Search results

"Still" doesn't come into it. You can borrow from other editions, or even third-party sources.

Well, that's what I get for not reading to the end of the thread! 😆 Anyone else here read Knights of the Dinner Table? I'm reminded of Lord Gilead--he was formerly a lowly hireling whom the PCs forced to test out an unknown magic item that turned out to be a Helm of Lordship. Who knows, maybe...

These sentences jumped out at me. If the goal is to make sure players don't know what various items do, isn't that MORE likely to lead to them forcing hirelings to try them out first? What in the book makes it now impossible for them to do that?

You're not wrong about any of this, but I feel like you're leaning too heavily on angels specifically for the lore. Aasimar just have a bit of "celestial" in their backgrounds, right? It doesn't have to be an angel specifically. Maybe find another celestial creature that interests you more and...

FWIW, my players actually prefer the opposite approach. I think they like the idea of their characters blending in with the crowd but having a secret. When they play tieflings, they want to play the older version that look like humans except for maybe some subtle visual cues. Same goes for...

I love me a good heist.

I apologize. I actually have complicated feelings about this whole upcoming era of D&D that I can't entirely parse, and I'm both self-questioning and feeling isolated for being the only one at my main table who isn't excited about it. I guess hearing you say you wanted to see everybody doing...

But you're talking about fan-made content there, right? Don't we already have that without multiple companies publishing their own 5E almost-clones?

It's understandable. Hard copies of the "orange cover" edition of that adventure are incredibly rare and too valuable to just lend out.

No offense meant, but why do you care so much about what other people do at their tables?

That's why I quoted the earlier post about why the new cover might not resonate.

I thought conventional wisdom was that "kids these days" wouldn't go for Greyhawk?

Boring ... consistently branded ... potahto.

Do I detect a note of sarcasm there?

I'm not very interested in the new "Balkanized" landscape of 5E variants. The core game does what I want, and I don't want to bother with keeping track of each microvariant's peculiarities. I'm not even sure I'll bother with 5E 2024.

This raises the question of what constitutes "obviously enough," though. For a 1970s/1980s audience, he almost certainly thought he did.

Ask and ye shall receive. (Video cued to the part in question.) Disclaimer: I'm parking this here purely in the interests of providing a verbatim, in-context quote. Not weighing in on what he says at all, because I am not touching that subject with a ten-foot pole.

I think this is aimed more at collectors than players.

I'd just like to add that neither of these pictures looks male-gaze-y to me, so making the cover illustration female was not the only way to avoid that aspect.

I submit that if expanding the options was really their first priority, they would have just made a regular mini that could be easily found and purchased. Not made it part of the "blind box" lottery.