The woke DEI shit in 2024 D&D goes beyond just the artwork. The removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control. Beyond issues of "the message", the PHB has   ballooned in size becoming an even more massive brick. There have been several videos released that show the complete lack of page references to rules in the layout as well as the how broken some of the spell changes actually are. It seems to be a product that was released before it was fully cooked, with the attitude that it can just be patched online later.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2024, 11:26:03 AMThe removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control.

They have been more selective about how they use them, but they have not entirely removed those words. As an example, every Soldier (a background) begins play with the Savage Attacker feat.

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 01:14:19 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2024, 11:26:03 AMThe removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control.

They have been more selective about how they use them, but they have not entirely removed those words. As an example, every Soldier (a background) begins play with the Savage Attacker feat.

They'll change it to something like "Massive Attacker".

No wait. Can't do that. "Massive" may imply fat, thus triggering body positive people.

"Great Attacker"?

Nope. "Great" implies being better than others. They want everyone to feel equal and accepted.

Huge?

Super?

Super-Huge?

Slippery slope folks...

WoTC supports censorship. That's the reality.

On the actual topic: burgers, tacos, and sushi? fucking stupid and Lacks imagination. Plus, since the left has such a hard on about "cultural appropriation" (which is the most fucking idiotic thing ever), by depicting burgers, tacos, and sushi in fantasy setting and associating them with orcs, elves and the like, isn't that by definition "cultural appropriation"? IF you were insane and mentally challenged enough, you could make a weak-ass argument.

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 01:30:05 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 01:14:19 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2024, 11:26:03 AMThe removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control.

They have been more selective about how they use them, but they have not entirely removed those words. As an example, every Soldier (a background) begins play with the Savage Attacker feat.

They'll change it to something like "Massive Attacker".

No wait. Can't do that. "Massive" may imply fat, thus triggering body positive people.

"Great Attacker"?

Nope. "Great" implies being better than others. They want everyone to feel equal and accepted.

Huge?

Super?

Super-Huge?

Slippery slope folks...

WoTC supports censorship. That's the reality.

On the actual topic: burgers, tacos, and sushi? fucking stupid and Lacks imagination. Plus, since the left has such a hard on about "cultural appropriation" (which is the most fucking idiotic thing ever), by depicting burgers, tacos, and sushi in fantasy setting and associating them with orcs, elves and the like, isn't that by definition "cultural appropriation"? IF you were insane and mentally challenged enough, you could make a weak-ass argument.

Savage Attacker is straight from the 2024 Player's Handbook. If you want to bitch about what WotC is doing, then you should probably pay more attention to what they are actually doing.

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 02:43:25 PM

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 01:30:05 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 01:14:19 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2024, 11:26:03 AMThe removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control.

They have been more selective about how they use them, but they have not entirely removed those words. As an example, every Soldier (a background) begins play with the Savage Attacker feat.

They'll change it to something like "Massive Attacker".

No wait. Can't do that. "Massive" may imply fat, thus triggering body positive people.

"Great Attacker"?

Nope. "Great" implies being better than others. They want everyone to feel equal and accepted.

Huge?

Super?

Super-Huge?

Slippery slope folks...

WoTC supports censorship. That's the reality.

On the actual topic: burgers, tacos, and sushi? fucking stupid and Lacks imagination. Plus, since the left has such a hard on about "cultural appropriation" (which is the most fucking idiotic thing ever), by depicting burgers, tacos, and sushi in fantasy setting and associating them with orcs, elves and the like, isn't that by definition "cultural appropriation"? IF you were insane and mentally challenged enough, you could make a weak-ass argument.

Savage Attacker is straight from the 2024 Player's Handbook. If you want to bitch about what WotC is doing, then you should probably pay more attention to what they are actually doing.

It's just tribalism at this point.

Personally, I've come to view the 2024 PHB in a very similar light to D&D Essentials. That is both good and bad.

My extended gaming circle (multiple tables) are rejecting the new book en masse. Most of them either were unaware of the new half edition, or have recoiled from the increased crunch, and to a far lesser extent the appearance of a DEI agenda.

