Quote from: Vic99 on May 19, 2024, 09:31:16 PM

Quote from: Lurker on May 19, 2024, 06:15:08 PMLet us know when it is released. I run a mash up of Call of Cathluh & Delta Green for my daughters periodically, and am always on the look out for a good adventure to use.

Thanks!  Since you use Delta Green, it's set in the 1980s.  Characters are thru-hikers on the Appalachian Trail.

Any suggestions for making a forest ranger profession in Delta Green?

Quote from: yosemitemike on May 19, 2024, 08:33:57 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 16, 2024, 10:21:45 PMThe answer to this depends on how one defines magicians. For all of the middle ages, most peasant villages had some kind of wise man or cunning woman, who did folk magic. They were generally valued by the people; and contrary to the claims of some modern wiccans or whatever, they absolutely considered themselves to be Christians (at least after the very earliest part of the middle ages).

Complicating this is the fact that modern Wiccans are rather prone to making false and rather outlandish claims about witches and witchcraft in the Middle Ages.  One of them is buried in the phrase modern Wiccans.  This implies that there was such a thing as ancient Wiccans.  This fits in with the claims made by some Wiccans that Wicca is the survival of some Pre-Christian European tradition.  This is simply false.  All Wiccans are modern Wiccans.  Wicca is a modern practice invented in the 1950s by a guy named Gerald Gardner aka Scire.  The ancient coven that supposedly inducted him was pure fabrication.  He made it all up.  There are some rather outlandish claims about the persecution of witches by the Church in the Middle Ages too.  People talk about "The Burning Times" when millions of witches were supposedly burned by the Catholic Church.  Supposedly, so many witches were burned that the smoke blackened the sky.  This claim is, of course, absurd.  Some Wiccan authors, like Scott Cunningham, are honest about the origins of Wicca while others still promote these falsehoods. 

Then again, there are people who still promote Margaret Murray's work as if it had any validity at all.

As demonstrated by European fairy-tales, witches were originally not conceived to be human at all, but cannibalistic monsters/demons who looked like elderly women. "Witch" and "hag" were thus synonymous.

Quote from: David Johansen on May 16, 2024, 07:55:52 PMI think part of the problem is that many of these writers and commentators are ashamed that they like and play D&D and have to tear it down to show they are really grown up adults with adult attitudes and understanding.

What is funny is that there are plenty of notable conservatives like Michelle Malkin who are not in the least embarrassed by enjoying Dungeons & Dragons.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1772229319511213

One thing I have noticed about modern CoC scenarios is that a lot of them seem to be built entirely around one-shot play.  They are written assuming that players will be playing the provided pregens or characters built specifically for this scenario.  There is very little allowance for using existing characters without significant rewriting by the GM and, usually, a credulity straining contrivance or two.  This is fine for one-shot play at a convention but it limits their usefulness in ongoing campaigns.

On that note, include multiple hooks that can be used to pull in characters. 

Include a player map.  Lots of scenarios will give you one map with everything clearly labeled.  These can't be shown to players without a lot of extra work editing them or just asking players to ignore that arrow pointing to the secret door.

   

Quote from: jhkim on Today at 02:19:00 AM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 19, 2024, 05:08:45 PMIf you think that the Greyhawk material will be woke shit, for you it means that people with that opinion will be "following the narrative" because they can't possibly look at the past decade and a half of WotC pushing some of the lamest crap out under the aegis of the D&D IP with older material changed to conform to "modern audiences" and predict that this will be more of the same. Instead, it has to be because the customers who don't hand over their paychecks for more WotC crap must be brainwashed sheep.

Your taste is totally valid - if you hated the past 15 years of D&D (4th ed and 5th ed), that's fine.

I recently wrapped up my D&D(5th) campaign of the last 1.5 years, and I'll be taking a break from D&D for a while. I haven't bought any WotC product for over a year, and I won't be getting the next edition.

---

However, having been on this board a while, I remember how RPGPundit consulted for and endorsed 5th edition - even including explicitly endorsing the LGBT inclusion paragraph in the Player's Handbook. He wasn't alone in this. D&D5 has been massively successful commercially and seen a huge increase in visibility of D&D in television, movies, and online. It is also the second longest-lived of D&D's twelve editions - except only AD&D1.

D&D5 book sales have dropped recently as the new edition was announced, but every edition has seen sales drop in the years after a new edition. Eight years after AD&D1 was released, TSR was bankrupt with massive debt and laid off 75% of its employees.

This doesn't obligate anyone to like 5th ed, but it makes it hard to claim that WotC is an objective failure that hates its players. I think it's a soulless money-grubbing corporation, but that's true of most big companies eventually.

