Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM
Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

This is slightly disingenuous I think.
The Tasha's class changes to races & classes appeared in my D&D Beyond without me having Tasha's enabled, confusing players. The Volo's changes to monster descriptions were done Ministry of Truth style, without any option to see the old version. So there is certainly precedent.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 12:13:04 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 11:26:16 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2022, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 20, 2022, 11:25:33 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
Well this is going to throw a monkey wrench in the narrative here.

D&D Beyond:

"D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users."

Smiteworks said:

"Customers who want the newer versions of the monsters, newer images, newer tokens, races, etc., will need to purchase the new module for Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. If a customer owns both the new module and the old modules, then they will see multiple listings for search results and will need to choose which version they want to use.

The Dungeon Master will be able to use the Allow Content or Block Content flags in the library to turn off or on those options within the Library for any players in their campaigns."

What a timely announcement. I'm sure they planned it this way all along, and it had nothing to do with fan commentary...

Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

Except, you blatant liar, they DID remove and replace content in Volo's on DNDBeyond!  They "errata'd" the descriptions of a bunch of monster races, and DNDBeyond was required to update the online book and remove the descriptive passages.  You know this, because you posted in that very thread on Dec 27th.  So who is the crazy, you moron, the people who suspect that they will do again what they have already done, or the people who assert that WotC would never replace old content because they want to sell new content.

But this was never announced as errata you dolt. It's a new book.

Containing the reworking of old (i.e. previously released) monsters.  Just like in Volo's.  You can't be honest, even when the facts are clear, can you?

Greetings!

Eirikrautha, why do you think Mistwell gets wrapped up in all of these printing/production arguments? Somehow, he's always tapdancing about something. Honestly, I'm not sure what he's tapdancing about. His arguments seem rather obscure.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

At this point in his quest to be always right and for fear of going against his carefully constructed personal narratives.  He has begun to both contradict himself and rather than admit the truth continue to be disingenuous. When one is caught lying and still continue to claim to be right well what you expect from a Normie. No critical thinking or any self-reflection that they can possibly be in the wrong.

Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 02:15:35 PM
The side-topic on illustrations of women started with Shrieking Banshee bringing up chainmail bikinis back in reply #142, which was just around when you dropped out. fixable initially replied with his problems with chainmail bikinis, and then a bunch of others spoke out in support of chainmail bikinis. I weighed in that I didn't have a problem with chainmail bikinis per se, but I overall disliked the 1970s/1980s examples of such, because they tended to not portray women adventurers as equally heroic - especially in pose and stance as I just mentioned. fixable dropped out after a bit, but the side topic has kept up.

I'm not going to say that was a poor summary per se, but you neglected to mention both Pat and Jaeger providing several examples of Conan in peril and early female characters in heroic poses.

Your opinion is just as valid as any other. And clearly you have seen enough in early artwork for you to determine that women were portrayed in a negative, unequal, way. But your super low bar to female victim hood is not shared by many others around here, and certainly not the women I game with.

Not quoted here, but evoking your sex life as evidence of your lack of need to see sexy images is exactly out of the playbook. Congratulations, implying people like those images because they don't have sex is following the incel play perfectly. Just know it landed about as well as Steve Carell in 40 Year Old Virgin taking about all the sex he has.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 12:13:04 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 11:26:16 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2022, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 20, 2022, 11:25:33 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
Well this is going to throw a monkey wrench in the narrative here.

D&D Beyond:

"D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users."

Smiteworks said:

"Customers who want the newer versions of the monsters, newer images, newer tokens, races, etc., will need to purchase the new module for Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. If a customer owns both the new module and the old modules, then they will see multiple listings for search results and will need to choose which version they want to use.

The Dungeon Master will be able to use the Allow Content or Block Content flags in the library to turn off or on those options within the Library for any players in their campaigns."

What a timely announcement. I'm sure they planned it this way all along, and it had nothing to do with fan commentary...

Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

Except, you blatant liar, they DID remove and replace content in Volo's on DNDBeyond!  They "errata'd" the descriptions of a bunch of monster races, and DNDBeyond was required to update the online book and remove the descriptive passages.  You know this, because you posted in that very thread on Dec 27th.  So who is the crazy, you moron, the people who suspect that they will do again what they have already done, or the people who assert that WotC would never replace old content because they want to sell new content.