I just keep telling them they are not the target audience, this book is primarily a print companion to DDB & the VTT.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 11, 2024, 01:38:44 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 01:09:58 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 04:35:40 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 10, 2024, 03:43:03 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 03:26:41 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 10, 2024, 03:17:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 01:45:48 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 10, 2024, 12:18:18 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 09, 2024, 11:27:10 PMBut tacos, sushi and burgers. OH NOES!

Gotta agree with Mistwell on this one. This is pretty low on my "Woke stupidity" meter. More like, this pic is just goofy, like a lot of D&D before it.

How many grains of sand make a beach?

First the "Totally Not Mexorcs, trust us bro!"
Then the twink Dwarves in a bakery/forge (WTAFF!?)
Next the multicolor Elves
And now this.

It's not Forgotten Realms or any other D&D setting (even if WotC says it is) It's current year Seattle.

Because you manufactured both a connection and timeline. This isn't one in a series of issues, they're all in the same book with hundreds of images which don't match that narrative. Everyone ignored the other images because they're entirely non-controversial and don't get clicks or discussion. Which is HOW EVERY CORE BOOK RELEASE FOR EVERY EDITION goes. Whatever is plain vanilla doesn't get discussed.

There is only one objection I've seen which isn't manufactured outrage. And that's Exploderwizard's reaction, that the art overall feels to him impersonal and corporate art with a fantasy overlay. That's an objection that at least makes sense and doesn't depend on pretending all the other art in the book doesn't exist and there is some connection between like 5 images total spread throughout the book with some meaning and agenda behind it all.

So, the illustrations on the PBH aren't connected in any way...

As for a timeline, there's one, the timeline when we find out about it. YOU might want to overlook THAT, but it's there nevertheless, because reality exists even if you wish it didn't.

Now please come back and explain to us all how exactly the illustrations on the PBH AREN'T connected to each other in any way shape or form.

Plus, you're also disregarding the well DOCUMENTED ideology at work in WotC. Another thread connecting it all. But I'm sure you'll find an Ad-Hoc rationalization for that too.

The illustrations are connected, but not the connection you're making because the ones you're focused on are the extreme overwhelming minority tone of the images in the book. The extreme overwhelming majority of images don't envisage anything concerning the premise you're claiming. You could much more easily support a premise that the book uses the colors white and blue for ray-like spells, which seems to be a common color pallet in the book for some reason. You could support the premise there seems to be more dragonborn images in this book than in the past. But you cannot, if you actually pick up the friggen book and look at it yourself rather than parroting some clickbait agenda, honestly support the premise that the books overall image tone is backing a woke agenda. Because it doesn't. Frankly I'd say half the illustrations are of ordinary objects and setting locations in the book with no people portrayed at all. If their goal was to make the illustrations about a woke agenda, frankly they did a terrible awful and rotten job at it. There are hundreds and hundreds of places they could have slipped such an agenda into and simply didn't. As it is you have to really blind yourself to nearly everything to pull out the tiny fragments to pretend wokism is some cohesive theme to the illustrations when it isn't.

And the timeline you "found out" about it IS ENTIRELY MANUFACTURED BY PEOPLE YOU KNOW HAVE THE SAME AGENDA AS YOU. They're cherry picking the stuff which supports your same premise, and ignoring the stuff that doesn't support that premise, and then dishing it out one image at a time literally for clickbait. Because controversy sells.

So now you're moving the goal post from there's no connection to what?

It's not the connection I'm making?

And #NotAll?

So, what's the connection I'm making Professor X?

How a I moving a goalpost? You claim I said images are not connected at all. I didn't? I said the connection you're making is manufactured. And the connection you're making is there is an overall woke agenda in the book of current year Seattle. That's a manufactured one by clickbaiters. It's not in any way an overall impression you'd get looking at this book. You can only try and pretend that's an agenda by cherry picking the 5 or so images out of hundreds in this book and making it seem like that's most of the books tone when it isn't

Just gonna bold where you say that I manufactured a connection, which (to anyone with a brain) means there's none.

