Search results

On a bookshelf in Limbo, the books are in a random order. On a bookshelf in the Far Realm, fish and melted candles, and the color green tells you what to think

It's even worse when you realize troglodyte literally means "cave dweller," yet some random clan of jungle-dwelling lizardfolk has a stronger connection to elemental earth than any troglodyte.

hides file containing homebrew Spelljammer-Planescape-Ravenloft mashup/reboot Nothing to see here. Carry on, folks.

Designers: "It would be cool if the Forgotten Realms had a nation with dragon-riders!" Ormpur: "We're right here. A city-state of dragon-riders for hundreds of years. A dragon's flight away from Calimshan. No? Okay, just shoe-horn some redundant tropes into Cormyr then. That's fine. We're in...

One benefit to providing Fey counterparts of certain Humanoid creatures is the addition of more verisimilitude to the default "D&D Multiverse" campaign setting mentioned in the core rules. When the setting narrative claims certain creatures have an association with the Feywild, the game...

I'd say the messaging is weaker than the mechanic. The designers chose to use, "Your PC has lost their feyness," as their messaging for the creature type change. As far as I'm concerned, that's a weak way to frame what they're doing. The designers could have instead said, "There are plenty of...

Between the recent holidays and some ongoing distractions at my day job, I haven’t had a chance to update this thread for a few weeks now. Thankfully, I’ve found time since my last post to make some progress on the book. Here’s a brief status report: I’ve changed the working title to the...

In fairness to Curse of Strahd, creating the false impression that you have agency but not actually giving you the option to leave is probably the most on-point thing a Ravenloft module could do.

The 2e Monstrous Compendium entry for maedars explained the reason for their petrification reversal powers. It was a hunting strategy. A medusa would petrify and shatter a victim, and a maedar would then turn the chunks of stone into edible chunks of meat.

Now that gnolls are Fiends, one can presumably play a tiefling of gnoll descent.

D&D slots stopped being D&D after the 2nd iteration. 3rd iteration is a video-gamey superhero slot machine with none of the gritty realism of old-school D&D slots.

We don't seem to define basic terms like "slavery" and "good neighbor" in the same way. I don't want to get into semantics, so I'll bow out of this discussion now.

If one wants a reputation for helping others, one has to help others. That isn't slavery. That's someone willfully setting a goal and actively pursuing it. One could just as easy decide the benefit of a good reputation isn't worth the effort involved in building a reputation and willingly choose...

There's no such thing as forcing someone to be altruistic. Altruism is defined by the intent of the person helping others. If someone is forced to help others without a choice, they have no agency and thus no intent, selfless or otherwise.

If Muscular Neutral is Muscular because it's trying to balance Law and Chaos, it has no reason to prefer NG or NE. If CE is dominant and its strongest non-Chaotic rival is NG, Muscular Neutral would ally with NG. If LG is dominant and its strongest non-Lawful rival is NE, Muscular Neutrals would...

It's challenging if we assume the thought experiment is talking about True Neutral, specifically. If we're asking why Lawful Neutral would oppose certain Good factions and why Chaotic Neutral would oppose certain other Good factions, it's fairly easy. Actually, if we assume True Neutral doesn't...

To recap, my current understaning of the thought experiment is this: Premise 1: Evil is harming, killing, or oppressing others. Premise 2: Good is selflessly helping others. Premise 3: It's possible for Good to win with no harmful consequences. Premise 4: If Good wins, Evil acts are prohibited...

Thanks for reposting that. I missed it the first time. I'll contemplate that premise and see if there's anything I can contribute to the thought experiment.

Okay, this sounds like a workable definition of Good winning. In a world where Good has won, all members of society chill out and help one another live their lives. The victory condition for Good is the establishment of this entirely altruistic society in perpetuity, without end. Using that...

I'd be interested in engaging with the premise of the thread, so I have a follow-up question. Since we're assuming Good (altruism and respect for others) can win and defeat Evil (harm and oppression) forever, what does a world where Evil has been defeated look like? I would need a concrete...