happy with the PHB ranger now that it won't be worth them spending any more time trying to fix it.) The pertinent bit is around the 27-minute mark: "I actually just approved errata for the three core books earlier today, and there will be some tweaks in a few places actually that I think people will be pleased with that will make it unnecessary to have any kind of alternative fe...

Friday, 21st September, 2018

  • 05:54 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Parmandur in post Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
    Why not? If my local bakery, that produces and sells my favorite bagels, decides to only sell donuts from now on, why can't I say "Hey, you guys stopped making my favorite bagels, what's up with that?" They are certainly within their rights to say "Well, donuts sell better, and we don't really like making bagels, so I guess you're out of luck." And I'm certainly within my rights to respond "Well, I only really liked your bagels, so if you start making them, I'll come back, but otherwise I'll just have to skip bagels." I think Parmandur and @Sacrosanct explained this already, but, to the extent you wish to make this analogy to design, it would be more like this: Your baker has decided to drop bagels, and only make donuts. So, every day, you come in and say, "Hey, you know how you could make those donuts better? By making a donut that has ... let's see ... poppy seed, sesame seeds, onion & garlic flakes, pretzel salt, and pepper on it, and then serving that donut with lox and cream cheese!" Again, you are perfectly within your rights to say the following: a. I don't like donuts, I want you to make bagels instead! b. I like donuts, but I think think you can make better donuts ... like, those crossaint donuts! Where it goes bad is if you ignore what they are doing, and instead insist that they make your donuts like bagels; that just makes everyone miserable. :)

Tuesday, 11th September, 2018


Saturday, 25th August, 2018

  • 05:46 PM - Kobold Stew mentioned Parmandur in post What races are left for D&D to do?
    Parmandur has a good list. Gnolls. Mearls has, I think, been clear that gnolls are not going to be officially playable in 5e (link). It seems arbitrary to me, but the presentation of the race in VGTM has to my eye ruled out the possibility of them walking this back. I'll note that the results of the survey Parmandur linked to (here) are not entirely conisistent with what Mearls says about Gnolls. Half-giants are excluded because the designers have worked not to allow any playable race larger than Medium sized. Pixies are excluded for the converse reason: there are not going to be any races smaller than Small.

Saturday, 12th May, 2018

  • 11:36 PM - Demetrios1453 mentioned Parmandur in post List of monsters confirmed in Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes
    Via Twitter we now have the Monsters by challenge rating. And also the answer to which Lords of the Nine are in this book. Heavy spoilers. 97430 So the answer to how many lords of the Nine is one. Only Zariel is in the book. Also a few strange things like one of the monsters being an Oinoloth. Edit Source: https://twitter.com/fistfullofdice/status/995054993328820224 Very interesting! Definitely leaked far before we had surmised - usually we would have a few more days yet! Besides that surprising news on the lack of Lords of the Nine (which indicates they are holding most of them back for a later book - unless @Parmandur is right, and there are some at the top of the next page), some other observations: White and black abishai have maintained their previous power level, but green, blue, and red are much higher. We had a hint of this from the Roll 20 preview showing the blue abishai CR, but we didn't know they would split them this way. Derro made it in, like I assumed they would. There's a nice range of duergar, and even more drow variants than we knew about. Really, running a drow-centric campaign from 1 - 20 would easily be possible with little in the way of any CR gaps. I, too, wonder what an "oinoloth" is. If it were the traditional Oinoloth, it should have a much higher CR, as being lord of the Wasting Tower traditionally gave one almost god-like powers. Beyond that, pretty much all the yugoloths I assumed would appear do show up, other than, oddly, the piscoloth. Same with the demons and devils, those I felt were missing from the MM have pretty much all made appearances here. Sadly, other t...

Wednesday, 9th May, 2018


Sunday, 21st January, 2018

  • 05:18 PM - Corpsetaker mentioned Parmandur in post Kate Welch is WotC's New D&D Designer
    Parmandur You do realize the laugh button doesn't work in that way anymore. You look silly trying to "laugh with" a post that the original author wasn't laughing to begin with. You are giving me XP and making yourself look silly.


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...

Friday, 19th April, 2019

  • 10:50 PM - eyeheartawk quoted Parmandur in post Would you rather we get more setting neutral content than adventures?
    D&D Beyond is already better than any print option, if that sort of simplicity is desired. Apparently, people who buy the books don't mind: I haven't found this to be an issue in practice. If I didn't have to buy books that I already own over again on that platform I would agree, though with the caveat that some people don't want to use a computer/tablet at the table. And of course people buy the books. If you want more player options, are you not going to buy Xanathar's because it's not as a conveniently organized option as it could have been? Of course not. None of these things change the fact that the game would be better if you had to lug less books around.