So you're not only moving the goalpost but lying.

Lying when we can all just scroll a little on the quote and see what you wrote.

You're way too used to not having your claims challenged.

You manufactured "a" connection is what I said. That's not the same as saying the images in the book have no connection, just that you manufactured one.

If you have an image of ducks, an image of mina bird, and an image of canaries, they are connected (birds). However if you instead claimed the connection is "they're all alien lizards in disguise" without any evidence, that's a manufactured connection. Doesn't mean they're unconnected - they're connected in that they're all birds. Means you made a connection up despite there being a different connection between them all.

This isn't a difficult concept.

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 10:06:43 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 01:13:28 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on September 10, 2024, 06:33:58 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 10, 2024, 03:43:03 PMNTIRELY MANUFACTURED BY PEOPLE YOU KNOW HAVE THE SAME AGENDA AS YOU. They're cherry picking the stuff which supports your same premise, and ignoring the stuff that doesn't support that premise, and then dishing it out one image at a time literally for clickbait. Because controversy sells.

"It's all a conspiracy theory! It's not happening! There's definitely not a hard leftist agenda in the new PHB art, even though there's gay dwarves making pastries, and good illegal-immigrant orcs, and there's literally probably more Women-of-Color in the PHB than there are women of color who play D&D in real life. And if it was happening, it would be a GOOD THING, bigot! If you don't want your game to be political indoctrination, you're the weird one!!!"

I didn't call anyone a bigot or weird nor did I imply it. I said what your motive was, and it wasn't bigotry but capitalism. You're doing it for clicks. It's a series of clickbait videos you're publishing, spreading them out like you should if you want to maximize your revenue, manufacturing whatever controversy you can pull off to get those clicks. By now I suspect you've seen the full book and know these images are not representative of the extreme majority of images in the book, but admitting that would detract from your ability to get people to click and share and subscribe and like your videos. Like any good little YouTuber.

"My God! How dare he try to make money! Shame! SHAME!!!!"

You're soo quick to defend WoTC and their products, it makes me wonder if you're a paid WoTC schill.

I swear, whenever Pundit or anyone else here gives an argument against WoTC and their obvious DEI bullshit practices, you go full-bore bukkake mode defending WoTC.

I approve of capitalism. I didn't judge him for making a capitalist effort. I do judge him for not being very good at it relative to others in the field, and I think he has the knowledge and charisma to do much better, and have told him so before, but that's besides the point. I never judged Pundit on this one for selling videos other than I think he could do better than being the Wally George of TTRPGs eeking out small viewer count when he could be crushing it with hundreds of thousands of viewer counts.

Pundit made an exaggerated hasty generalization as clickbait. You defend him no matter what, without having ever seen the book yourself (and I suspect he hasn't either). I also defend Pundit when people make a stupid false point about him - which happens a lot as you might imagine, particularly outside of this forum. It should be OK for me to call BS when I see it, no matter the source. But when it's people spewing BS about WOTC I am a shill for WOTC (even though I am critical of them plenty). Am I also a shill for Pundit when I defend him from lefties who lie about him too?

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 10:11:52 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on September 10, 2024, 11:58:14 PMThe claim that the sci-fi elements in Expedition to the Barrier Peaks didn't cause any pushback is just bullshit.  I was there.  It did.  I remember people talking about how it broke Greyhawk as a setting.

And I also remember when Castle Greyhawk was published and quite a few people saying some of the same things, as far as saying it disrespected EGG on purpose.

Mistwell, just admit you were wrong.

OK, I guess you're just ignorant on this one. The bowling ally is in the Greyhawk manuscript from 1973. It is original to Gygax. I am not referring to that stuff published late in the TSR era after Gygax was gone.

