Search results

Thanks. Also, a shame.

Genuine question (because I simply hadn't seen it confirmed before): when did that retcon happen?

I was thinking more of the whole "we can't kill them if they're pretty" stance. For the rest of it: yes.

Actually, thinking about the Eye of Gruumsh specifically, it probably is true that it was first introduced to allow WotC to sell a miniature, and it's true (IMO) that removing it is a step backwards. I think the thing that was off-base, back in the day, was the objections at its introduction -...

Bear in mind that it's not necessarily the same people complaining both times. And with so many D&D players out there it is probably impossible to make any move that would be universally liked - even making the game entirely free for everyone would have people complaining about job losses or...

To be fair, everything they do is an attempt to monetize D&D IP. Which, also being fair, is exactly as it should be - they're a publicy traded company, so fundamentally they're there to make money.

I was too, back when I first encountered it at age 13 (I think). Time hasn't been kind - I wasn't aware of quite what I was reading until later. That's not the worst experience I've had revisiting stuff from the past. A few years ago I went through all my old homebrew notes, scanned everything...

Very true. I'm not sure that I want to think about what that means regarding drow...

I've been thinking on why 5e puts me in mind of 2nd Ed, and I think the answer may be more in how I've been approaching the game than anything else - with 3.5e I was constantly tinkering with the rules, grappling with the math, and chasing an imaginary perfection, where with 2nd Ed and now 5e...

I'm not a huge fan of most of the 5e adventures (though there are shining exceptions), but one thing they tend to do well is that they tend to open at a single point, then expand out to a "sandbox-y" bit (maybe "theme park" would be better) before coming back together for a conclusion. By...

Amongst other things, I tend to think one of D&D's lore problems is its depiction of the good species - elves and dwarves and the rest are just too sanitised, too nice. I tend to prefer the view that "while we may sometimes look like you, we are not you" (Babylon 5 is fairly obscure, especially...

Um... "Volo's Guide to Monsters" is another book that really hasn't aged well. It's not the absolute worst... but it's not thar off it. That said, I do prefer differentiated depictions of the various peoples, rather than just saying they're all just people and leaving an undifferentiated slop...

It's easier to be excited for a revised version before it comes out, because you can project onto it exactly what you want to see. Lots of people now have the books and have found that WotC haven't made the right changes (though nobody can agree what those are - for some this is a minor update...

I'm not sure I'd categorize the past decade as a "second golden age". This period has vastly eclipsed any previous success of the game, so I think we actually need something better than a golden age. Platinum age, perhaps? :)

That's true, but it does also work if they're intelligent evil creatures - the enemy of my enemy, and all that. There seems sometimes to be an assumption that the PCs could never come to an understanding with any of these forces simply because they're eeeevil, but it's never really been the case.

What I don't get is how they could know those dinos have something useful hidden in their DNA without already having a sample of that DNA with which to work?

I can totally see it, and I can't explain why.

Probably the wisest thing either of us has said in this exchange. 😀 I'm more than happy to leave it there.

No, that is exactly the thing I'm questioning, because the word used was 'literally'. You want me to agree that there are problems with the historic depiction of orcs? Done. You want me to decry the 2014 MM as a particularly bad example of that? Done. But if the claim is that the books...

It does not, however, say that this is universally so - in fact, it details an exception in the form of Obould Many-arrows. Nor does it say they are unredeemable. And the 2014 MM notes that the stated alignment is a default only. The claim is overstated.