I have noticed, one of the hallmarks of serious Racism is the sin of NOTICING THINGS.  I mean if I see a rat gnawing on my toes, it is obvious hateful and vile to attempt to scare it away.  A confident secure person would just let the rat keep chewing till it ate them completely.  Damned Racists!!!

Reinforcement of "THE MESSAGE" and "PROPER REPRESENTATION" aside, I do not really see how this movie is any different than 85 percent of anything else put out in Hollywood.  I think if you have gone to watch other movies, the white guy being made a clown in this one should not seem new or be any barrier to seeing it.  It is odd though when a movie with a nostalgia vibe decides to allow the hero of the movie be a hero, like Maverick, it sure seems the paying movie going population appreciates it. 

   Only Gripe I can really voice is the Barbarian is a tiny girl who has made a career of having Resting Bitch Face.  I think putting a hulking half orc into that role (honestly male or female...but no sexy orc please) would have been a better choice even if it is a CGI RBF chick.  I think from the trailer it might actually be brainless good.  I just do laugh when people get riled over folks FINALLY noticing that hollywood is little more than propaganda, non stop....just the strength of the signal gets modulated from time to time, I should have said for 100 years and not 50. 

QuoteThat being said, though, while D&D has always included a broad range of possibilities, my impression has always been that default classic D&D is primarily (though, not exclusively) about heroic adventure in the "do-gooder" sense (not necessarily in the Greek mythology of godlike heroes, although there are elements of that as well).

Around 3,5 I guess.
In earlier versions not so much.

And TBH heroic antiheroes is well within modern heroes concept. Like Guardians of the Galaxy - and that's precisely what I expect.

Quote from: Wrath of God on July 25, 2022, 10:09:59 AM

QuoteThat being said, though, while D&D has always included a broad range of possibilities, my impression has always been that default classic D&D is primarily (though, not exclusively) about heroic adventure in the "do-gooder" sense (not necessarily in the Greek mythology of godlike heroes, although there are elements of that as well).

Around 3,5 I guess.
In earlier versions not so much.

  I'd place the change around BECMI/late 1st, myself, with the rise of things like Dragonlance, Elmore art, etc. Even Gygax seems to have grown a bit more sympathetic to it as he matured.

Quote from: oggsmash on July 25, 2022, 05:22:00 AM
  I have noticed, one of the hallmarks of serious Racism is the sin of NOTICING THINGS.  I mean if I see a rat gnawing on my toes, it is obvious hateful and vile to attempt to scare it away.  A confident secure person would just let the rat keep chewing till it ate them completely.  Damned Racists!!!

A trans person posted in a Facebook group "Anyone who doesn't think that trans women are women are assholes." I replied that labeling half of the population of America as assholes is not helpful and also off-topic for an RPG group. Apparently I'm a bigot now. One of their Admins even called me a troll.

Quote from: Wrath of God on July 25, 2022, 10:09:59 AM

QuoteThat being said, though, while D&D has always included a broad range of possibilities, my impression has always been that default classic D&D is primarily (though, not exclusively) about heroic adventure in the "do-gooder" sense (not necessarily in the Greek mythology of godlike heroes, although there are elements of that as well).

Around 3,5 I guess.
In earlier versions not so much.

And TBH heroic antiheroes is well within modern heroes concept. Like Guardians of the Galaxy - and that's precisely what I expect.

By 3e they were already starting to try to phase out alignment. And I never got an antihero vibe from ANY edition of D&D, even now, with all their edgy Tieflings and paladins that can be any alignment (assuming that you even wanna use alignment, now it's explicitly optional). And again, this isn't to say that you couldn't play such characters, because D&D has always allowed for a broad range of possible camping styles, but that isn't to say that there wasn't a implied focus in the game. And that implied focus was always about the forces of good trying to vanquish the forces of evil, with neutral characters tagging along out of a sense of self preservation (cuz evil was harmful to them as well), as well as the prospect of finding treasure along the way.

I even remember Dragon articles in the 90s explicitly saying as much, cuz people kept asking about anti-Paladins, assassins (which they phased out in 2e) and other options for evil characters. So TSR kept trying to convince people that the focus of the game was to be the good guys, with neutrals joining in out of enlightened self-interest.

And before you bring it up, yes, they eventually did some Dragon articles about anti-Paladins, but that's because people wouldn't shut up about them. And IIRC, even then they tried to convince people that these were intended for NPCs and players should instead focus on playing the good guys fighting such villainous individuals. That's why most alignment specific classes were good, like Paladins and Rangers.

Maybe it was Dragonlance, but many players think that fallen Paladins become anti-paladins or death knights, when they merely just become Lawful Good—possibly Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral—Cavaliers or Fighters (if you play 1e).

I find it hilarious that their tiefling character uses the 2e/3e design rather than the 4e/5e design. I always disliked the 4e/5e design because the horns looked too impractical for their necks to support.

I detest Tieflings, but they've been around for over 20 years now. There's not much we can do about it.

Effects and such look better than I expected, so that's a plus. However, the trailer gives me the impression that it's not the kind of movie that will interest me. Might be well done, might not be, but it doesn't look like the kind of movie I tend to enjoy, either way.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament on July 25, 2022, 12:43:59 PM
Effects and such look better than I expected, so that's a plus. However, the trailer gives me the impression that it's not the kind of movie that will interest me. Might be well done, might not be, but it doesn't look like the kind of movie I tend to enjoy, either way.

Plus the newer D&D doesn't seem to be very medieval-looking anymore. They dress like later Renaissance if not almost modern.

Quote from: Shasarak on July 24, 2022, 05:57:27 PM
Finally Mistwell has found the Mayan face of White Supremacy.

Does this mean I'm as famous as Larry Elder or Rippa?

Quote from: Wrath of God on July 25, 2022, 10:09:59 AM

QuoteThat being said, though, while D&D has always included a broad range of possibilities, my impression has always been that default classic D&D is primarily (though, not exclusively) about heroic adventure in the "do-gooder" sense (not necessarily in the Greek mythology of godlike heroes, although there are elements of that as well).

Around 3,5 I guess.
In earlier versions not so much.

In earlier versions not so much.

When someone in my household checks it out of the local library and watches it, a year or so after it launches, I might watch part of it. But I doubt I'll stay with it long unless they catch me in a particularly dull state.  Though that says less about this particular effort and more about my general disinterest in anything Hollywood does lately.  Pair that with WotC version of the Forgotten Realms, and my expectations are that it might be mildly more entertaining than watching paint dry (depending on the color of the paint and the lighting on the wall). 

Tieflings have sense in Planescape or in a campaign with a strong Planescape element (I wonder if the popularity of Annah in "Planescape: Torment" worked in their favor). I ran a multi-year campaign deeply rooted in Planescape, however, and I never used them.

Regarding evil paladins, however, I don't see why they should be "edgy". An evil god that doesn't have his own holy warriors, along with clerics, is just stupid. Don't call them "paladins" maybe, as classic chivalric literature has given the term a specific connotation, but they should be a normal thing in any manichean setting.