D&D 5E Does anyone who got an mm at Gencon want to offer up spoilers to us?

[Iosue]

The succubus/incubus drawings look like Twilight fan art.

I don't disagree, and yet I'm not entirely sure it's inappropriate.

 

[gyor]

The Incubus I can kind of see, although I see him more as a 80's style singer ala Billy Idol.

The Succubus is a super cutie, hot outfit, and boots, first d&d succubus picture that I really loved.

 

[SigmaOne]

Do giants have something cool aside from big hits and rocks?

Their B-sides are pretty good too. And they don't just rock, they also roll!

 

[Quickleaf]

I'm writing an adventure that calls for a shadow fiend of some kind.

Could anyone check the challenge rating on shadow demons for me?

 

[pemerton]

When the source material for a given topic is relatively shallow, I feel it behooves you to consider it all, especially when the intent of the edition of the honor the game's games history, settings, and be more inclusive. The caveat being the exclusion -if absolutely necessary- of sources that either made continuity gaffes out of ignorance or mistake, or since 5e is returning to a version of the Great Wheel cosmology, paying secondary attention to something like the 4e material that IMO is a side-branch of the AD&D family along with Basic D&D and withing a continuity of its own. Incorporate those elements that don't disrupt previous 1e/2e/3e material as that continuity evolved, but by no means feel beholden to it on the same level.

If the goal is to be inclusive, I'm not sure why WotC would favour material that has been mostly out of print for 15 or so years (2nd ed AD&D Planescape) over material that presumably is familiar to a good chunk of the customer base to whom they are hoping to sell (4e).

You may regard 4e as a "side-branch" that you prefer to ignore. I think it would be a commercial error for WotC to do the same.

 

[bogmad]

If the goal is to be inclusive, I'm not sure why WotC would favour material that has been mostly out of print for 15 or so years (2nd ed AD&D Planescape) over material that presumably is familiar to a good chunk of the customer base to whom they are hoping to sell (4e).

You may regard 4e as a "side-branch" that you prefer to ignore. I think it would be a commercial error for WotC to do the same.

I'd dare to say that most of the 4e players outside of those inclined to post to forums are largely unaware or indifferent to most the lore differences, whereas those lost players from other additions are more inclined to dislike or be confused by some of the greater changes. Speaking as someone who only got back into the game with 4th edition after childhood memories of 2e, the 4e lore was never the editions largest selling point.

It seems to me that wotc went through a lot of trouble to figure out what the majority of players preferred.
You may disagree with how they came to their conclusions, but if the 4e changes are in fact your preference in lore, sadly it looks like you're in the minority.
Still it is heartening to see that they went through the trouble to make compromises where possible. The new succubus free-agent status is one instance that seems to work well for a lot of folks.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'm writing an adventure that calls for a shadow fiend of some kind.

Could anyone check the challenge rating on shadow demons for me?

*cough-monster-sorter-cough*

http://mouseferatu.com/index.php/news/august-20-2014-another-dd-gift/

Check for yourself, my friend.

 

[Tormyr]

Daaaaaang. Mouseferatu is right, 5E liches do not screw around. No more of this "11th-level wizard, but more durable" stuff. This guy is CR 21 and boy howdy, does he ever earn that rating.

My players are going to rue the day I get my hands on this book.

Yeah, I threw a lich into Legacy of the Crystal Shard. He kept on popping up and attacking the adventurers because his phylactery was a ring of protection they took with them. He ended up being the comic relief for how much the smacked around the playtest lich.

 

[Lawngnome4hire]

If the goal is to be inclusive, I'm not sure why WotC would favour material that has been mostly out of print for 15 or so years (2nd ed AD&D Planescape) over material that presumably is familiar to a good chunk of the customer base to whom they are hoping to sell (4e).

You may regard 4e as a "side-branch" that you prefer to ignore. I think it would be a commercial error for WotC to do the same.

Lore is interchangeable. If you don't like what they're doing with it, change it.

 

[Quickleaf]

*cough-monster-sorter-cough*

http://mouseferatu.com/index.php/news/august-20-2014-another-dd-gift/

Check for yourself, my friend.

Whoa! Thanks Ari! Would XP ya, but the Computer says I like you too much already