Search results

Agreed. It's really not about whether some piece of media is making people racist. What makes racism flourish -I think- is the act of refusing to learn, refusing to listen, refusing to empathize.

It's everywhere. But ultimately I think the power lies with Wizards, and it seems like they have a real problem having diverse voices in their good ol' boys club. I think time will tell if they can walk the walk. When it comes to minorities in the workplace, getting them in the door is only...

Allrighty then. But Crawford didn't say "Lycanthropy is an exception." He only spoke about the werewolf creature specifically, but not the curse of lycanthropy itself. If we take the idea that 5e does not impose alignment mandates as gospel, then lycanthropy... doesn't... work like that? I am...

That was a point I wasn't clear on. So thanks for that. But at the same time, how can D&D have a rule like that and still maintain that there are no alignment mandates in D&D? If lycanthropy changes the alignment of the person who contracts it, that's an alignment mandate. If it doesn't...

I think someone had mentioned that falling damage should do a percentage of a player's total HP. While I like that idea, the math seems rather fiddly. One thing I was considering is lowering the falling damage to 1d2, but falling damage is multiplied by the falling character's hit dice.

If I am reading this right, then the game doesn't even really prescribe an alignment change for contracting lycanthropy. It just says "If you are going to have your players encounter a werewolf, might I suggest an Evil alignment?" And without an alignment mandate, the threat of lycanthropy is...

Out of curiousity, how is the Tome of Strahd supposed to help the PC's? It's great that they found the truth behind Strahd's sordid past, but I don't know how that helps. Maybe I am being blinded by knowing too much and am failing to see the situation from the PC's perspective...

Achilli is a respected name, so that sounds like a step in the right direction.

So... Werewolves... The traditional werewolf story, with a person getting infected with lycanthropy, once a month turns into a furry murder machine against their will... how does that work in 5th edition? I apologize I do not have my Monster Manual handy.

I pledged about $240 to the Mage: The Ascension 20th anniversary kickstarter. No regrets.

Consider the name of the trope: "Damsel" in distress. Not "Person" in distress. We call it "Damsel" in distress for a reason: because the person in need of rescued is, more often than not, a woman, often of value as a potential romantic partner. A trope is a repeated motif. So if we say that...

Unfortunately I think there is a problem with that yardstick: an unabashed racist will not be made uncomfortable in these situations. In many cases this is the goal of having such edifices or defending them from being removed.

The face of a whale that has a blowhole full of water and knows everyone on board is going to get super wet when he surfaces.

I guess it depends on the factions. D&D presents the factions a bit like character classes, which has the effect of driving a wedge between the players. White Wolf tends to present factions in such a way that there are a number of sub-factions beneath them. You generally wouldn't play Vampire...

I know we have a few White Wolf people on this forum, but the games mostly only get brought up in passing. I am curious what people's reactions have been to 5th edition Vampire and what you think about the possibility of Werewolf and Mage 5th edition.

Many of your questions are answered in the links you quoted as well as elsewhere in this thread.

If you don't believe that racism is a socially pervasive thing that is happening right now, that needs to be handled with active steps, I don't see how I am going to convince you by talking about orcs and dragons. I can't teach you how to spell if you don't believe in letters.

I don't believe you have a stable grasp on the issue at hand, because you lack the basic understanding that racism is culturally pervasive, and that dealing with it is going to take work from everyone. Throwing our hands up in the air and saying "I'm not racist!" or "That's not racist!" gets us...

As you purport to believe in neither, this doesn't appear to be an argument in good faith.

Maybe let those people talk for themselves, rather than talking for them. And won't anyone talk about the dragon question? Why won't anyone talk about the dragon question!?!?