Search results

You’re right I didn’t! While I recognize your viewpoint as completely valid, I don’t share it. Halflings aren’t unsatisfying to me in the slightest. I’m glad they’re in the game in all their poorly defined mundanity. The blanker the slate, the better for my purposes (within reason). Halflings...

Not too tangential at all. Perhaps I should have said “incidentally about gaming” instead. My point was that the claim advanced by some that discussion of trans issues/discrimination in gaming is itself a tangent is wrong. This thread is primarily about trans issues/discrimination and it’s...

This topic is about how numerous companies and individuals are distancing themselves from EGG Jr. over political statements he made; it’s inherently a political topic that is only tangentially related to gaming. edit: since umbran misunderstood my post and invited me to leave the topic, allow...

“Yes” (I think the joke is that you tell him he’s “blogging”, so he’s got somewhere to rant, but in actuality it’s just a word doc stored locally, so he can’t continue to embarrass himself). EDIT: or maybe not, I don’t know. EDIT2: I was right! Apparently, it’s a The Office reference.

My takeaway from your post: D&D is a “big tent” game, and not everything is for everybody—and that’s ok! I DM a lot, and I love the more “generic” player lineages, halflings included. The more “out there” lineages are not really my cup of tea. What you would characterize as interesting, I would...

“This officially licensed jewelry items...” Yeah, doesn’t exactly scream “official document”, does it?

I don’t think pukunui was implying there was. Here’s how I imagine it might have gone down: “Let’s include a certificate of authenticity to bolster the perception that this prop replica is a rare and valuable collectible, thereby allowing us to charge a premium.” “Sounds good, but let’s make...

I find that people who go for 3D often start drifting into 2D as the night or campaign drags on. I know that I do, mostly because it takes less energy and because it’s more comfortable. My characters all start to look like exaggerated versions of myself (with a couple of quirks layered on top)...

Abjuration for blue, surely? C-c-c-counterspell! Although, abjuration also works for white (protection from evil is very circle of protection-ish). That aside, I’m not sure I get where you’re coming from or what you’re trying articulate. As someone who’s played a lot of d&d and a lot of mtg...

I answered Confundus because I felt neither of the other options reflect my intended use. I intend to mine it both for crunch and for fluff, and possibly crib some stuff from the mini-adventure as well. I do not intend to use the Strixhaven setting as-is, however.

It is generic, that’s the point. They’ve already got a generic setting so they need a hook to justify another one.

Apologies if this has already been covered in this thread and I missed it; who did they fire and what did he do to spark the lawsuit? edit: nvm! It was already covered in this thread. My bad!

Yes, but usually there’s nothing in the update that sways me one way or the other. It’s mostly a due diligence thing, just to make sure I know as much as possible before pledging.

Or, maybe people read your explanation and still didn’t like it? Just because you tried to anticipate a particular reaction and forestall it doesn’t mean people didn’t read your post if they nonetheless have that reaction. It’s not unthinking just cause you don’t like it!

It’s true, Canadian culture is a global scourge! Maple syrup, frigid cold and saying sorry? As a Canadian, I feel compelled to apologize. In all seriousness, you’d probably have been better off restricting this to English language TV. You’d have gotten much less pushback. Excluding British TV...

Off the list for being Canadian! Not allowed! :p

A press release vaguely promising "modularity" (a nebulous concept that could mean a lot of different things), and a press release advertising the inclusion of character creation (a much more discrete concept–either you can create characters or you can't) are not at all comparable. I think it's...

Without getting into specifics, the long and short of it is that copyright cannot be extended indefinitely in the US, regardless of whether the work was published before or after 1978.

Your knowledge of US copyright law is not as accurate as you think it is. Here’s what the US copyright office has to say on the matter: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-duration.html

I had a feeling :)