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 08:43:29 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 11, 2024, 01:38:44 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 01:09:58 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 04:35:40 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 10, 2024, 03:43:03 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 03:26:41 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 10, 2024, 03:17:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 10, 2024, 01:45:48 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 10, 2024, 12:18:18 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on September 09, 2024, 11:27:10 PMBut tacos, sushi and burgers. OH NOES!

Gotta agree with Mistwell on this one. This is pretty low on my "Woke stupidity" meter. More like, this pic is just goofy, like a lot of D&D before it.

How many grains of sand make a beach?

First the "Totally Not Mexorcs, trust us bro!"
Then the twink Dwarves in a bakery/forge (WTAFF!?)
Next the multicolor Elves
And now this.

It's not Forgotten Realms or any other D&D setting (even if WotC says it is) It's current year Seattle.

Because you manufactured both a connection and timeline. This isn't one in a series of issues, they're all in the same book with hundreds of images which don't match that narrative. Everyone ignored the other images because they're entirely non-controversial and don't get clicks or discussion. Which is HOW EVERY CORE BOOK RELEASE FOR EVERY EDITION goes. Whatever is plain vanilla doesn't get discussed.

There is only one objection I've seen which isn't manufactured outrage. And that's Exploderwizard's reaction, that the art overall feels to him impersonal and corporate art with a fantasy overlay. That's an objection that at least makes sense and doesn't depend on pretending all the other art in the book doesn't exist and there is some connection between like 5 images total spread throughout the book with some meaning and agenda behind it all.

So, the illustrations on the PBH aren't connected in any way...

As for a timeline, there's one, the timeline when we find out about it. YOU might want to overlook THAT, but it's there nevertheless, because reality exists even if you wish it didn't.

Now please come back and explain to us all how exactly the illustrations on the PBH AREN'T connected to each other in any way shape or form.

Plus, you're also disregarding the well DOCUMENTED ideology at work in WotC. Another thread connecting it all. But I'm sure you'll find an Ad-Hoc rationalization for that too.

The illustrations are connected, but not the connection you're making because the ones you're focused on are the extreme overwhelming minority tone of the images in the book. The extreme overwhelming majority of images don't envisage anything concerning the premise you're claiming. You could much more easily support a premise that the book uses the colors white and blue for ray-like spells, which seems to be a common color pallet in the book for some reason. You could support the premise there seems to be more dragonborn images in this book than in the past. But you cannot, if you actually pick up the friggen book and look at it yourself rather than parroting some clickbait agenda, honestly support the premise that the books overall image tone is backing a woke agenda. Because it doesn't. Frankly I'd say half the illustrations are of ordinary objects and setting locations in the book with no people portrayed at all. If their goal was to make the illustrations about a woke agenda, frankly they did a terrible awful and rotten job at it. There are hundreds and hundreds of places they could have slipped such an agenda into and simply didn't. As it is you have to really blind yourself to nearly everything to pull out the tiny fragments to pretend wokism is some cohesive theme to the illustrations when it isn't.

And the timeline you "found out" about it IS ENTIRELY MANUFACTURED BY PEOPLE YOU KNOW HAVE THE SAME AGENDA AS YOU. They're cherry picking the stuff which supports your same premise, and ignoring the stuff that doesn't support that premise, and then dishing it out one image at a time literally for clickbait. Because controversy sells.

So now you're moving the goal post from there's no connection to what?

It's not the connection I'm making?

And #NotAll?

So, what's the connection I'm making Professor X?

How a I moving a goalpost? You claim I said images are not connected at all. I didn't? I said the connection you're making is manufactured. And the connection you're making is there is an overall woke agenda in the book of current year Seattle. That's a manufactured one by clickbaiters. It's not in any way an overall impression you'd get looking at this book. You can only try and pretend that's an agenda by cherry picking the 5 or so images out of hundreds in this book and making it seem like that's most of the books tone when it isn't

Just gonna bold where you say that I manufactured a connection, which (to anyone with a brain) means there's none.

So you're not only moving the goalpost but lying.

Lying when we can all just scroll a little on the quote and see what you wrote.

You're way too used to not having your claims challenged.

