Quote from: rkhigdon on June 25, 2024, 10:13:37 AM

Quote from: Valatar on June 24, 2024, 07:00:13 PMSome middle-aged VP of something or another went out and proclaimed that all artwork and/or content must meet some minimum company standard...

More likely an executive decision designed to ensure no loss of investment capital from the major asset management firms out their who use DEI as a major risk category to drive corporate behavior.

Neither you nor I nor anyone else on this forum are Hasbro's real customers. Blackrock and Vanguard (and other giant asset management firms) are Hasbro's customers now. That's just the way it is. I don't bother getting upset about it, as I am actually happy that Hasbro (and its masters) are hellbent on making Hasbro IPs increasingly culturally irrelevant.

This is a potentially great opportunity if you are a particularly ambitious game designer that thinks and plans for the future.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 10:02:36 PM

Quote from: Omega on June 24, 2024, 09:37:57 PMJust from his outrage post and video people when out and bought it to see for themselves...

Gonna need some numbers or documentation on that.  There may be a handful of who were curious and bought the module because of the outrage.  But most people don't see reviews like "This is crap!" and go "I need to buy this."  More people are likely to be scared off than buy from curiosity.  So I need some documentation for this assertion, because the actual sales numbers for Candlekeep are worse than Spelljammer (which was a huge under-seller)...

I never said alot. But I know at least two who bought Candlekeep just to see if it was a bad as claimed. And if I can pin down even 2 that did then that means theres more that did.

I just do not believe it is enough to justify. But they wotc keeps doing it so WTF? Someone in marketing thinks it pulls nets a profit else they wouldnt keep doing it. But the failure scapegoat option may be one reason.

Quote from: Ruprecht on June 18, 2024, 05:03:18 PMOne of the things about 5E was they just put Orc or Goblin in the module instead of a stat block. If 6E includes the same categories (even if they change the fluff and stats) the modules will be as usable as they were for 5E (thus claims of compatibility).

Paizo did something along those lines when they went from D&D 3.5 to their own system for Pathfinder Society.  The first season scenarios were written for D&D 3.5.  Theoretically, you could use them with Pathfinder by just using the Pathfinder monster stats instead of the 3.5 stats.  In practice, this didn't necessarily work that well.  One of the tier 1-2 scenarios had a monster that was CR 3 in 3.5 but CR 5 or 6 in Pathfinder.  That turned it from a somewhat difficult encounter to a player killer.  It was technically usable in Pathfinder but not really. 

Quote from: Omega on June 22, 2024, 07:10:16 PMTSR was doing drow as blue and purple for a good while now. I always wondered if Gry read about the skin effects of Analgesic silver water on people and ran with that because it can turn you blue or a funky black.

I would guess they did that for the same reason that anime characters who are Japanese often have dark purple or dark blue hair instead of black hair.  Black is very difficult to highlight to create the appearance of depth. 

Quote from: Omega on June 26, 2024, 03:41:27 AM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 10:02:36 PM

Quote from: Omega on June 24, 2024, 09:37:57 PMJust from his outrage post and video people when out and bought it to see for themselves...

Gonna need some numbers or documentation on that.  There may be a handful of who were curious and bought the module because of the outrage.  But most people don't see reviews like "This is crap!" and go "I need to buy this."  More people are likely to be scared off than buy from curiosity.  So I need some documentation for this assertion, because the actual sales numbers for Candlekeep are worse than Spelljammer (which was a huge under-seller)...

I never said alot. But I know at least two who bought Candlekeep just to see if it was a bad as claimed. And if I can pin down even 2 that did then that means theres more that did.

I just do not believe it is enough to justify. But they wotc keeps doing it so WTF? Someone in marketing thinks it pulls nets a profit else they wouldnt keep doing it. But the failure scapegoat option may be one reason.

When Candlekeep first came out I watched the reviews by Diversity & Dragons and said "No way am I buying that crap!" 
Then my wife bought me a copy for my birthday because she thought the cover was pretty.  I still haven't cracked it open.
 

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on June 26, 2024, 06:40:08 AMWhen Candlekeep first came out I watched the reviews by Diversity & Dragons and said "No way am I buying that crap!" 
Then my wife bought me a copy for my birthday because she thought the cover was pretty.  I still haven't cracked it open.
 

One of my players got it out of, yep, curiosity over the online commotion. I had a glance at it and was thoroughly unimpressed. You arent missing anything never opening it. It is though better than Radiant Citadel. Which is not saying anything good about either really. Both are anthology books, collections of several more-or-less un-related mini modules.