D&D General What the Melf's Guide to Greyhawk Cover Might Look Like

Below is a quick mockup of the potential cover of Melf's Guide to Greyhawk based on the Jeff Easley art revealed at Gary Con, using the current D&D 5.5E trade dress. The fonts aren't quite right, but it gives an approximate look at what the book may look like when it is released.

 

[Mournblade94]

people can always draw their own conclusions, so it is never necessary to point something out directly? That premise is very flawed…

If I retweet Andrew Tate and do not add a commentary of my own, what does that make my post? At a minimum an implicit endorsement of his views. This is not really all that different.

So you agree with the conclusions of the foreword, you just would rather they had not spelled them out?

YES. Thank you

I see your point on Tate but that dude is directly harmful to his audience.

 

[Clint_L]

The book history itself yes was done very well (I really dislike the term love letter more often than not it seems like an ironic term) Its the preface I take issue with. The preface was an apology for the old game. The book proper indeed was the love letter.

I read the preface in the book store then read the first chapter of the book. When I found out it was just the author being annoyingly apologetic in the preface and the book itself having good scholarship I bought it. The preface stains the book a bit. Instead of a 9.8 mint work it brings it down to a 9.2 near mint.

I find your use of the term "apology" a bit confusing. The editor, Ben Riggs, is not apologizing; he has nothing to apologize for, as he didn't write the content. He is offering a disclaimer in his function as editor (and probably as required by his publisher), acknowledging that times have changed and many ideas and opinions have changed with them. This is not significantly different from the warning that you routinely get when you, for example, stream an older movie off Amazon Prime or whatever.

I suspect the discomfort comes when we consider that many of us did not find anything about that work in any way objectionable at the time, and maybe still don't (I do). So we might feel as if we are being asked to apologize, when we have nothing to apologize for. But that's coming from us, not from the short preface.

In my case, I am more than happy to apolgize for things that I've said and done that have given offence; I am certainly not the same person I was then, and I totally get why a "random harlot table" (1e example, but same idea) would offend most women today, even if thirteen year old Clint was oblivious and just thought it was funny. Then again, I'll even apologize for stuff when I might not agree that I did anything wrong; this is a function of being married for 37 years. I don't worry so much about apologies.

 

[Distracted DM]

I have A5e but me and my group felt it was taking us away from our old school playing style so we when back to 5e.

Can you elaborate on that? Very curious- I can maybe guess what you mean, but don't want to put words in your mouth