I gotta agree. Feel like a tonal disconnect has occurred. I don't think it means anyone made a mistake per se. Sometimes we don't know our expectations until they are violated.
It's better this way. A bad actor is called out. People shun them. Years go by and you wonder if their time out in the cold has changed them, helped them learn to be a polite community member. And then they come out of their bag and you know. It's better to know.
As the first pick shows off, scaling in DnD can sometimes be an impediment because of the face that creatures need to function as 5x5 squares. That dragon is larger than a football field. No way you could place that on your game table.
I am fascinated by the choice of a more "ArdKore" setting conceit for the series. Some of the design aesthetics so far for Daggerheart have read as very cute, and I have to think this is to highlight how the system is more versatile than one might assume.
We all have our own lines. Dealbreakers that might make us shy away from a given product or artist. But like in all things, we are judged by the company we keep. We are judged by what we accept and condone to at least some degree. Yes, there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, but seeing...
I just don't trust people who claim to be just reasonable and wanting to hear people out when we have already heard people out and made reasonable judgements as to the nature of their character. Unless things have changed, why change how you react to such scoundrels? I am very warry of people...
Again, these terms have no clear definitions in the space, but it does lead to an interesting thought.
Is a "normal" campaign one which lasts the entire lifespan of a given group of PCs? Can characters be played over multiple campaigns?
So for me, a campaign can have a singular goal, but has steps towards that goal and can have intermittent side quests that may or may not advance the primary goal.