But this was never announced as errata you dolt. It's a new book.

Containing the reworking of old (i.e. previously released) monsters.  Just like in Volo's.  You can't be honest, even when the facts are clear, can you?

LOL You think Volo's was a book of reworking old monsters? You have not read Volos at all, have you. Admit it.

I mean this is how stupid your stance sounds: 1) You predict they will replace the content, 2) when that doesn't happen, you claim the prediction itself (as a complaint) is what caused it to not happen. IE in your mind, NOTHING could have happened which would have proven you wrong. If they had replaced the content you'd be right, and if they didn't replace the content you'd be right. You see how absurd your stance is, right?

Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2022, 02:36:12 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 12:13:04 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 11:26:16 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2022, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 20, 2022, 11:25:33 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
Well this is going to throw a monkey wrench in the narrative here.

D&D Beyond:

"D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users."

Smiteworks said:

"Customers who want the newer versions of the monsters, newer images, newer tokens, races, etc., will need to purchase the new module for Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. If a customer owns both the new module and the old modules, then they will see multiple listings for search results and will need to choose which version they want to use.

The Dungeon Master will be able to use the Allow Content or Block Content flags in the library to turn off or on those options within the Library for any players in their campaigns."

What a timely announcement. I'm sure they planned it this way all along, and it had nothing to do with fan commentary...

Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

Except, you blatant liar, they DID remove and replace content in Volo's on DNDBeyond!  They "errata'd" the descriptions of a bunch of monster races, and DNDBeyond was required to update the online book and remove the descriptive passages.  You know this, because you posted in that very thread on Dec 27th.  So who is the crazy, you moron, the people who suspect that they will do again what they have already done, or the people who assert that WotC would never replace old content because they want to sell new content.

But this was never announced as errata you dolt. It's a new book.

Containing the reworking of old (i.e. previously released) monsters.  Just like in Volo's.  You can't be honest, even when the facts are clear, can you?

LOL You think Volo's was a book of reworking old monsters? You have not read Volos at all, have you. Admit it.

I mean this is how stupid your stance sounds: 1) You predict they will replace the content, 2) when that doesn't happen, you claim the prediction itself (as a complaint) is what caused it to not happen. IE in your mind, NOTHING could have happened which would have proven you wrong. If they had replaced the content you'd be right, and if they didn't replace the content you'd be right. You see how absurd your stance is, right?

You buffoon, the statement was that the new book was a reworking of old monsters, just like the changes in Volo's changed information that was already published.  You are arguing against a strawman, because that's all you've got.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 03:11:08 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2022, 02:36:12 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 12:13:04 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 11:26:16 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2022, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 20, 2022, 11:25:33 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
Well this is going to throw a monkey wrench in the narrative here.

D&D Beyond:

"D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users."

Smiteworks said:

"Customers who want the newer versions of the monsters, newer images, newer tokens, races, etc., will need to purchase the new module for Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. If a customer owns both the new module and the old modules, then they will see multiple listings for search results and will need to choose which version they want to use.

The Dungeon Master will be able to use the Allow Content or Block Content flags in the library to turn off or on those options within the Library for any players in their campaigns."

What a timely announcement. I'm sure they planned it this way all along, and it had nothing to do with fan commentary...

Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

Except, you blatant liar, they DID remove and replace content in Volo's on DNDBeyond!  They "errata'd" the descriptions of a bunch of monster races, and DNDBeyond was required to update the online book and remove the descriptive passages.  You know this, because you posted in that very thread on Dec 27th.  So who is the crazy, you moron, the people who suspect that they will do again what they have already done, or the people who assert that WotC would never replace old content because they want to sell new content.

But this was never announced as errata you dolt. It's a new book.

Containing the reworking of old (i.e. previously released) monsters.  Just like in Volo's.  You can't be honest, even when the facts are clear, can you?

LOL You think Volo's was a book of reworking old monsters? You have not read Volos at all, have you. Admit it.

I mean this is how stupid your stance sounds: 1) You predict they will replace the content, 2) when that doesn't happen, you claim the prediction itself (as a complaint) is what caused it to not happen. IE in your mind, NOTHING could have happened which would have proven you wrong. If they had replaced the content you'd be right, and if they didn't replace the content you'd be right. You see how absurd your stance is, right?

