D&D Movie/TV D&D: Honor Among Thieves Open Discussion [Full Spoilers]


log in or register to remove this ad

Hmmm, Shadowdark uses a similar magic system and could use a druid class

rogue maybe. not a commoner. Not as a Harper.
I know that Elminster was mentioned as an ancestor, but was it specifically stated that he was this particular ancestor?
No it was not. In fact he called the ancestor his Great Grandfather and gave him a name but I can't remember it.
 

rogue maybe. not a commoner. Not as a Harper.
Deciding he has a bunch of class levels and a specific subclass because he's a Harper when he doesn't do anything is silly.

He's a Harper for the same reason Doric turns into an owlbear: because it's cool.

There is literally nothing in the actual movie that suggests that Edgin is anything other than a level zero commoner.
 
Last edited:


no there are several scenes in the movie that if you try to conceptualize what he does as a skill check the target number would be stupid.

but that doesn't display well in a movie. For instance the first time he interrupted the pardon board most likely that would have resulted in anyone else being removed from the room. What is the skill check to naughty word 2 high level bureacrats for 10 minutes while you wait for the guy you need to carry out your plan to show up? I think it would be stupidly high.
 


Oh! I don't think that the one who appeared in the visions was Elminster. I got the impression it was an intermediate ancestor.
Yeah, the sound mix made it hard to hear, but he didn't say "Elminster." When this gets released on digital/DVD, we'll see what the captions say, but if they were going to bring in Elminster, they would have made sure we knew, since they waved a flag back and forth every time they mentioned other important IP.
 

there's always Ed Greenwood - he's only 63 last I checked, which is almost horrifyingly young compared to what I assumed. I suspect he may be a little too naughty for them to want to draw attention to though - even though AFAIK it's always been in a progressive way (but er... still more progressive than society allows given how fond he is of polyamory
Ed's wife died last year, they were married for 45 years.
Suggesting that because he wrote about all sorts of open and varied relationships in the realms, that it reflects upon himself as a man,
for you to say he was "naughty" and fond of polyamory... that is a rather disingenuous and more than a little weird take.
And no "at least in his art" does not release you from what are trying to foist upon a real person in a real world. Grow up.
That would be similar to accusing George R.R. Martin of enjoying SA.
 

Ed's wife died last year, they were married for 45 years.
Suggesting that because he wrote about all sorts of open and varied relationships in the realms, that it reflects upon himself as a man,
for you to say he was "naughty" and fond of polyamory... that is a rather disingenuous and more than a little weird take.
And no "at least in his art" does not release you from what are trying to foist upon a real person in a real world. Grow up.
That would be similar to accusing George R.R. Martin of enjoying SA.
I don't think @Ruin Explorer was saying Ed was a bad guy because of what he expresses in his art. You are bringing that to the table yourself.
 


Remove ads

Top