Recent content by Branduil

Oh, they keep the name for a reason, make no mistake. Although their name gives them a horrific reputation with most normal people, the kind of people who actually hire them want that reputation. The corporations who hire the Pinkertons want the unions and other targets to be terrified of what...

You're right, I might have been unfair to liches. For all I know some might have a healthy respect for labor rights, unlike strikebreakers.

"Oh so the guy who used to work for a lich hired some of the lich's minions, and we're supposed to think this is a bad thing?"

There is really no way to justify hiring the PINKERTONS to harass someone who got some of your product early. Obviously people will still try, but come on.

I would honestly be okay with that. While the concerns about overpowered combos is valid, I would counter with 2 points: 1. This would also make it easier for devs to identify overly good or bad subclasses, since now every class would have access to the good ones. 2. It would be a buff for...

A Ranger that's actually good and fun to play!

It wouldn't be D&D anymore if the stealth rules were well-written

No, of course not. I am suggesting that there's a sizeable number of D&D fans who are anti-furry, that there is overlap between furry and queer culture (and similarly overlap between anti-furry and anti-queer arguments), and that some of the reaction to Ardlings is due to this factor. It's...

I mean I think there's a spectrum of conservatism. Obviously WotC is not going to try to appeal to the kind of toxic, extreme people who think that different skin tones existing is "woke" or anything like that. But there is a kind of "mushy middle" where people are fine with "inclusive gaming"...

Well, in earlier surveys their support was still high enough to keep them, so I think something did change there. It's quite obvious some people didn't like them, it's not like the Aardling opponents were shy to express their opposition. So yes, my supposition is that what changed is that as a...

So I guess with the OGL debacle, the Aardling shows WotC is going to lean even harder into the desires of grognards that D&D can never change or evolve too much or too fast. It's a shame, but I've already realized D&D isn't really for me any more.

Ultimately, it comes down to 3 things: There is no inherent benefit, to the player or society at large, to making Charisma explicitly based on appearance. There are inherent negatives to society at large by linking Charisma and appearance, however minor. There is nothing stopping any individual...

I don't know about bringing back attacking saving throws, but I would definitely favor bringing back Fort/Ref/Will for a variety of balance reasons.

I revoked the OGL 1.0a 35 minutes ago

That does seem weird. How are things even written in the SRDs? "Generic Monster #543"?