You buffoon, the statement was that the new book was a reworking of old monsters, just like the changes in Volo's changed information that was already published.  You are arguing against a strawman, because that's all you've got.

The extreme overwhelming majority of volos content was new for 5e. Which you'd know if you'd read it. You don't know anything really about 5e except the bullshit you read here...also written by people who don't know much about 5e.

And now you've taken to making predictions which you think are immune from ever being wrong - now if you are wrong in your prediction then you think your prediction is what changed events. Like WOTC changes all their plans, and forces all their 3rd party licensees to change their plans, based on what you and a tiny number of non-5e-players think. It's an insane way of thinking. You were never correct - they were never going to give this stuff away for free, and never had given it away for free in the past, and you've fucking lost your mind over 5e because of your stupid agendas which have become more important to you than gaming itself these days.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2022, 04:57:25 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 03:11:08 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2022, 02:36:12 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 23, 2022, 12:13:04 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 11:26:16 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 22, 2022, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:23:07 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 20, 2022, 11:25:33 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 10:59:28 PM
Well this is going to throw a monkey wrench in the narrative here.

D&D Beyond:

"D&D Beyond has said that Monsters of the Multiverse will not replace existing monsters already purchased by users.

While they have indicated that existing content will not be overwritten, they were unable to share any details on how the new monster stat blocks will be implemented - suggestions might include duplicate entries, or some kind of toggle. This also includes racial traits, which won't replace old material -- the contents of the book will be treated as new content.

While DDB is taking it's lead from WotC on what to do, apparently WotC asked them to take charge of communicating this all to users."

Smiteworks said:

"Customers who want the newer versions of the monsters, newer images, newer tokens, races, etc., will need to purchase the new module for Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. If a customer owns both the new module and the old modules, then they will see multiple listings for search results and will need to choose which version they want to use.

The Dungeon Master will be able to use the Allow Content or Block Content flags in the library to turn off or on those options within the Library for any players in their campaigns."

What a timely announcement. I'm sure they planned it this way all along, and it had nothing to do with fan commentary...

Two different companies. One is DNDBeyond, one is Smiteworks (Fantasy Grounds). Of course they planned this all along - it's the identical policy both companies have always followed for new books. The only people ever claiming they would REPLACE the content is the batshit crazies here who don't even fucking play 5e or even have DNDBeyond or use Fantasy Grounds with 5e. It was always stupid to think they'd GIVE AWAY FOR FREE the new content (with replacements) rather than charging for it like the normal businesses they are!

Except, you blatant liar, they DID remove and replace content in Volo's on DNDBeyond!  They "errata'd" the descriptions of a bunch of monster races, and DNDBeyond was required to update the online book and remove the descriptive passages.  You know this, because you posted in that very thread on Dec 27th.  So who is the crazy, you moron, the people who suspect that they will do again what they have already done, or the people who assert that WotC would never replace old content because they want to sell new content.

But this was never announced as errata you dolt. It's a new book.

Containing the reworking of old (i.e. previously released) monsters.  Just like in Volo's.  You can't be honest, even when the facts are clear, can you?

LOL You think Volo's was a book of reworking old monsters? You have not read Volos at all, have you. Admit it.

I mean this is how stupid your stance sounds: 1) You predict they will replace the content, 2) when that doesn't happen, you claim the prediction itself (as a complaint) is what caused it to not happen. IE in your mind, NOTHING could have happened which would have proven you wrong. If they had replaced the content you'd be right, and if they didn't replace the content you'd be right. You see how absurd your stance is, right?

You buffoon, the statement was that the new book was a reworking of old monsters, just like the changes in Volo's changed information that was already published.  You are arguing against a strawman, because that's all you've got.

The extreme overwhelming majority of volos content was new for 5e. Which you'd know if you'd read it. You don't know anything really about 5e except the bullshit you read here...also written by people who don't know much about 5e.