You manufactured "a" connection is what I said. That's not the same as saying the images in the book have no connection, just that you manufactured one.

If you have an image of ducks, an image of mina bird, and an image of canaries, they are connected (birds). However if you instead claimed the connection is "they're all alien lizards in disguise" without any evidence, that's a manufactured connection. Doesn't mean they're unconnected - they're connected in that they're all birds. Means you made a connection up despite there being a different connection between them all.

This isn't a difficult concept.

"Where I say what I said it doesn't mean what I said but something totally different, even if that meaning is an ad-hoc, post-hoc rationalization I'm pulling out of my ass to cover up the fact that I lied and was caught with my pants down". -Mistwell 2024 in this very thread.

You know? For someone who looooooves to throw away the liar label and accusations of not aknowledging when one is wrong you seem to do plenty of both.

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 08:47:22 PMI approve of capitalism. I didn't judge him for making a capitalist effort. I do judge him for not being very good at it relative to others in the field, and I think he has the knowledge and charisma to do much better, and have told him so before, but that's besides the point. I never judged Pundit on this one for selling videos other than I think he could do better than being the Wally George of TTRPGs eeking out small viewer count when he could be crushing it with hundreds of thousands of viewer counts.

Pundit made an exaggerated hasty generalization as clickbait. You defend him no matter what, without having ever seen the book yourself (and I suspect he hasn't either). I also defend Pundit when people make a stupid false point about him - which happens a lot as you might imagine, particularly outside of this forum. It should be OK for me to call BS when I see it, no matter the source. But when it's people spewing BS about WOTC I am a shill for WOTC (even though I am critical of them plenty). Am I also a shill for Pundit when I defend him from lefties who lie about him too?

I've got the book sitting here right in front of me (a gift from a friend who I didn't have the heart to tell that I probably wasn't going to be running it).  You are just as hyperbolic about its contents as you accuse Pundit of being.

Just sticking to the art, the book is atrocious.  The pieces fall into 3 basic types: nostalgia-bait, action scenes, and Seattle slice-of-life bullshit.  The nostalgia bait is callbacks to the D&D cartoon, famous characters from other settings (FR, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, etc.) and drawings invoking classic D&D monsters.  They range in quality from pretty good set-pieces to pseudo-pencil drawings that are solidly "meh."  The action scenes are generally pretty good, with a handful being very good.  These are the best illustrations in the book, by far.  Unfortunately, at least 1/3 of those action scenes also fall in the third category.

Third, and most egregious, are the "happy Seattleites playing dress-up" illustrations that are everywhere.  They are often in a "Cal Arts" style that looks like it could have come directly off the cartoon network, with exaggerated coloring and goofy posing.  The characters are all smiling like they are high as a kite, and frequently their expressions are totally incongruous with what is happening (the "haggling with a hag" picture, where everyone is grinning like they just farted, is abysmal).  Half of them are twinks dancing.  Every group picture is comically "diverse".  You can practically see the WotC "artist" typing in to their AI program, "Draw me a picture of the fat, black woman in the cubicle next to me as a D&D character having fun!"  The tone, composition, subject, and coloring of these pictures are comically bad.  They are "woke" in every way possible.  In order to dismiss the woke, you would have to assert that fully 1/3 of the pictures don't "count," which is the exact cherry-picking that you are accusing Geeky and Pundit of.

Which is, of course, exactly what I expect of you.  Self-awareness is not your strong suit...

Like I said, there's a real possibility that there might be more depictions of "women of color" in the PHB than there are actual women-of-color playing D&D.

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 02:43:25 PM

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 01:30:05 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on September 11, 2024, 01:14:19 PM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2024, 11:26:03 AMThe removal of perfectly fine English words, such as race, savage, slavery, etc. is straight up Marxist language control.

They have been more selective about how they use them, but they have not entirely removed those words. As an example, every Soldier (a background) begins play with the Savage Attacker feat.

They'll change it to something like "Massive Attacker".

No wait. Can't do that. "Massive" may imply fat, thus triggering body positive people.

"Great Attacker"?