If you think that the only reason that D&D book sales has dropped is because a new edition is coming out and not that the OGL has been threatened by WotC, that the latest modules were pandering crap (magical coffee shop? WTF?), that what was a game is now being pushed as a lifestyle brand (D&D fashion and shoes anybody?), that the company holding the IP views its customers as just paychecks to be looted, that any legacy product must be changed for "modern audiences" (that iconic male fighter facing a dragon was actually a woman! tits!), and is willing to send thugs to reviewers homes (Pinkertons for MtG!); then you are not just being willfully ignorant, but gaslighting as much as HippyDerp is trying to. Fuck off already.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 19, 2024, 05:35:49 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 19, 2024, 05:08:45 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 19, 2024, 03:30:47 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 19, 2024, 02:29:09 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 18, 2024, 09:50:20 PM

Quote from: Votan on May 18, 2024, 03:28:27 PM

Quote from: Omega on May 17, 2024, 02:51:52 PMConsidering how much they despise Gygax and co for being "White and Male"... The odds of them handling Greyhawk with nay respect approaches zero.

Fair. But here is the thing, if it is done well then we can use the awesome stuff. If it is done poorly, it can be easily ignored. All real play settings must diverge from the cannon setting, anyway, because at some point the world events will be different or an area that the DM fleshed out will be done differently. So it is probably a net positive.

That's not a bad take on it, but you won't find too many here that are willing to give it a fair chance. Even if it is good, they'll have to reject it to follow their narrative.

Nice No Win Scenario you created, you get the Kobiyashi Maru Award for blaming the customer. Wear it with pride.

You're really going to try and claim to be one of their customers? My point is that most of the posters here have totally written them off and are not their customers, which you either missed or...well, you do have your narrative to stick to don't you?

Well, you are right, I am not one of their customers. I wrote off WotC back when 4E came out because they delivered a shit sandwich of a game and claimed it was filet mignon. Then when customers weren't buying the crap they produced, they blamed the poor taste and the grognardism of those same customers.

Kinda like what you are setting people up for here.

If you think that the Greyhawk material will be woke shit, for you it means that people with that opinion will be "following the narrative" because they can't possibly look at the past decade and a half of WotC pushing some of the lamest crap out under the aegis of the D&D IP with older material changed to conform to "modern audiences" and predict that this will be more of the same. Instead, it has to be because the customers who don't hand over their paychecks for more WotC crap must be brainwashed sheep.

Fuck off and go try to gaslight someone else with your bullshit.

You're not at all following what I'm saying. I'm not saying it will be good (though it might be), I'm saying that for many (possibly most) of the people on this board, it must be shit or else their little worlds will implode. That's not me gaslighting, that's the effects of the continuous bombardment of anti-WotC posts on this site (and, yes, elsewhere too).

I agreed with the poster that said he'd wait and see how the new Greyhawk material pans out. If it's good, great. If not, he'll ignore it. My agreement that he should make up his own mind isn't gaslighting at all...

But you go on with your narrative...

That bolded part is you continuing to try and gaslight....

Quote from: HappyDaze on Today at 12:57:20 AMAll you have are these weak personal attacks...and, of course, your delusional all-inclusive culture war narrative. But, if that narrative had any truth to it, how does it feel for you to be losing?

No. We have 24 years of wotc fucking things up. Pulling one dirty deal after another. Chasing agendas. Treating employees like dirt. Ripping off people and more.

They are opening with a 50th Aniversary book where they brag about how "problematic" OD&D is because the designers were "White and Male" in their own damn promotional video. Perkins has noted on video what he plans to go into the 5e DMG and junk. And he lies about this new edition not being a new edition.

The idea that they are not going to fuck this up is idiocy.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 19, 2024, 08:10:14 PMI can only speak for myself on this point, but the eventual quality of the OneD&D (or whatever they're calling it these days)

They are now insisting it will still be 5e.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 19, 2024, 07:17:25 PMThank you for supporting my point.

Thank you for proving mine.

Quote from: jeff37923 on May 19, 2024, 05:08:45 PMIf you think that the Greyhawk material will be woke shit, for you it means that people with that opinion will be "following the narrative" because they can't possibly look at the past decade and a half of WotC pushing some of the lamest crap out under the aegis of the D&D IP with older material changed to conform to "modern audiences" and predict that this will be more of the same. Instead, it has to be because the customers who don't hand over their paychecks for more WotC crap must be brainwashed sheep.

Your taste is totally valid - if you hated the past 15 years of D&D (4th ed and 5th ed), that's fine.

I recently wrapped up my D&D(5th) campaign of the last 1.5 years, and I'll be taking a break from D&D for a while. I haven't bought any WotC product for over a year, and I won't be getting the next edition.

---

However, having been on this board a while, I remember how RPGPundit consulted for and endorsed 5th edition - even including explicitly endorsing the LGBT inclusion paragraph in the Player's Handbook. He wasn't alone in this. D&D5 has been massively successful commercially and seen a huge increase in visibility of D&D in television, movies, and online. It is also the second longest-lived of D&D's twelve editions - except only AD&D1.

D&D5 book sales have dropped recently as the new edition was announced, but every edition has seen sales drop in the years after a new edition. Eight years after AD&D1 was released, TSR was bankrupt with massive debt and laid off 75% of its employees.

This doesn't obligate anyone to like 5th ed, but it makes it hard to claim that WotC is an objective failure that hates its players. I think it's a soulless money-grubbing corporation, but that's true of most big companies eventually.