Search results

Yes, we have mentioned several times that the setting is modern, without really explaining what we mean by that. It’s not a unique feature, but it is one that makes it different from a couple of the alternatives that have been mentioned.

It was clearly an experiment, and one that ended up costing the company a huge amount of money. I doubt the bean-counters will be interested in excuses about materials or the weather. Even without the disastrous printing, it was a very marginal product, since printing a slim hardback doesn’t...

I don't recall that in any of the original stories, but it did have Atlantis and other more advanced (but decadent) lost civilisations, including a lost city that closely resembles a 20th century shopping mall.

NB when did D&D add Tolkienesque races to the game? So far as I can see early D&D was based on Weird Tales, with little input from the British fantasy.

Now, the way I would use these creatures (and the way they are used in official publications) is very different. The nothic is an insane former wizard. They are generally more interested in talking than fighting, in a Gollum/Ben Gunn deranged way. WotC also use them in this way, in Reach for the...

That’s not really one I would rate high in that category. It’s a portal fantasy, in that the protagonist starts out with amnesia in the present day real world, and part of the plot involves firearms with magic ammo, but it’s no more “advanced” than 20th century automatic rifles, and magic is...

I don’t think “we don’t play at that level” is something WotC can really admit to.

In order to do that, they would have to know how to do that. WotC aren’t holders of secret lore. If the experienced players on this forum don’t know how to do it neither does WotC.

I think the slim hardback is a technical failure. Printer: “sure we can do that, no problem!” WotC: “shouldn’t a book be - flat?” And the slim paperback proved an economic failure. I think WotC see online only as the way forward for anything not big enough for a full size hardback.

Personally, I would rather have no adventures in setting books. If I want an adventure I’ll buy an adventure, if I want a setting I’ll buy a setting.

I think he will set out to make something better, using what he learned from Eberron.

I’ve encountered quite a few speaking nothics as a player and as a DM, and they always speak Common, so I think the OP is right, a rule that is generally overruled is a bad rule.

Yeah but I like flashy VFX more than I like earnest sincerity or gritty realism in my RPGs.

Nope, I like both. I don’t think Tolkien is a good fit for the silly shenanigans that RPG players generally get up to though.

The rest of the underdark is a long straight tunnel. It’s probably too draughty. That’s the thing, slipping through is exactly how you would handle these in 5e, you could complete it in a few minutes.

And if you want to buy a generic fantasy setting this is probably the best you can get through DDB. I think the thread has already covered that. Not just my opinion.

Same reason as you would purchase any other. And this one better written than WotC 5e setting books (don't know about the new FR books though). Especially well done is exactly what it is.

The problem with your criticisms isn't that they are falsifiable, it's that they make no sense. It sounds more like Matt Mercer ran over your dog.