Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tyler Do'Urden" data-source="post: 256042" data-attributes="member: 4601">Re: So it appears unclear still....The cant is great, berk, and I'll slice the bonebox of any cutter who says otherwise!Speaking of killing Elminster- in a game I have coming up, I'm planning to give the players a chance to castrate him... (we'll send one to the Simbul and one to Khelben, press-release style)... ah, when Fight Club goes to the realms... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But yeah, although there are people who could wax for days on the subtle differences between the settings, Greyhawk, Mystara, FR, and Kalamar all really look the same to me.&nbsp; Same classes, same messy pantheons, same confusion of cultures, basically the same races... no thanks.&nbsp; Dragonlance wasn't very detailed, but at least it made D&amp;D MAKE SENSE.&nbsp; Everything seemed to have it's place- and if there wasn't a place for something, it was cut from the setting.&nbsp; No orcs.&nbsp; No psionics.&nbsp; The wizards were regulated, the clerics were missing in action, men were men, and silver dragons were women. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp; There was no need to have a nation based off of every fleepin RW culture.&nbsp; The Pantheon made sense- it wasn't a bunch of gods- it was closer to a monotheism with a hierarchy of angels in it's organization.&nbsp; That's what I call a setting.Scarred Lands looks like something new and different as well.&nbsp; If I decide to run a new D&amp;D campaign this fall, it'll either be Scarred Lands, Middle Earth, or Dragonlance... I have not yet decided which.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tyler Do'Urden, post: 256042, member: 4601"] [b]Re: So it appears unclear still....[/b] The cant is great, berk, and I'll slice the bonebox of any cutter who says otherwise! Speaking of killing Elminster- in a game I have coming up, I'm planning to give the players a chance to castrate him... (we'll send one to the Simbul and one to Khelben, press-release style)... ah, when Fight Club goes to the realms... :) But yeah, although there are people who could wax for days on the subtle differences between the settings, Greyhawk, Mystara, FR, and Kalamar all really look the same to me. Same classes, same messy pantheons, same confusion of cultures, basically the same races... no thanks. Dragonlance wasn't very detailed, but at least it made D&D MAKE SENSE. Everything seemed to have it's place- and if there wasn't a place for something, it was cut from the setting. No orcs. No psionics. The wizards were regulated, the clerics were missing in action, men were men, and silver dragons were women. ;) There was no need to have a nation based off of every fleepin RW culture. The Pantheon made sense- it wasn't a bunch of gods- it was closer to a monotheism with a hierarchy of angels in it's organization. That's what I call a setting. Scarred Lands looks like something new and different as well. If I decide to run a new D&D campaign this fall, it'll either be Scarred Lands, Middle Earth, or Dragonlance... I have not yet decided which. [/QUOTE]

Verification