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.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
BoVD Thoughts
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="Furn_Darkside" data-source="post: 369942" data-attributes="member: 210"><p>First- I will say again what I have said from the beginning- wait and see. Wait and see. Wait and see. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think you are painting by too broad of a brush- especially with B.</p><p></p><p>A- I don't care what people think, but I can appreciate those concerned that went through the worst of the d&d hysteria of the 80's.</p><p></p><p>B- I think the material is stupid, but I am not opposed to it being published. I am concerned about its future impact on D&D. </p><p></p><p><strong>If</strong> such material as corpsebond was an example of what is to come in BoVD, then I would be very disappointed. It is stupid immature splatterpunk.</p><p></p><p>Yes, I know a different person wrote that section then who wrote BoVD, but the magazine and the book share the same warning. If the material in the book is just DM tips on how to run villians, then the warning would be just a gimmick. If it is not a gimmick, then we have an example of what the publishers believe is "mature audiance only".</p><p></p><p>But- I have read MC's thread on his board and trust him from his past books that this will not contain such stupidity (still- wait and see, wait and see, wait and see!).</p><p></p><p>So- what is my concern as a side-group of B? </p><p></p><p>I am concerned about MC's comment about how that powers-that-be wanted him to make the book more "vile".</p><p></p><p>I have already voiced my concern over the direction Dragon magazine is going- and I would be horrified to see all of d&d begin to go in that direction due to great sales of BoVD. </p><p></p><p>The powers-that-be taking the sales as a sign to go ahead and drive d&d to the same low-brow "evil is kewl" attitude I find repugnant in the WW's WoD products.</p><p></p><p>Again- I don't want to see the book censored (I must be missing the posts that are even calling for this..). What I don't want to see is the core of the game I greatly enjoy being pushed in direction I don't enjoy. Let a d20 publisher push that boundry.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is not a good argument- villian characters use the same mechanics as non-villian mechanics. MC has made it clear it will have new options, but nothing in there is "essential". People have been playing villians well before this book was even known to be on the table.</p><p></p><p>I also invite you to look at many of the splatbooks- most of them are hero/villian neutral. They have plenty of options in there for villians- or else I have been foolish in using a lot of it for my villians.</p><p></p><p>FD</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Furn_Darkside, post: 369942, member: 210"] First- I will say again what I have said from the beginning- wait and see. Wait and see. Wait and see. I think you are painting by too broad of a brush- especially with B. A- I don't care what people think, but I can appreciate those concerned that went through the worst of the d&d hysteria of the 80's. B- I think the material is stupid, but I am not opposed to it being published. I am concerned about its future impact on D&D. [B]If[/B] such material as corpsebond was an example of what is to come in BoVD, then I would be very disappointed. It is stupid immature splatterpunk. Yes, I know a different person wrote that section then who wrote BoVD, but the magazine and the book share the same warning. If the material in the book is just DM tips on how to run villians, then the warning would be just a gimmick. If it is not a gimmick, then we have an example of what the publishers believe is "mature audiance only". But- I have read MC's thread on his board and trust him from his past books that this will not contain such stupidity (still- wait and see, wait and see, wait and see!). So- what is my concern as a side-group of B? I am concerned about MC's comment about how that powers-that-be wanted him to make the book more "vile". I have already voiced my concern over the direction Dragon magazine is going- and I would be horrified to see all of d&d begin to go in that direction due to great sales of BoVD. The powers-that-be taking the sales as a sign to go ahead and drive d&d to the same low-brow "evil is kewl" attitude I find repugnant in the WW's WoD products. Again- I don't want to see the book censored (I must be missing the posts that are even calling for this..). What I don't want to see is the core of the game I greatly enjoy being pushed in direction I don't enjoy. Let a d20 publisher push that boundry. This is not a good argument- villian characters use the same mechanics as non-villian mechanics. MC has made it clear it will have new options, but nothing in there is "essential". People have been playing villians well before this book was even known to be on the table. I also invite you to look at many of the splatbooks- most of them are hero/villian neutral. They have plenty of options in there for villians- or else I have been foolish in using a lot of it for my villians. FD [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
BoVD Thoughts
Top