Nope. "Great" implies being better than others. They want everyone to feel equal and accepted.

Huge?

Super?

Super-Huge?

Slippery slope folks...

WoTC supports censorship. That's the reality.

On the actual topic: burgers, tacos, and sushi? fucking stupid and Lacks imagination. Plus, since the left has such a hard on about "cultural appropriation" (which is the most fucking idiotic thing ever), by depicting burgers, tacos, and sushi in fantasy setting and associating them with orcs, elves and the like, isn't that by definition "cultural appropriation"? IF you were insane and mentally challenged enough, you could make a weak-ass argument.

Savage Attacker is straight from the 2024 Player's Handbook. If you want to bitch about what WotC is doing, then you should probably pay more attention to what they are actually doing.

Here's the definition of sarcasm, since it's totally missed by you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

Quote from: Mistwell on September 11, 2024, 08:48:49 PM

Quote from: blackstone on September 11, 2024, 10:11:52 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on September 10, 2024, 11:58:14 PMThe claim that the sci-fi elements in Expedition to the Barrier Peaks didn't cause any pushback is just bullshit.  I was there.  It did.  I remember people talking about how it broke Greyhawk as a setting.

And I also remember when Castle Greyhawk was published and quite a few people saying some of the same things, as far as saying it disrespected EGG on purpose.

Mistwell, just admit you were wrong.

OK, I guess you're just ignorant on this one. The bowling ally is in the Greyhawk manuscript from 1973. It is original to Gygax. I am not referring to that stuff published late in the TSR era after Gygax was gone.

Well, isn't that convenient. You were "actually" referring to the '73 Greyhawk where literally just a handful of people would have been privy to such information. D&D and Greyhawk wasn't even a thing yet.

If that's what you meant, then you should have said it first. Not assume.

I'm pretty sure most, if not everyone here, would have rightly assumed you were referring to the '88 release. That at the time was the most widely published and known version of Castle Greyhawk.

as stated here:

QuoteFan reception of Castle Greyhawk was mixed but generally negative. Many dedicated fans of the Greyhawk setting were bitterly disappointed by the long-awaited work. Some interpreted the publication as being a direct insult to Gary Gygax, who had recently left TSR in a dispute over ownership of the company, and by extension to early fans of the setting and D&D players in general. These issues continue to be discussed and debated on various fan sites and chat rooms.[8][9]

and

QuoteGame designer John D. Ratecliff wrote in an article published on the Wizards of the Coast website:

Despite being intended in fun, the unrelenting mayhem of Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror creates a sense of bedlam, and the parody element opened the door for the later WG7, Castle Greyhawk (1988) -- thought by some at the time to be a deliberate attempt by TSR to destroy Gygax's reputation in the wake of his departure from the company. The truth, especially given the freelance talent involved, is more likely to be that someone thought it a good idea at the time. They were wrong. Castle Greyhawk's assortment of villains -- Col. Sanders, the Pillsbury Doughboy, the cast of Star Trek, and others -- would be more in keeping with a bad episode of Scooby Doo than a dungeon crawl. Unfortunately, the Castle Greyhawk collection of unconnected parody adventures tainted the mystique of D&D's original dungeon so badly that not even the astonishingly deadly killer dungeon presented slightly later in WGR1. Greyhawk Ruins (1990) could reclaim its lost prestige.[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Greyhawk_(module)

rating of Castle Greyhawk on Enworld

Castle Greyhawk as rated by Cononfire

Just for the record, yes I am aware of the history of the game, so you can just cut the pretentious bullshit.

AS far as the book is concerned, a picture says a thousand words.

I don't have to open it up to know it's garbage.

WoTC has a track record of garbage.

WoTC has DEI as part of it's game design and has stated as much.

Therefore...garbage.

Quote from: RPGPundit on September 12, 2024, 05:39:24 AMLike I said, there's a real possibility that there might be more depictions of "women of color" in the PHB than there are actual women-of-color playing D&D.

Does this bother you? If so, why? If not, why mention it twice?