Search results

This was really good, but I didn't include it on my list because it was 2021...I think?

I agree with this, but that ship has sailed. D&D has gotten too big, and Hasbro will do everything they can to squeeze every last dollar out of the property. We've all been reminded that, in the end, Hasbro is no different than any other corporation, and revenue/profits is the bottom line, so...

I pretty much agree with this, although watched TWD a couple more seasons, until Negan showed up and we saw Glen's eyes divorced from his body. At that point I said "enough is enough." My complaint about TLoU is not strongly held...I'm just not feeling the instant love of it that the...

I want a version of D&D that has a "basic" mode that is much more simple (more like C&C, or even simpler), and can be played as such, and an "advanced" mode that has all the bells and whistles you want. I want my complexity dial, gods of all the planes damn it! Basic mode: very simple. Takes...

THE GOOD (Most memorable) Possession (1983) ~ Saw this for the first time - only barely heard of it before. Isabella Adjani is amazing. Everything, Everywhere, All At Once ~ One of those rare films that surprised me, with a bit of a lot of things. It just works. Barbarian ~ This was a nice...

The rules: Must either have first aired in 2022 and/or you first saw it in 2022. Your list will be highly subjective, of course (of course!), so feel free to go about it your own way...maybe they were the most entertaining (to you), the most meaningful (to you), the most well made (iyo), etc...

I found it a bit...meh. It was OK, I like Pedro Pascal, and generally really enjoy post-apocalypse cinema, but it was kind of...bland? Boring? Tepid? It felt like the Walking Dead, but with different specifics. Not much new, nor anything that really stood out. I'll probably continue for another...

Well again, the language is nebulous and includes "conduct." That presumably means anything from a 10-year old tweet that someone at WotC finds problematic to a tipsy remark at GenCon to...well, whatever WotC wants it to mean. But yeah, if I'm Kobold--or any other publisher--I'd be very...

@Ruin Explorer, we're clearly very different with regards to this issue, light years away really, so I'd suggest that we save ourselves (and everyone else) the grief of further discussion on the matter. We agree on some other things, so maybe let's keep our interactions to those topics ;-). Peace.

That was helpful. Here's a quote from the end:

Accusing someone of racism is an easy and cheap way to (try to) discredit them - even if it is entirely unfounded, which in this case it is. I've been reading GH for 25 years, and haven't caught even a tiny whiff of bigotry (except his dislike of close-minded archeologists!) And no, the...

Especially that last sentence. Hmm.

Except it is not that simple or clear. It says they can decide what is "harmful" (etc), and you cannot contest it. Meaning, it is a relatively easy backdoor way for them to revoke the license for someone whenever they choose.

This makes sense. They probably don't care what the OSR does - it is what other film studios do.

Maybe I'm being overly hyperbolic, but does this mean that if Wolfgang Baur makes a "harmful" joke in the office and WotC catches word, they can revoke the OGL from Kobold? I know, it is ridiculous and wouldn't happen, but it seems like it keeps the door open for some ridiculousness.

They're taking one from politicians and Hollywood: masking economic/power reasons with social/activist reasons. Plus, the whole concept of "harmful content" is highly nebulous and subjective.

What's your line of work, if I may ask?

I'm caught on you knowing a lot of racist dudes. As for their tastes, yeah, there's that. Not my sense of GH, though.

I would suggest that the term "misinformation" doesn't apply, especially when we're talking about theories on prehistory. It isn't "misinforming" to share a different view on human origins, because there's no factual account of it. What I find to actually be both unethical and...

You're completely missing the point. Netflix is an entertainment service, and puts out shows that they think people will watch. Hancock is a popular author. Millions of people watch or listen to Joe Rogan. I mentioned Rogan as an example of Hancock being known to many people, and thus giving a...