Recent content by M.L. Martin

Correct, although a domain named "Markovia" showed up in the 1990 Realm of Terror boxed set. Said boxed set is also where Vallaki was introduced to Barovia.

The HR books and the 2E settings come from an older model of D&D, where the game was considered in part a toolkit for running various types of fantasy games. At least one prolific poster on this thread has criticized this as a bad model for D&D, but I think it can be safely said at least that...

WotC has been pushing "D&D as its own distinctive genre/game/brand" for a quarter-century now, from the design of 3E to the 'make it more distinctive' redesign of 4E, and even the nostalgia push of early 5E. The toolkit element is a dying older segment at most, IMO.

I was starting to wonder if I was the only one looking forward to Twilight Sword. :)

That looks like a collection pretty tightly focused on core characters in both cases (Swindle's the oddball on the TF side).

Which is why there's no real point to playing D&D unless you're looking for that specific blend as interpreted through WotC's lens. (Or if you've sold your soul to WotC and are now committed to furthering the dominion of the One Brand to Rule Them All, I suppose ... ;) )

Unfortunately, they're in storage bins at my parents' house, and show the marks of having been well played with both 40 years ago and now (we've broken them out a few times for my nieces and nephew). There are far more impressive collections and displays online.

I have two Battle Cats (original and 200X) and two Panthors (ibid.). But then, I have everything released as an official Masters of the Universe toy in the US in the original 1980s line. :)

Based on precedent, WotC. :) That's why, when questions of edition come up, I ask if we're using the general hobby's definition of 'edition'--'smooth out the problem spots, fold in the most popular expansion material, maybe tweak a few details'--or the WotC definition--'completely retool the...

That is one model for angels, but not the only one. It's not the one I personally prefer, and I'm willing to say it's inaccurate, but that's pushing the limit of board rules.

Yes, but are they good? The introduction to the Codex seems to take a very hard-edged and cynical view of Celestials.

How does the Codex Exaltum describe Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael?

Yes, but so did everyone else here who got involved with this hobby. ;)

You're going to have a tough time avoiding it if you want to adapt Chronicles, as it's pretty foundational to the premise of the first book at least. And Legends introduces its own issues in that regard, although I seem to be one of the only people who notices it and finds it obnoxious.

True, but you're going to be swimming upstream against the assumed setting and even some of the game's mechanical assumptions, especially if you're playing WotC editions.