D&D (2024) Comeliness and Representation in Recent DnD Art

[LesserThan]

TSR been dead for a while dude, not sure if you heard. Been, what, 26 years? 27?

Colin is one who jokingly chose to make this a stretch goal in one of his KS campaigns (I think for Torment: Tides of Numenera). I do think he should have been more prepared to play along with the spirit of the thing, because the first attempt at humour shows he didn't really expect them to hit that level with the KS. As such, only he is responsible for him having to apologise!

Apparently not, that is why there is multiple lawsuits and a 1000 page active thread about TSR.

 

[LesserThan]

Who else would apologize? Michelle Carter? She's sort of still working for WotC.

That video was 11 years ago? WotC owned TSR at that time maybe they should apologize?

Did the book come out before WotC? Can they use that as an excuse?

 

[Charlaquin]

Apparently not, that is why there is multiple lawsuits and a 1000 page active thread about TSR.

Completely different company than the original TSR. They just snatched the trademark out from under the previous holder when he let the registration lapse.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The answer, of course, is to not design literally everything to have the broadest possible appeal.

The nuance here is that it actually depends on how many risks you feel like you can take.

If you need mass appeal, you take relatively few risks.

If you don't need mass appeal, you can take more risks.

At a certain level of expected $, you need mass appeal.

Which is how we get Disney live-action remakes.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Apparently not, that is why there is multiple lawsuits and a 1000 page active thread about TSR.

As @Charlaquin points out, that's a completely different entity. Were you genuinely confused about that?

 

[Charlaquin]

That video was 11 years ago? WotC owned TSR at that time maybe they should apologize?

Did the book come out before WotC? Can they use that as an excuse?

WotC never owned TSR. TSR (the real TSR, not the new embarrassment that Justin LaNasa created) were the original owners of Dungeons and Dragons. WotC is a completely different company, owned by Hazbro, who bought D&D after the original TSR collapsed. In 1997.

 

[MGibster]

I made my current tiefling intersex--or rather, I gave her a cloaca, which is, medically speaking, something different. It was only important as a background element.

Entire campaigns have been predicated on less.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Which is how we get Disney live-action remakes.

Indeed. The sheer level of de-risking in some of those (Pinocchio and Dumbo are particularly dire from that perspective) is kind of staggering and shows a truly profound creative bankruptcy. It's funny because Disney doesn't de-risk new properties or genuinely new movies for extant properties to anywhere even remotely near the degree they did for the universally-dire live-action remakes.

And whilst they've been financially successful for the most part, they're really going to do horrific damage to Disney's reputation longer-term.

The only exception being The Jungle Book, which is actually pretty good, probably better than the original.

 

[LesserThan]

Completely different company than the original TSR. They just snatched the trademark out from under the previous holder when he let the registration lapse.

Neither Jason nor Justin should have been allowed to have it, and I hope failure to take Jason to court costs WotC the trademark, and Justins apparent bankruptcy costs him the ability to maintain it and someone else can buy it and not be a grandma unfriendly word with it.

 

[LesserThan]

As @Charlaquin points out, that's a completely different entity. Were you genuinely confused about that?

No, I was just failing at being funny I guess.