D&D 5E WotC Shares Theros Table of Contents

WotC has shared the table of contents of Mythic Odysseys of Theros. Well, part of it, at least. Update -- thanks to "obscureReviewer" on Twitter, here's a fuller image!

WotC has shared the table of contents of Mythic Odysseys of Theros. Well, part of it, at least.

table of contents.jpg


Update -- thanks to "obscureReviewer" on Twitter, here's a fuller image!

EZRMn-tUcAUe5g_.jpg
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eyes of Nine

Everything's Fine
That's a possibility, though Titanic (literally, like unto the literal Titans) sea beasts of legendary magic are a big thing for Theros.
Speaking of Titans, I hope the next MtG setting book will be Ikoria. Why? Because it would be awesome to have stats for Godzilla and King Ghidorah. Personally, I think @Morrus needs to get his vast empire of folks to create the stats for kaiju just like they have been for legendary heroes and monsters...


1590965344182.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mecheon

Sacabambaspis
When it comes to big ol' Godzilla and others, I think its moreso gonna be "You, as a singular adventurer, are too small to do any sort of impactful damage to this unless you just so happen to have some superweapon on hand"

(still amazed we got two King Ceaser's out of that though, and no Hendorah or Zilla. Or Jet Jaguar)
 

I was in middle school when Oriental Adventures came out, and I remember reading reviews that criticized it for being thin stereotypes by people who didn't know much of what they were talking about and didn't bother to try and find out. I find it difficult to believe that they couldn't have created something better if they wanted. 1E stuff generally wasn't great -- around the same time, we got another group of magical faux Romani that the game still has a hard time shaking loose -- but even in the 1980s, people knew the book was problematic.
I'd very much like to see the bad critics you saw in 1985-86 about Oriental adventures. The three magazines that I had were speaking so highly of this book that this was what prompted me to buy it. They were: "Traveler, White Dwarf and (of course) Dragon (but I'll conceed that this one was not really unbiased". In Montreal the book sold so well that there was a shortage because not enough books were ordered. I remember a friend going to Ottawa then Toronto go get his hands on one copy. If the book was problematic, it was not so in our gaming community.

In fact, the bad critics I saw/read about the book got out around the end of the 2nd edition in a magazine (I don't remember the name) that was not even remotely related to RPG but had "experts" ranting about the OA and a few other RPG books.

I wonder if you might still have the issues that are saying that the book was bad and that are dated from that era. I don't have the magazines anymore but my memories of the ones that I read were unanimously praising OA. Your claim is a total surprise for me. Unless the critics were not part of the RPG community?
 

I'd very much like to see the bad critics you saw in 1985-86 about Oriental adventures. The three magazines that I had were speaking so highly of this book that this was what prompted me to buy it. They were: "Traveler, White Dwarf and (of course) Dragon (but I'll conceed that this one was not really unbiased". In Montreal the book sold so well that there was a shortage because not enough books were ordered. I remember a friend going to Ottawa then Toronto go get his hands on one copy. If the book was problematic, it was not so in our gaming community.

In fact, the bad critics I saw/read about the book got out around the end of the 2nd edition in a magazine (I don't remember the name) that was not even remotely related to RPG but had "experts" ranting about the OA and a few other RPG books.

I wonder if you might still have the issues that are saying that the book was bad and that are dated from that era. I don't have the magazines anymore but my memories of the ones that I read were unanimously praising OA. Your claim is a total surprise for me. Unless the critics were not part of the RPG community?

Yeah, I don't really think there was much commentary on the cultural aspects of the book in the 80s. Many thought the mechanics sucked or whatever, and I hardly think an AD&D book of last 1st edition era would have attracted much or indeed any commentary outside of the RPG magazines.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
When it comes to big ol' Godzilla and others, I think its moreso gonna be "You, as a singular adventurer, are too small to do any sort of impactful damage to this unless you just so happen to have some superweapon on hand"

(still amazed we got two King Ceaser's out of that though, and no Hendorah or Zilla. Or Jet Jaguar)
No superweapon needed: Godzilla, the Tarrasque, &c are weak against swarms of insects getting under their skin. Find that Kobold with the beehive on the end of a stick and talk him into collecting nests of Murder Hornets.
Yeah, that's the ticket! (old SNL reference)
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
... around the same time, we got another group of magical faux Romani that the game still has a hard time shaking loose
I don't know if you were on EnWorld when Curse of Stradh was released. The issue was aired and discussed in several threads. If your web-fu is good, you can look them up and review them.

I'm glad we agree that cheap stereotypes make for poor gaming.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
This isn't defending blackface as a valid artistic choice?

Correct, that was not defending blackface. If you think it was, it's you. You're reading into it things which are not there. From an ordinary reading, it's not defending blackface. I think you're doing a disservice to your peers to make whatever assumptions you're making about his comment.

And it doesn't have a racist "connotation" to it. It's racist.

That's what "racist connotation" means. Something which conveys a racist concept. It means the blackface was the means of conveying the racism. For example, in the phrase "She's feeling blue" the word "blue" is a connotation for sadness.

You appear to be reading something into the word "connotation" which isn't there, or using some alternate definition of connotation which isn't as applicable in this context as the obvious one.
 
Last edited:




Remove ads

Remove ads

Top