Wednesday, 17th April, 2019

  • 07:22 PM - jmucchiello quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    Nothing in the Kickstarter pledge is "profit," it is all contractually obligated to be used in producing something. Profit comes later. Then EVERY single KS project in the history of KS is in violation of the terms of service since every KS project has allocated profit that it kept for the creator. I think you are misreading the FAQ which is about charity incorrectly. The FAQ says very little about the actual use of funds except this: While nonprofits are welcome to launch projects on Kickstarter, projects can't promise to raise funds to donate to a charity or cause. Funds raised on Kickstarter must go towards facilitating the project outlined by the creator on the project page. Profit is part of "facilitating the project" because as the first sentence says "nonprofits are welcome" but it wouldn't be phrased that way if nonprofits were the default. For-profit endeavors are the default and profit is a valid use of KS funds. Also, please explain how profit comes later in the typical...
  • 04:02 PM - jmucchiello quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    According to Kickstarter, it can't. Realistically, sure, people can do all sorts of scummy things. No, it doesn't say you can't put it in the bank. If it did, no one would use KS. You are allowed to make a profit. Profits go in the bank.
  • 09:39 AM - Iry quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    No, they cannot use the funds for another project.I’m just imagining a Critical Role Calendar. ”Wow! We hit 20 million in funding! What the heck do we do with the extra?!” ”We add a 13th month, every page is gold foil, and we include a video of Chris Avellone seductively turning the pages.”
  • 06:31 AM - jmucchiello quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    Profits once they produce a project, sure, but per the Terms of Service Kickstarter funds can only go to the project in question: "Funds raised on Kickstarter must go towards facilitating the project outlined by the creator on the project page." https://www.kickstarter.com/rules There is nothing in there that says excess funds must be frivolously applied to the creation of the project beyond the price of the project's creation. Ongoing concerns of the company behind the project is a perfectly normal place for excess funds to end up. Keeping the lights on and the employees paid is part of fulfilling the project goals.
  • 01:16 AM - Morrus quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    No, they cannot use the funds for another project. They can use any profit in any way they wish.
  • 12:49 AM - gyor quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    No, they cannot use the funds for another project. What do they do with access profits then? As long as they deliver what they promised, the left over money is theirs to use as they wish, they aren't going to refund it.
  • 12:01 AM - jgsugden quoted Parmandur in post Critical Role's Kickstarter Breaks $1,000,000 In About An Hour!
    No, they cannot use the funds for another project.They may not directly do this, but there are a lot of ways to indirectly fund season 2 with these proceeds. Although I like Critical Role for what it specifically is, what excites me most about this project is that it will be a real D&D game turned into animation rather than being one of those hald hearted attempts at it that is scared to embrace the game.

Monday, 15th April, 2019


Sunday, 14th April, 2019


Wednesday, 10th April, 2019

  • 08:18 PM - lkj quoted Parmandur in post New D&D Adventure Reveal On 17th May at 'The Descent'
    Pretty sure that was Driz'zt novel related. Wouldn't shock me to see D1-3 and U redone, but probably not months after Ghosts of Saltmarsh. Ah. Well. There you go. I haven't read a Driz'zt novel in a long time. And I agree that D series is probably not next up on their docket. AD
  • 08:11 PM - MNblockhead quoted Parmandur in post Sneak Peek At Ghosts of Saltmarsh Maps
    Actually, it was mapped in the 3.5 DMG2, which this map is based off: dunno what the orientation there was. Google Maps is oriented so that the top is the direction my car is moving by default, not by North. And I have seen many, many maps on atlases using alternate set-ups. That is only when you are in navigation mode. If you are simply searching for a location or directions from point A to B, the orientation of Google Maps is always the same in Satellite and Map modes. North is on the top of your screen, and south is on the bottom. While North at top may be "new" when looking across history, it is safe to say the that for pretty much everyone living today, the vast majority of maps they have seen put north at top to point that this is expected. Will increasing use of mobile navigation devices and apps change this? Maybe. But if you are dealing with a static image on print or in a VTT, it behooves the creators to use N-at-top orientation to increase ease of use for most customers.

