The D&D thread

And just to keep things light, I'll share a few pics from the previous live shows. Austin was most recent, had decent seats and there was a ~1 hour Q&A with the audience beforehand that was fun. London was a complete clusterfuck on their end, as the organizers completely underestimated how popular Crit Role was (and in addition I can't find my pics).

The OG LA show though was a lot of fun, and the VIP ticket included a meet-and-greet afterwards. This was way back in 2016, before they realized they could monetize the greetings and photos individually (like they did in London). I took a pic while in line but was too nervous to ask for any with the people. I didn't expect to be but I was rather trepidatious of saying hi to a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors who sit around and play dungeons and dragons. I also attached a few signatures. I bought the 2nd edition books way back when I was younger and they had been collecting dust at my family's home for years and years. I thought it'd be cool to get signatures in them so I took the DM guide, player guide, and character sheet books. When I showed Matt, he immediately went for the DM book and in under 5 seconds found that picture, which he said was his favorite from when he was younger.

In general I don't disagree much. Except on you saying Matt should have prompted them. They are level 20. By that point they shouldn't need the DM to point out that they could do something. I even think Matt had told them on several occasions that exact thing and that he wouldn't be prompting them to DO something.

Specifically with Arkham, though. In a rules heavy game like Matt colvile's, for example, yes I absolutely think getting into turn order and action economy in that moment is the right thing to do. However, CR has always been narrative heavy. The rules assist in telling their story, not the other way around. In THAT kind of game, I think what Matt did was not only acceptable, but I think it's perferred

Dashel said:

Anyone have a good rec on a next DnD 5e campaign? We'll be done with Lost Mine of Phandelver soon.

We want something that is at least up to level 10

These are the 4 I'm looking at:

Curse of Strahd
Tomb of Annihilation
Ghosts of Saltmarsh
Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus

Click to expand...

I'm only starting Curse of Strahd really, but it's badass so far. Starts off with a haunted house, which I love.

Curse of strahd is fun, it can get a little... Depressing though...

Dashel said:

Anyone have a good rec on a next DnD 5e campaign? We'll be done with Lost Mine of Phandelver soon.

We want something that is at least up to level 10

These are the 4 I'm looking at:

Curse of Strahd
Tomb of Annihilation
Ghosts of Saltmarsh
Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus

Click to expand...

Strahd is a blast of your group likes the idea.
Kept an account of what went down. Curse of Strahd

Also my advice would be to make Strahd never interact with the group directly until the end, that is unless you are REALLY good at role playing evil. I went for a Stoker Dracula but he never really felt dangerous to me and became more of a "Dead and Loving" it type. If I were to do it again I would always have him one step ahead or barely missed and let his wake tell the story. Also do not do the high end dungeon included in back of book, cool place for a one off or something did not fit at all with the campaign.

Dashel said:

Anyone have a good rec on a next DnD 5e campaign? We'll be done with Lost Mine of Phandelver soon.

We want something that is at least up to level 10

These are the 4 I'm looking at:

Curse of Strahd
Tomb of Annihilation
Ghosts of Saltmarsh
Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus

Click to expand...

I transitioned in to Dungeon of the Mad Mage and it is phenomenal so far.

In another game, I am a player in Princes of the Apocalypse and it's a really great adventure. It would be pretty seemless to go from Phandelver to Triboar or Red Larch.

Fyff said:

I transitioned in to Dungeon of the Mad Mage and it is phenomenal so far.

In another game, I am a player in Princes of the Apocalypse and it's a really great adventure. It would be pretty seemless to go from Phandelver to Triboar or Red Larch.

Click to expand...

Also a great choice if you like sand boxes. I run that one so much in person I have a big ass map printed out to sharpie up, did the kinkos/laminated thing.

Alright, I'm 99% sure we are doing Baldur's Gate. I'm getting hyped for it. Still have to finish Phandelver though.

Looks like Orcs and Drow are getting some edits to make them a bit more morally ambiguous versus generic chaotic evil scenery chewers. Sort of like what we saw with the Klingons in Star Trek over the years.

Interesting that they are also addressing the 'gypsy' types in Ravenloft as well.

Well that's a huge waste of time.

If they are going to Disnefy every intelligent race for the sake of fictional diversity... they need to eliminate every single stereotype.

Which means anything with an intelligence score over a certain threshold, let's say 6. Now needs equitable representation and can no longer be represented by generic versions.

You see three goblins who look like they are ready to attack. But more importantly, why are they ready to attack. As it turns out these goblins have encountered adventurers before and lost most of their tribe to their bloodlust. Now they are trying to survive by crafting small wares and selling them through an intermediary at the nearby town. However due to their disadvantaged position they are not able to negotiate for fair compensation for their labor and therefore must rely on theft and robbery to supplement their meger income.

Roll with privilege to see if you oppress the goblins further.

Pancreas said:

You see three goblins who look like they are ready to attack. But more importantly, why are they ready to attack. As it turns out these goblins have encountered adventurers before and lost most of their tribe to their bloodlust. Now they are trying to survive by crafting small wares and selling them through an intermediary at the nearby town. However due to their disadvantaged position they are not able to negotiate for fair compensation for their labor and therefore must rely on theft and robbery to supplement their meger income.

Click to expand...

I know you didn't mean it this way, but that actually sounds like a pretty interesting plot point in a homebrew adventure.

Pancreas said:

Well that's a huge waste of time.

If they are going to Disnefy every intelligent race for the sake of fictional diversity... they need to eliminate every single stereotype.

Which means anything with an intelligence score over a certain threshold, let's say 6. Now needs equitable representation and can no longer be represented by generic versions.

You see three goblins who look like they are ready to attack. But more importantly, why are they ready to attack. As it turns out these goblins have encountered adventurers before and lost most of their tribe to their bloodlust. Now they are trying to survive by crafting small wares and selling them through an intermediary at the nearby town. However due to their disadvantaged position they are not able to negotiate for fair compensation for their labor and therefore must rely on theft and robbery to supplement their meger income.

Roll with privilege to see if you oppress the goblins further.

Click to expand...

To be honest any dungeon master worth their salt should write any race like goblins or orcs in their world with this kind of nuance, it makes for a far more interesting experience for players. Updating the official sources is fine imo if not somewhat unnecessary.

Dalven said:

To be honest any dungeon master worth their salt should write any race like goblins or orcs in their world with this kind of nuance, it makes for a far more interesting experience for players. Updating the official sources is fine imo if not somewhat unnecessary.

Click to expand...

I was going to make a super long post, but this sums it up pretty nicely. If your campaign doesn't have depth and moral ambiguity, it's probably two-dimensional and boring anyway. It's the difference between Saturday morning cartoons and shows like Deadwood, Rome, The Last Kingdom, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, etc.

I guess some people like their campaigns feeling like Saturday morning cartoons, but most adult RPers get tired of that shit pretty quick.

Misunderstood Orc is more played to me. It's very predictable at this point. When did they do that with Orcs in WoW? Feels like it's been like this a long time and it's over done.

Arden said:

I was going to make a super long post, but this sums it up pretty nicely. If your campaign doesn't have depth and moral ambiguity, it's probably two-dimensional and boring anyway. It's the difference between Saturday morning cartoons and shows like Deadwood, Rome, The Last Kingdom, Mad Men, Better Call Saul, etc.

I guess some people like their campaigns feeling like Saturday morning cartoons, but most adult RPers get tired of that shit pretty quick.

Click to expand...

I agree, ADULTS do get bored when treated like children. So why do you support the sanitization of potentially offensive and troublesome concepts from the game such as bigotry and ignorance? As a mature adult player you should be comfortable handling these topics on your own without needing to have your hand held by wizards of the coast.

Even if they retcon the orcs to be an internally beautiful race of poets and artisans unless they also do something about their skin and teeth there should still be a large hurdle of acceptance by other races. Not because it's right or wrong to treat an orc based on appearance alone, but because it's believable that others would have a hard time accepting them.

That's the job of the DM. To create a believable world that honestly reacts to the players to make them feel like their actions have real impact.

If the DM and publisher quietly handle all of the truly difficult situations ahead of time, THEN you end up with your cartoon world where everyone is equal and no one feels excluded.

Conflict is inevitable in a diverse world. How it gets resolved and the effects of that resolution are the heart of any good story or adventure. Start bleaching out the uncomfortable parts and you're left with nonsense and unbelievable morality plays.

Actual adults shouldn't need to be told how to think, they are supposed to figure that part out on their own.

Pancreas said:

I agree, ADULTS do get bored when treated like children. So why do you support the sanitization of potentially offensive and troublesome concepts from the game such as bigotry and ignorance? As a mature adult player you should be comfortable handling these topics on your own without needing to have your hand held by wizards of the coast.

Even if they retcon the orcs to be an internally beautiful race of poets and artisans unless they also do something about their skin and teeth there should still be a large hurdle of acceptance by other races. Not because it's right or wrong to treat an orc based on appearance alone, but because it's believable that others would have a hard time accepting them.

That's the job of the DM. To create a believable world that honestly reacts to the players to make them feel like their actions have real impact.

If the DM and publisher quietly handle all of the truly difficult situations ahead of time, THEN you end up with your cartoon world where everyone is equal and no one feels excluded.

Conflict is inevitable in a diverse world. How it gets resolved and the effects of that resolution are the heart of any good story or adventure. Start bleaching out the uncomfortable parts and you're left with nonsense and unbelievable morality plays.

Actual adults shouldn't need to be told how to think, they are supposed to figure that part out on their own.

Click to expand...

What, specifically, did I write that made you think I support the sanitization of anything? Why don't you go back and reread the examples of quality fiction I mentioned. Unless you are living under a rock, you've at least seen one or two of those shows, and you know there is nothing "sanitized" about them. If anything, moral ambiguity is the least sanitized way to approach fiction, because it's the most realistic take on things. You're out here punching away, but I'm not sure you even know what you're fighting about.

Dashel said:

Misunderstood Orc is more played to me. It's very predictable at this point. When did they do that with Orcs in WoW? Feels like it's been like this a long time and it's over done.

Click to expand...

Its not about making the orc the 'misunderstood savage', its about fleshing out their motivations. Orcs are a nomadic warlike race but that doesn't necessarily make them evil - if you need evil orcs for your players to smash consider why this particular band of orcs are evil; Gruumsh is a bastard of a god, is there a chief who has become influenced by a devout priest of Gruumsh? Why do they insist on killing everyone in caravans they raid - is it because they are simply bad bastards or they fear reprisals if word gets out? Are they unable to farm because they don't have the knowledge and no one is willing to share it with them? Are they unable to settle anywhere because adventurers keep driving them out at the request of the local town/village who doesn't want to share the resources the orcs are competing to consume? All unimaginative tropes I've come up with off the top of my head really but at the same time very simple means to add a bit of depth as to why the orcs are acting the way they are.

Pancreas said:

I agree, ADULTS do get bored when treated like children. So why do you support the sanitization of potentially offensive and troublesome concepts from the game such as bigotry and ignorance? As a mature adult player you should be comfortable handling these topics on your own without needing to have your hand held by wizards of the coast.

Even if they retcon the orcs to be an internally beautiful race of poets and artisans unless they also do something about their skin and teeth there should still be a large hurdle of acceptance by other races. Not because it's right or wrong to treat an orc based on appearance alone, but because it's believable that others would have a hard time accepting them.

That's the job of the DM. To create a believable world that honestly reacts to the players to make them feel like their actions have real impact.

Click to expand...

In fairness I've not read the Eberron or Wildemont books and likely won't as I've little interest in those settings but I'm not convinced the intention is to rewrite Orcs as the hyperbolic example you've given there; its to remove the homogeneous characterisation of the race as evil simply because they are orcs and give it some more depth. Characterising individuals because they belong to a certain race is one of the definitions of racist and if they want to add more nuance to the beings in their world then I don't really see why this is something to get worked up about. It just gives the DM more tools and support to do their job; how they are used is still up to the individual DM.

Pancreas said:

If the DM and publisher quietly handle all of the truly difficult situations ahead of time, THEN you end up with your cartoon world where everyone is equal and no one feels excluded.

Conflict is inevitable in a diverse world. How it gets resolved and the effects of that resolution are the heart of any good story or adventure. Start bleaching out the uncomfortable parts and you're left with nonsense and unbelievable morality plays.

Actual adults shouldn't need to be told how to think, they are supposed to figure that part out on their own.

Click to expand...

This is nonsense, how are all the difficult situations being handled ahead of time? I very much doubt they are removing all the means of conflict from the game as that would make for some pretty dull source material. I fail to see how any of this removes the ability for adults to think for themselves when creating or playing in campaigns, as I've said the only thing that is being 'bleached out' is the rather dull characterisation of all orcs and drow as purely evil because they belong to a certain race.

I always thought it was interesting to explore the rational viability of the 'bad guy' races through different rationales for behavior that didn't question their role as being 'evil'. The mantid in World of Warcraft were a good example of this -- still very much evil but for reasons that had to do with a completely different set of values. Similarly I've always regarded the elves as needing some added work because of their incredible long lifespans and not wanting to risk lives on a whim etc.

Who is more evil, the necromancer who sits at home in his tower with his skeletal friend or the paladin who actively seeks his destruction?

Dalven said:

Its not about making the orc the 'misunderstood savage', its about fleshing out their motivations. Orcs are a nomadic warlike race but that doesn't necessarily make them evil - if you need evil orcs for your players to smash consider why this particular band of orcs are evil; Gruumsh is a bastard of a god, is there a chief who has become influenced by a devout priest of Gruumsh? Why do they insist on killing everyone in caravans they raid - is it because they are simply bad bastards or they fear reprisals if word gets out? Are they unable to farm because they don't have the knowledge and no one is willing to share it with them? Are they unable to settle anywhere because adventurers keep driving them out at the request of the local town/village who doesn't want to share the resources the orcs are competing to consume? All unimaginative tropes I've come up with off the top of my head really but at the same time very simple means to add a bit of depth as to why the orcs are acting the way they are.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah 100% agree there. If you're talking a Thanos type of motivation, where he thinks he's right, rather than a generic "I want to rule the world!!!" guy. Yeah I'm on board with that. Even if it's something simple like they want more land and they hate Humans/Dwarves/Elves/Whatever, so take theirs.

I've just been surprised by a lot of the stuff I'm seeing in the DnD world since coming back. It's not a matter of a different take on Orcs it's more like ... giving Orcs a negative to intelligence is racist. Or they're not warlike. Or they're the oppressed. It's just bizarre.