Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Anyone else laugh at Dangers of the Demonweb?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 4611145" data-attributes="member: 18182"><p>As mentioned above, so shocking you've added yet another post to your negative post-a-thon "laughing" at the D&D Minis product line.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And? As stated in the article, some of the beasties presented are different builds than the ones presented on the stat cards. Some are the same (I haven't checked to see which is which, or the percentage of "new" builds). Usually, we get minis with stat cards based on monsters presented in RPG products, in this case they are just reversing the direction of inspiration.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Uh, no. To any or all of the monsters in the article, you do not need the corresponding mini and/or stat card. Now you are just spreading disinformation. Sure WotC wants to encourage you to purchase lots of minis and the article's purpose is cross-promotional, but to state you "need" the minis is just flat out wrong.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, wrong (not the cards, you). I have no doubt there is errata needed for the various minis and cards in the Demonweb expansion (show me a minis or D&D product that didn't need errata and you win a prize). But the builds on the stat cards are not "wrong". They are simply different builds. You might have noticed that many monsters in the MM and other sources have *gasp* more than one build. Same case here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Interesting leap of logic here. You do know that there were minis introduced in earlier sets that had no 3rd Ed counterpart at the time? WotC has long used the minis line to introduce a handful of new creatures to the game, and IMO this is awesome! Anytime we get new beasties is a good time! It's clear that WotC considers the minis to be part of the 4th Ed line of products and, no, they are not having you "pay" for errata. Again, you are just being a bit silly about the whole thing here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>As the rash of negative D&D minis posts over the past week or so show, you mask your dislike of the the line with "humor" quite poorly. We all get it Joe, you don't like the way WotC handles their miniature line. It's okay. Just come out and say it, and please drop the snark, it's getting tiring.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dire Bare, post: 4611145, member: 18182"] As mentioned above, so shocking you've added yet another post to your negative post-a-thon "laughing" at the D&D Minis product line. And? As stated in the article, some of the beasties presented are different builds than the ones presented on the stat cards. Some are the same (I haven't checked to see which is which, or the percentage of "new" builds). Usually, we get minis with stat cards based on monsters presented in RPG products, in this case they are just reversing the direction of inspiration. Uh, no. To any or all of the monsters in the article, you do not need the corresponding mini and/or stat card. Now you are just spreading disinformation. Sure WotC wants to encourage you to purchase lots of minis and the article's purpose is cross-promotional, but to state you "need" the minis is just flat out wrong. Again, wrong (not the cards, you). I have no doubt there is errata needed for the various minis and cards in the Demonweb expansion (show me a minis or D&D product that didn't need errata and you win a prize). But the builds on the stat cards are not "wrong". They are simply different builds. You might have noticed that many monsters in the MM and other sources have *gasp* more than one build. Same case here. Interesting leap of logic here. You do know that there were minis introduced in earlier sets that had no 3rd Ed counterpart at the time? WotC has long used the minis line to introduce a handful of new creatures to the game, and IMO this is awesome! Anytime we get new beasties is a good time! It's clear that WotC considers the minis to be part of the 4th Ed line of products and, no, they are not having you "pay" for errata. Again, you are just being a bit silly about the whole thing here. As the rash of negative D&D minis posts over the past week or so show, you mask your dislike of the the line with "humor" quite poorly. We all get it Joe, you don't like the way WotC handles their miniature line. It's okay. Just come out and say it, and please drop the snark, it's getting tiring. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Anyone else laugh at Dangers of the Demonweb?
Top