Tuesday, 9th April, 2019

  • 04:57 AM - Whizbang Dustyboots quoted Parmandur in post It's Not A Cartoon, But What Is It?
    "Incredibly" might be an exaggeration. It's certainly a trope better suited to something like Fate... It was the number two superhero game until TSR waded in. Granted, that almost certainly put it at the bottom of the top 10 of old school games, but it was successful enough for the creators and publisher to battle over the legal rights decades later.
  • 04:52 AM - trancejeremy quoted Parmandur in post It's Not A Cartoon, But What Is It?
    "Incredibly" might be an exaggeration. It's certainly a trope better suited to something like Fate... I played V&V back in the day, but I think it's popularity was quickly usurped by Champions and Marvel Super-Heroes, both of which I played more. There's something of an urban gaming legend about someone doing that in GURPs (besides statting yourself, you'd have all the stuff you had with you when the game start), and one guy in the group learning about it before hand, so he brought along all sorts of crap, including a crossbow. But the first D&D novel, Quag Keep, was based on the same premise. In that, some the best D&D players in the country received mysterious miniatures in the mail and that transported them to Greyhawk. Sorta.

Monday, 8th April, 2019

  • 06:29 PM - Gradine quoted Parmandur in post Hidden
  • 06:20 PM - DMZ2112 quoted Parmandur in post New D&D Adventure Reveal On 17th May at 'The Descent'
    Maybe the missing arm is significant: time will tell. You are just making s**t up, now. Ravnica us not a "new setting" in the way Stewart was talking about, a wholecloth from the ground up fresh start. It's an adaptation of an existing property. This is not the first time I have heard this chestnut, and it is actually more disheartening to me that anyone finds it acceptable. If Stewart was using weasel words to this degree, it says something much darker about the marketing machine at WotC than even I want to believe. Ravnica is a new D&D setting. Full stop. Stewart either lied outright to maintain spin, or he is comfortable treating the fans like they are idiots. I pray it is the former. I'm pretty sure Stewart keeps up the Spelljammer teases because he wants Spelljammer to be a thing, and getting people talking about it is playing the long game. Yeah, well, I know he's a marketing guy doing marketing.
  • 06:01 PM - DMZ2112 quoted Parmandur in post New D&D Adventure Reveal On 17th May at 'The Descent'
    The Angel is descending to eight outstretched arms, which is numerically suggestive of the fallen Angel Zariel becoming the Ninth Archdevil after her crusade into the Nine Hells. Last week, mere days before this was announced, Perkins gave a rundown of the Nine Hells on Dragon Talk and for no discernable reason gave an extensive profile of Zariel, her personal history, her motivation, and her goals. When @GarrettKP asked Greg Tito if this was Zariel, Tito got dodgy. Pretty sure this is Zariel. There are only seven arms in the smaller image, which seems like an odd change to make if the picture was numerologically significant. Note that the smaller image is not just a crop, it's a digital recomp. And Tito didn't get 'dodgy' in response to Garrett's tweet, he got rude. I'm as big a fan of speculation as the next geek when it is warranted, but this recent tendency to just create evidence wholesale where there is none makes me uncomfortable. We might be getting a planar setting book. There...

Thursday, 4th April, 2019

  • 05:26 PM - Akodoken quoted Parmandur in post A Look At The D&D Acquisitions Inc. Book
    Yup, Omin Dran (Jerry's PC) is a minor character in one of Ed Greenwood's novels, and Perkins has stated that AI is canon on multiple occasions, and deciding canon is part of his job description: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Omin_Dran People put too much stock in "canon" in TTRPGs. It really doesn't mean squat at the game table where the DM and the players define the reality of their game. That's one of the beautiful and unique things about this hobby. Chris Perkins, whom I have an immense amount of respect for, can say it all he wants to. If we don't accept it at the game table where we interface with that world and make it our own then his input doesn't amount to anything. As for my group, AI has no place in our Forgotten Realms and that is the only "canon" that matters to us. :) That said, I will let this thread go. I don't want to troll those who will enjoy this product and I have no desire to harass the lovers of AI. Love what you love. :D

Tuesday, 2nd April, 2019

  • 01:09 PM - Aebir-Toril quoted Parmandur in post A Look At The D&D Acquisitions Inc. Book
    The people in charge of Forgotten Realms canon say Acquisitions Inc. is canonical, and the Creator of the setting treats Acquisitions, Inc. as canonical and includes them in a canonical novel. Not sure how much more canon something even could be, if you are into that sort of thing. Wait, really? I was unaware of that. Furthermore, I tend to be a bit silly before I've had adequate caffeine. :p
  • 01:28 AM - Aebir-Toril quoted Parmandur in post A Look At The D&D Acquisitions Inc. Book
    Having been made canon: been years since that ship sailed. It has? Just because the designers wanted to change FR?


Parmandur's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites