Quote from: Pat on October 05, 2021, 08:41:38 PM

There should be a word for when someone tries to be edgy and contrarian, in the exact same way as everyone else. It would have nearly infinite uses in fiction and politics.

Middle-school syndrome

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 05, 2021, 03:55:10 PM
Here are some 5.5e changes:

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/creature-evolutions

Puke, bilge, bile, garbage, refuse, matter even the lowest decomposers will not touch much like a hyper processed hamburger that could sit on the shelf for a year without decaying

Quote from: Pat on October 06, 2021, 11:59:17 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 11:04:53 AM

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on October 06, 2021, 10:42:10 AM
I don't know if you'll remember, back in the day on ENWorld there was/is a poster named Sepulcrave, or something like that, that had a killer story hour. The premise was there was a succubus that wanted to be redeemed. Seps world (Tales of Wyre) is heavily influenced by religion (but I think Sep studied religions). I think his thread is still there, some poster even made a combined pdf. I highly recommend.

So I don't have a problem with fallen angels/redeemable fiends... .... .... if the game master says so. But in my world, all devils/demons are pure "Evil" and the celestials are "Good"... .. ... unless I say so as the game master.

Thing is, if you can have Good Demons (not redeemed ones that would stop being Demons) and Evil Angels (not Demons that is what Evil Angels are but Angels that manage to be Evil and Angelic) then redemption looses it's meaning.

In order for redemption to work you need the two extremes fixed and never thw two shall meet. This is the road you must travel to earn redemption.

You might want to read Sepulchrave's Tales of Wyre story hour. It's not just the best gaming fiction I've ever read, but one of the best fantasy stories of any kind. The path of Nahael's redemption is not between two poles, though the story is heavily influenced by a deep understanding of Catholic gnosticism, absolutism, and dualism. But it also weaves in pagan mysticism, transhuman transcendence, richly realized characters, and epic fights using third edition rules.

Okay, you sold me, where can I find this?

Beyond the OP trying to come off as the internet equivalent schlock news reporter for shits and giggles

Nothing in the preview is something I would probably use yet nothing warranting some of the pearl clutching I'm seeing in this thread. Wotc is forcing no one to make Demons good or 6 ft talk Dwarves at ones table. It's like some of you act like you have a gun pointed at your head with the trigger half cocked ready to fire.

I'm no Wotc apologist and will probably pass on this due to edition fatigue and Woke politics, yet let's also not act like Wotc has done Gestspo ready to knock out doors down if we don't comply. 

Quote from: sureshot on October 06, 2021, 12:25:23 PM
Beyond the OP trying to come off as the internet equivalent schlock news reporter for shits and giggles

Nothing in the preview is something I would probably use yet nothing warranting some of the pearl clutching I'm seeing in this thread. Wotc is forcing no one to make Demons good or 6 ft talk Dwarves at ones table. It's like some of you act like you have a gun pointed at your head with the trigger half cocked ready to fire.

I'm no Wotc apologist and will probably pass on this due to edition fatigue and Woke politics, yet let's also not act like Wotc has done Gestspo ready to knock out doors down if we don't comply.

Can you point to the pearl clutching and where anyone has said anything about WotC kicking down our doors to make us play as they want?

Me thinks you conflate mockery, criticism and opinions as to why it doesn't work and how it could work with some strawman in your head.

Having sent the link to my gaming group even the hardcore liberal of the group sees it for what the new edition will be.

The Woke preferred pronoun flying wheelchair, morally grey alignment, wish fulfillment edition. Unless the next previews wow myself and my gaming group it will be a very hard pass on purchasing it.

Sad though about Wotc the Woke usually do not buy the product. Could be the edition that might hurt Has bro financially imo.

Quote from: sureshot on October 06, 2021, 12:54:30 PM
Having sent the link to my gaming group even the hardcore liberal of the group sees it for what the new edition will be.

The Woke preferred pronoun flying wheelchair, morally grey alignment, wish fulfillment edition. Unless the next previews wow myself and my gaming group it will be a very hard pass on purchasing it.

Sad though about Wotc the Woke usually do not buy the product. Could be the edition that might hurt Has bro financially imo.

Chances are it will sell well enough, but it could be (if they go full on woke) their "Star Wars: The Force Awakens", signaling the begining of their decline as number one in the TTRPG hobby.

As for that REALLY hurting Hasbro... Don't think they depend that much on WotC sales, and I think MtG is still the main seller of WotC.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 11:04:53 AM
Thing is, if you can have Good Demons (not redeemed ones that would stop being Demons) and Evil Angels (not Demons that is what Evil Angels are but Angels that manage to be Evil and Angelic) then redemption looses it's meaning.

In order for redemption to work you need the two extremes fixed and never thw two shall meet. This is the road you must travel to earn redemption.

I think there are a lot of possibilities. As I see it, angels and demons in fantasy are metaphors for the divine, and different metaphors can be used and also be true. For example, by some interpretations of Meister Eckhart, angels and demons are the same beings. This was portrayed in the film Jacob's Ladder, which I thought was very powerful. At another extreme was the TV series The Good Place, which was humorous and parody - but also portrayed a lot of interesting concepts well, I thought.

I can't think offhand of a story where a demon found redemption and immediately transformed into an angel. I'm not opposed to it, but I don't think it's the only metaphor to work. In a number of fantasy cosmologies, there is a difference between a fallen angel like Lucifer and the rank-and-file demons of Hell. Lucifer is still portrayed as being feather-winged and beautiful, for example, as contrasted with most demons that are bat-winged and/or disgusting. I don't have a problem with that.

Inherently, stories portraying Lucifer, angels, and demons as relatable characters are making them into something more like human beings who have free will. That's suspect as literal theology, but as a story metaphor, it can work to convey real points.

On the other hand, there are a lot of ostensibly Christian stories that I find very un-Christian. I mentioned The Omen previously, which tried to make a father killing his adopted toddler as the morally good action. A common story I have a big problem with is a character who sells their soul to the devil to do something that they thinks is good - and then there needs to be some sort of action to fight or break the contract -- or even possibly the person gets sent to Hell. To me, that fundamentally opposes the power of God and the forgiveness of Jesus.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 12:24:37 PM

Quote from: Pat on October 06, 2021, 11:59:17 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 11:04:53 AM

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on October 06, 2021, 10:42:10 AM
I don't know if you'll remember, back in the day on ENWorld there was/is a poster named Sepulcrave, or something like that, that had a killer story hour. The premise was there was a succubus that wanted to be redeemed. Seps world (Tales of Wyre) is heavily influenced by religion (but I think Sep studied religions). I think his thread is still there, some poster even made a combined pdf. I highly recommend.

So I don't have a problem with fallen angels/redeemable fiends... .... .... if the game master says so. But in my world, all devils/demons are pure "Evil" and the celestials are "Good"... .. ... unless I say so as the game master.

Thing is, if you can have Good Demons (not redeemed ones that would stop being Demons) and Evil Angels (not Demons that is what Evil Angels are but Angels that manage to be Evil and Angelic) then redemption looses it's meaning.

In order for redemption to work you need the two extremes fixed and never thw two shall meet. This is the road you must travel to earn redemption.

You might want to read Sepulchrave's Tales of Wyre story hour. It's not just the best gaming fiction I've ever read, but one of the best fantasy stories of any kind. The path of Nahael's redemption is not between two poles, though the story is heavily influenced by a deep understanding of Catholic gnosticism, absolutism, and dualism. But it also weaves in pagan mysticism, transhuman transcendence, richly realized characters, and epic fights using third edition rules.

Okay, you sold me, where can I find this?

https://www.enworld.org/threads/tales-of-wyre.58227/

It starts off slow, a DM asking the board some questions. But it quickly develops into a true story hour. It gets better and better as it goes along. Flip to page 11 if you prefer PDFs. There are also a number of secondary threads where Sepulchave posts stat blocks, expansions and fixes for the epic spellcasting system, and so on; but they're not necessary.

Some high points (and I mean high, as in 'what the hell were they smoking?') from the preview:

QuoteWe've also gotten strict about which monsters get the Humanoid creature type. This type is now reserved for creatures who are humanlike in their moral and cultural range. As we update older books, we'll reassign some Humanoids to other creature types. When Monsters of the Multiverse is released, you'll see that some former Humanoids are now Monstrosities, Fey, and other types.

This is odd, as prior to this the Humanoid type/subtype applied to creatures that were bipeds in the usual human-size range or smaller to an extent. Making it an aspect of morals and culture is a bit bizarre. Does this mean a human raised by nonhumanoids isn't technically a humanoid?

QuoteAlignment had a time out in the stat blocks of Candlekeep Mysteries and Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft. We omitted alignment in those books as a temporary measure, giving us time to determine how to handle alignment going forward. Now that we've done that work, alignment returns in The Wild Beyond the Witchlight and appears in all our other upcoming books as well.

So why did alignment get a time out? For a while, there'd been some confusion in the community about alignment's role in D&D. In the rules of the Player's Handbook, you choose your character's alignment, and in the rules of the Monster Manual, the DM determines a monster's alignment. No matter what alignment is chosen, a creature's alignment describes that creature's moral outlook; alignment doesn't determine the creature's behavior. Alignment is essentially a roleplaying aid.

Both books are clear about the player and the DM having the final say on alignment, but both books also plant a seed of doubt. The Player's Handbook suggests alignments for various folk in the D&D multiverse, and the stat blocks in the Monster Manual include alignments without reminding the DM that those alignments are merely suggestions.

To eliminate that seed of doubt while preserving alignment's function as a roleplaying tool, we've made the following changes:

Only named individuals, such as Mister Witch and Mister Light, have a definite alignment.
Generic Humanoids bear the words "Any Alignment," reminding the DM that such people have vast moral range.
Magical creatures that have a strong moral inclination (angels, demons, devils, undead, and the like) have an alignment preceded by the word "Typically." For example, a demon's stat block says "Typically Chaotic Evil," since it is typical for a D&D demon to be chaotic evil. That one word—"typically"—reminds the DM that the alignment is a narrative suggestion; it isn't an existential absolute. The holy can fall, and the fiendish can rise. Members of certain organizations—charitable knighthoods or diabolical cults, for example—also sometimes get the "Typically" treatment.
Creatures, such as most Beasts and Oozes, that are incapable of moral discernment continue to lack an alignment and therefore bear the term "Unaligned."

This is stupid, and WotC should feel bad for putting this on a paper or webpage.

They invoke the players and DMs having final say over alignments of PCs and monsters respectively, then turn around and insist 'well, these creatures are only typically good/evil', or 'these creatures can have ANY alignment'.

Aside from being a pain in the ass ('oh no, we shouldn't fight the goblins, they could be good!' 'THEY ATE THE MILLER!' 'It was an accident!') what on earth is the point, except to add more moral ambiguity?

I've have written it like this:
- Specific individuals have specific, fixed alignments.
- Most humanoid races have 'typically' in their alignment, to allow for outliers, outcasts, and ne'er-do-wells as well as cultural mutations.
- Magical creatures are almost always of their alignment listed, except in very rare circumstances.
- Outsiders hailing from the Outer Planes are always of their alignment. Because their essence and identity is bound up in the plane they hail from as well as that alignment, to change such would be to change their very nature. It can happen, but it always results in the outsider changing to become something else.
- Beasts, oozes, and other animal/non-intelligent creatures are always unaligned.

QuoteOccasionally a creature has a tag—Elf, Goblinoid, Titan, or the like—that identifies an important detail that doesn't appear elsewhere in the stat block. We've begun introducing new tags, which some rules now reference, allowing us to create fresh ways for creatures to interact with the game's system. For example, some creatures now include a tag that is the name of a spellcasting class, such as Cleric, Druid, or Wizard, and Monsters of the Multiverse includes a rule that says such a tag means the creature counts as a member of the named class for the purpose of magic item attunement.

Many of the numbers in a stat block include the creature's proficiency bonus. Because of that fact, a creature's proficiency bonus now appears in the stat block. The number sits to the right of the creature's challenge rating.

These are actually intelligent changes, which makes me wonder how they got in here.

