Search results

Which is all well and fine, but nothing about that implies that (for example) giant/halfling hybrids come about by mummy halfling and daddy storm giant getting up close and personal. How would that even work? Still sounds weird to me, and more to the point is still too ambiguous. I disagree...

No D&D setting I am aware of has direct crossbreeding of elves and thri-kreen or centaurs and tritons - I do not remember any such hybrids existing but I am prepared to take your word for it that they do, but I would like a citation that they are the result of direct cross-breeding and not...

Does any such world exist? Even if it does, for those categories of beings to be able to interbreed, they must exist as distinct types of beings. Species is as good a word as any (and better than most) for those types. Anyway, most of the alternative suggestions in this thread (regardless of...

Now that you mention it, it is kinda weird. Never noticed that before....

The post you seem to be referring to is this one: But that was not in response to you, and in any case the thread had been talking about what should or should not be done when updating classic settings for a while at that point. In any case, it was nothing to do with your talking about the World...

1. You were talking about the World Axis. 2. The World Axis replaced the Great Wheel* as the cosmology of the 4e version of the Realms (and the default setting, but that was new). 3. This was a significant change to the Realms' cosmology. 4. Therefore, 4e Realms cosmology was inconsistent with...

You were talking about the introduction of a whole new cosmology significantly different from the previous cosmology (or cosmologies in FR's case). Whether you care or not, that is a significant setting inconsistency. And that is the whole point, you decided that your post that was literally...

I am really not. Unless you are saying that "designed as adventuring locations" has nothing to do with playability (in which case, what benefit does it bring exactly?), then it absolutely is "putting setting consistency/fidelity in conflict with playability", which is why @Micah Sweet responded...

Ironically, "the dichotomy exists/does not exist" is also a dichotomy that you are imposing. In a lot of cases, there will be no dichotomy, but playability was given as a reason for some changes in this very thread and in those cases preferences differ. @Micah Sweet did not say that the...

Not in so many words. But it is implicit in the whole line of argument that faithful adaptation = unplayability. Of course it needs to be playable. But since it definitionaly already is, how much you value marginal increases in it compared with how you value other things (like setting...

And yet, RL did get rid of the core and SJ did get rid of the phlogiston and crystal spheres. Every time these things come up, people try to use "but you could be wrong" to deflect, despite their not being in fact wrong. The fact is that they ditched the phlogiston and (EDIT: mostly) crystal...

It is the 21st century. You can know an awful lot about a product without actually reading it. You can, for example, get a very good sense of whether it is worth your time and money to buy and read the book! While I would possibly not go as far as Micah Sweet, I do think that if WotC are...

You keep saying that like your personal preference is objective quality. It isn't.

Where? ("Toril", or possibly "Abeir-Toril", is the FR world, but where is the "Al-" prefix coming from?)

I think there might be confusion caused by varying definitions here. I certainly would not call anyone who bought every book "casual".

"Lying" is a strong term, and no product is a "foregone conclusion" until it is at least announced (arguably not until it is shipped). But I would certainly call it "spin". I can certainly believe that all of the top folks at Paizo's initial impressions of 4e were somewhat negative, but...

I can't speak for newbies (having been playing since the 80s), but I find it rather confusing that a Bonus Action is not a type of Action. Didn't Earthdawn use circles? Anyway, personally I am fond of "valance" as used in Tales of Wyre, but that may be a bit too...specific. I agree with you...

They have said that they are the same, and then considered it no problem for one of them to be killed off while the other is fine. Which to my way of thinking makes them very much not the same to my way of thinking, whatever they say on the matter. I kinda assumed handling issues just like this...

@Maxperson absolutely could misunderstand something (as anyone could), but in this case they are making perfect sense and you are talking gibberish. So maybe re-examine your own understanding first?

I never said anything about a new OGL, I said a new book or SRD. For example, my homebrew setting contains a plane called The Dreaming. The Dreaming is also the name of a (different) plane in A5e's cosmology, and is declared as PI there. If I decided to write my homebrew setting up as a...