D&D 5E Mordenkainens starting to show up in the wild?

[SkidAce]

... If all they heard was how happy the unwashed masses were with their product, ...

Hey I bathe.....

 

[SkidAce]

Splitting hairs, maybe, but I still stand by my statements. I don't want ANY "NPC" Name part of any supplement that is intended to be used by any DM. It ruins the whole feel of the book for me. YMMV.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

Curious...how did you feel about this when it came out?

 

[darjr]

Hey I bathe.....

I’ll beleive it when I se it.


Uh, wait......

 

[Gradine]

Man, here I was hoping someone would spill some beans on contents of the book but instead it's people arguing about halfling proportions... -_-

Welcome to ENWorld! Come for the gaming news, stay for the petty five-year-long arguments

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Thank you again for your response. That is interesting. I would have assumed from your comments that, similar to me, you have no preconceived notion of Mordenkainen precisely because you don't buy into their IP. To me Mordenkainen = John, I have no preconceived notion of who he is. None of the TSR / WotC IP has really ever entered my games (despite being all over the place in 2e). Their unique characters carry no baggage for me. How do they carry baggage for you if, in your distaste for them, you've avoided them as you suggest?

EDIT: On reading the post again it appears your concerned about the perceptions of others, is that it. So, your worried that even if Mordenkainen is some nobody to you, you willget challenged by others in your game. I apologize, but I just don't get it. I'm trying to understand your perspective, but it just seems like such a trivial issue to care about I'm having a hard time finding a point of reference for me to understand. To each his own! Seems to me your missing out on some good content (and games all together for that matter), but I guess it is working for you!

Hmmm. The NPC's of "D&D" (regardless of campaign setting), are effectively all ready established. If I was to introduce them into my campaign...even if it's in the 'correct' world (Greyhawk for Mordenkainen, Elminster from Forgotten Realms, Tika (Tikka?) for Dragonlance, etc)...they would come "pre-cooked" so so say. When one of their names is in the title of the book...how can everything in the book NOT be 'related' to them? Like if some manager at a Starbucks does something supposedly bad, and then suddenly ALL of Starbucks employees of EVERY outlet are seen as "potentially bad" so people boycott Starbucks.

As for it being trivial, I can see that others may find it so. That's cool. Differences is what makes the world go round, right? For me, however, it's just the implied involvement of said NPC in everything in the book. Just instantly makes me see everything in that book, whatever it is, from said NPC's "viewpoint". And that bugs me for some odd reason.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[jgsugden]

FALSE ADVERTISING. With a thread that claims the books are showing in the Wild that jumps to ~150 posts quickly I expect some spoilers.... like if the Guardinals make an appearance or not.

 

[darjr]

Roll20 has it for preorder and there is some info. I don’t know if any of it is new.

https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/compendiumexpansion/4/mordenkainens-tome-of-foes

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Hiya!



Hmmm. The NPC's of "D&D" (regardless of campaign setting), are effectively all ready established. If I was to introduce them into my campaign...even if it's in the 'correct' world (Greyhawk for Mordenkainen, Elminster from Forgotten Realms, Tika (Tikka?) for Dragonlance, etc)...they would come "pre-cooked" so so say. When one of their names is in the title of the book...how can everything in the book NOT be 'related' to them? Like if some manager at a Starbucks does something supposedly bad, and then suddenly ALL of Starbucks employees of EVERY outlet are seen as "potentially bad" so people boycott Starbucks.

As for it being trivial, I can see that others may find it so. That's cool. Differences is what makes the world go round, right? For me, however, it's just the implied involvement of said NPC in everything in the book. Just instantly makes me see everything in that book, whatever it is, from said NPC's "viewpoint". And that bugs me for some odd reason.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

No it's still super petty and trivial and I still can't understand your point of view. It's just so alien and bothered by something so minor. And no that Starbucks analogy does not work because some manager at some starbucks doing something bad would not make me hold a grudge against all Starbucks.

The more you talk about your view on this, the less sense it makes to me. I heavily recommend you actually give one of these books a chance. Rather then just judging them on your strange mindset.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

No it's still super petty and trivial and I still can't understand your point of view. It's just so alien and bothered by something so minor. And no that Starbucks analogy does not work because some manager at some starbucks doing something bad would not make me hold a grudge against all Starbucks.

The more you talk about your view on this, the less sense it makes to me. I heavily recommend you actually give one of these books a chance. Rather then just judging them on your strange mindset.

Yeah its kind of strange, specially the part ''When one of their names is in the title of the book...how can everything in the book NOT be 'related' to them?'' Its like saying: '' I dont buy Dungeons and Dragons books, because the name contain the name Dungeons and the name Dragons and I dont like any of those in my games'' Then when you say to me ''well its just a name, the book is about players that go adventuring against x, y, z there's not dungeons or dragons in all books'', I would still refuse to look a the book because it has two words I dont like on the cover, so it MUST be all about the game must revolve against dragons, right?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*