They're also simplifying Spellcasting and highlighting Bonus Actions, which again is not a bad idea.

QuoteNew character races don't have the Ability Score Increase trait that Player's Handbook races have. The new races instead rely on a special character-creation rule that allows a character to increase one ability score by 2 and another score by 1 or to increase three different ability scores by 1. The lack of the Ability Score Increase trait helps make your choice of race and your choice of class independent from each other, broadening the types of characters we're likely to see at the game table.

But why? Why don't these races use the same ASI system everyone else does? This is retarded beyond belief. It's not like everyone is going to pick the same ASI options; they're going to pick what strengthens their character. I need a drink.

Quote from: Pat on October 06, 2021, 01:20:14 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 12:24:37 PM

Quote from: Pat on October 06, 2021, 11:59:17 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 06, 2021, 11:04:53 AM

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on October 06, 2021, 10:42:10 AM
I don't know if you'll remember, back in the day on ENWorld there was/is a poster named Sepulcrave, or something like that, that had a killer story hour. The premise was there was a succubus that wanted to be redeemed. Seps world (Tales of Wyre) is heavily influenced by religion (but I think Sep studied religions). I think his thread is still there, some poster even made a combined pdf. I highly recommend.

So I don't have a problem with fallen angels/redeemable fiends... .... .... if the game master says so. But in my world, all devils/demons are pure "Evil" and the celestials are "Good"... .. ... unless I say so as the game master.

Thing is, if you can have Good Demons (not redeemed ones that would stop being Demons) and Evil Angels (not Demons that is what Evil Angels are but Angels that manage to be Evil and Angelic) then redemption looses it's meaning.

In order for redemption to work you need the two extremes fixed and never thw two shall meet. This is the road you must travel to earn redemption.

You might want to read Sepulchrave's Tales of Wyre story hour. It's not just the best gaming fiction I've ever read, but one of the best fantasy stories of any kind. The path of Nahael's redemption is not between two poles, though the story is heavily influenced by a deep understanding of Catholic gnosticism, absolutism, and dualism. But it also weaves in pagan mysticism, transhuman transcendence, richly realized characters, and epic fights using third edition rules.

Okay, you sold me, where can I find this?

https://www.enworld.org/threads/tales-of-wyre.58227/

It starts off slow, a DM asking the board some questions. But it quickly develops into a true story hour. It gets better and better as it goes along. Flip to page 11 if you prefer PDFs. There are also a number of secondary threads where Sepulchave posts stat blocks, expansions and fixes for the epic spellcasting system, and so on; but they're not necessary.

Thank you so much!

@Ghostmaker They are trying to fit the square peg of Orks are black people yo! into the round hole of Orcs are evil. Which is why Elfs, often if not always described and imagines as fair skinned creatures, don't get the same treatment and become monstrosities.

The new character races vs the old character races ASI is the stupidest idea I've ever seen.

Until they come up with something else to top that, there's no limit to human stupidity.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 06, 2021, 01:21:29 PM
Some high points (and I mean high, as in 'what the hell were they smoking?') from the preview:

QuoteNo matter what alignment is chosen, a creature's alignment describes that creature's moral outlook; alignment doesn't determine the creature's behavior.

What? Since when does your moral outlook not determine your behavior?  "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy on October 06, 2021, 01:53:06 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 06, 2021, 01:21:29 PM
Some high points (and I mean high, as in 'what the hell were they smoking?') from the preview:

QuoteNo matter what alignment is chosen, a creature's alignment describes that creature's moral outlook; alignment doesn't determine the creature's behavior.

What? Since when does your moral outlook not determine your behavior?  "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"

When you're an SJW and therefore the ends justify the means. Which is why they can harass women IRL and not be called mysoginists because they are doing it to the right kind of women for the right kind of reasons.

Not my rules, I just understand their twisted logic.

It feels like they're trying to set up something similar to WoD's Nature/Demeanor, but I could be mistaken on that.

It's one thing to say 'alignment should not be a straitjacket for actions taken by a player or NPC'. That I can understand. But to say 'moral outlook and alignment don't determine behavior' strikes me as going full retard in the opposite direction.