And now you've taken to making predictions which you think are immune from ever being wrong - now if you are wrong in your prediction then you think your prediction is what changed events. Like WOTC changes all their plans, and forces all their 3rd party licensees to change their plans, based on what you and a tiny number of non-5e-players think. It's an insane way of thinking. You were never correct - they were never going to give this stuff away for free, and never had given it away for free in the past, and you've fucking lost your mind over 5e because of your stupid agendas which have become more important to you than gaming itself these days.

First, I own Volos and DNDBeyond, so I know exactly what is in each.

Second, all right, liar, quote where I predicted that WotC would give away anything.  In fact, quot ANY prediction I've made about this.  You only have strawmen, because I've never said anything you claim I have.  This discussion was about what WotC was going to do with the monsters in the new book, and whether they were going to do the same thing they already did with Volos.

Oh, and even the knob-polishers on Reddit were angry about Volos and questioning what would happen with the new book.  So I'm pretty sure WotC knew that their errata strategy was a failure...

Quote from: jhkim on January 22, 2022, 03:55:52 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 21, 2022, 02:24:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 02:15:35 PM
The side-topic on illustrations of women started with Shrieking Banshee bringing up chainmail bikinis back in reply #142, which was just around when you dropped out. fixable initially replied with his problems with chainmail bikinis, and then a bunch of others spoke out in support of chainmail bikinis. I weighed in that I didn't have a problem with chainmail bikinis per se, but I overall disliked the 1970s/1980s examples of such, because they tended to not portray women adventurers as equally heroic - especially in pose and stance as I just mentioned. fixable dropped out after a bit, but the side topic has kept up.

And no, I haven't claimed anything about why women used to participate less in tabletop RPGs.

YET.

In a product who's main audience is male, you would do well in having stuff males tend to like. Your argument is one of representation...

Not all men prefer 1970s style chainmail bikinis -- just like not all men always want to eat at Hooters, or have naked women on all their playing cards. I'm expressing what I prefer in my game illustrations, and I'm a heterosexual man.

Yeah, hashtag not all. But enough do that it's a solid bussiness decision.

Quote from: jhkim on January 22, 2022, 03:55:52 PM
I have an active sex life, and I don't feel the need to have passive sexy women strewn in every activity.

Yes Jim, everybody that likes stuff you don't is an InCel...

Quote from: jhkim on January 22, 2022, 03:55:52 PM
I'll enjoy bikini-clad women in some games where that's the premise - like Macho Women With Guns or Teenagers from Outer Space. I also enjoy games like Buffy the Vampire Slayer where characters may look appealing but likely aren't in bikinis. I don't think it fits in every game, though, and in particular, I don't find the 1970s trend of more passive-looking women fantasy adventurers more appealing.

You enjoy what you enjoy, I'll do the same, and as a plus I'll never advocate for banning the stuff you (or anyone else -within certain limits) enjoy.

I'm seriously considering getting ALL the art for my totally not conan game be chainmail buxom women. Half of the time holding the strong almost naked dude's (that just saved her) leg.

Greetings!

*Laughing* I think buxom, scantily-clad women are great features in art. It's also cool when they need to be saved from some monster or villain by a strong, masculine hero.

Good stuff.

I always hope we see MORE of it.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The only problem I have with buxom, scantily-clad women in art is that they are wearing clothes at all.

Fair enough. Some of us want more equality: maybe show a few xenas rescuing puny glasses-wearing princes (that are totally not self-inserts, why would you think that? ).

Quote from: SHARK on January 24, 2022, 12:08:37 AM
Greetings!

*Laughing* I think buxom, scantily-clad women are great features in art. It's also cool when they need to be saved from some monster or villain by a strong, masculine hero.

Good stuff.

I always hope we see MORE of it.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

truly who doesn't love Tits?

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 24, 2022, 01:55:31 PM
truly who doesn't love Tits?

Small insects?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on January 24, 2022, 01:15:29 PM
Fair enough. Some of us want more equality: maybe show a few xenas rescuing puny glasses-wearing princes (that are totally not self-inserts, why would you think that? ).

So you're not happy with strong females resquing Conan?

I have exactly zero objection to having the danger magnet-hero tropes reversed. Why would I? Didn't Xena regularly rescued everybody? I'm sure there must have been some such prince in that show. Also didn't She-Ra reversed the tropes? There was this guy with a heart symbol on his chest...