https://screenrant.com/jeremy-crawford-chris-perkins-leaving-dnd-interview/

Bye Crawford.  Looks like Hasbro is cleaning house due to the D&D 6E launch failure.  If I see WotC bring one more gray beard and present him as having the secret sauce, I'm gonna vomit.  I wonder what retard they'll say is the savior of 6E next.  I believe it will be RuPaul, he fills all the DEI buckets.

ChatGPT.

You heard it here first.

Anyone has the video of the idiot Crawford stating "we want our elfs to be the elfiest elf".

If anyone involved in WOTC's mess of recent years was an uber doofus, it was Jeremy Crawford. 

It pains me to think that he was one of the faces of modern D&D, to new people just coming into the hobby.  What a goofy spin he had on this cool hobby, which had already been enjoyed by generations of previous gamers.

His voice and influence on the hobby will be extremely inconsequential, just as soon as he leaves that position at WOTC.  There will be an extremely low demand for his "skills", amongst the hobby at large.

He was the face of 5e, it's strange that he's leaving the D&D team.

He did more harm to D&D than any other individual. Definitely hopeful news.

Well maybe if I tune into a rules discussion about D&D I wont have to hear a man gush about his husband for 10 minutes before we get on with the actual rules.  That dude was missing the plot big time.

His interpretation of the rules was pretty bad.  One time he opined that the Detect Invisible spell did not fully reveal invisible creatures to you, and you still had disadvantage on the attacks. 

Even stupider were the people who accepted that ruling. 

Quote from: Man at Arms on April 12, 2025, 12:34:17 AMThere will be an extremely low demand for his "skills", amongst the hobby at large.

He has skills?

Since when?

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on April 12, 2025, 07:29:35 PMHis interpretation of the rules was pretty bad.  One time he opined that the Detect Invisible spell did not fully reveal invisible creatures to you, and you still had disadvantage on the attacks. 

Even stupider were the people who accepted that ruling. 

His rules interpretàtions once he stopped working àlongside Mearls were gobsmàckingly bad and showed zero understanding of design intent.

One needs only look at his body of work to understand what this man brings to gaming. Design on WHFRP2e is a rather prestigious feather depending on how you feel about that version. It may not have the nostalgic appeal of WHFRP 1e but it is a good game in my opinion. Bloated in the end but that's hardly a surprise or the fault of the designer of the initial release.

And then Blue Rose. Oh Blue Rose, why are you?
I'm not going to bash Blue Rose for being rainbow, I honestly don't give a shit about that. I'm going to bash Blue Rose for being a) boring and b) mechanically inconsistent with the tone it presents. Green Ronin soft launched True20 through Blue Rose and for those that don't know True20 is a genericised d20 system with some significant tweaks. All in all not bad but also very much a d20 derivative. Now at the time there was a big push for homogenizing the gaming world to run everything on d20 systems. This was tied to the OGL but was ultimately a marketing vehicle for WotC, maybe not in a direct line but if you are familiar with what Ryan Dancey had to say about d20 and the OGL it's not difficult to connect the dots. 

Blue Rose was Romantic Fantasy, meaning it dealt with emotional and social conflicts over the adventure and violence that lies at the center of most fantasy games. And I'm not going to bash it for that reason either. That may not be my cup but it has appeal to some, and they were trying to draw in more women at that time, particularly to d20 gaming since White Wolf had the bulk of that market. I am going to bash it for strapping a game that is meant to have these softer conflicts onto a system that is, what, 80% combat and adventure oriented? The changes that made True20 different did not do much to support this different style of play. To me that is a failure of design. I'm not advocating for story games. Again, I simply do not care. But I do care, in a broad sense, about game design and system intent particularly when we are talking about the value of a person's contribution to gaming. What this means to my assessment of Crawford is that, depending on what his contribution to Blue Rose was, he either designed a boring setting, had little to no understanding of how to tie system to theme, or varying degrees of both.

Looking at the rest of his body of work you see that he was instrumental in pushing out a bunch of corporate slop for WotC and not much else. Like nothing. A supplement for Mutants and Masterminds and everything else is 4e or 5e. I have low opinions of both of those editions so my opinion of their quality is inconsequential but it is still a window into his capabilities and contribution to gaming as a body. And to me it just ain't good. He's a company man with a very narrow focus that didn't generate anything of real note and finally ended with a whimper if the 5e reboot's sales are any indicator. I'm not going to say "not a creative bone in his body", that is hyperbole, but I will say a mediocre talent whose career thus far has primarily been being a warm body.

If this signals Crawford's ultimate retirement from the gaming sphere then there is no loss. Any spark of promise he had was snuffed out long ago and there is no shortage of corporate yes-men to do anything he may have been responsible for in the future.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on April 11, 2025, 03:16:54 PMAnyone has the video of the idiot Crawford stating "we want our elfs to be the elfiest elf".

To quote paraphrase Sam Hyde "No, we're not doing that and you're [Crawford] getting called a slur. I don't know which one, whichever I feel like saying at the moment. You're getting called a slur."

There we go there's the cringe line.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on April 13, 2025, 01:16:21 PM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on April 11, 2025, 03:16:54 PMAnyone has the video of the idiot Crawford stating "we want our elfs to be the elfiest elf".

To quote paraphrase Sam Hyde "No, we're not doing that and you're [Crawford] getting called a slur. I don't know which one, whichever I feel like saying at the moment. You're getting called a slur."

Oh that's a good one, what's the slur directed towards Crawford?

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on April 13, 2025, 11:02:14 PMOh that's a good one, what's the slur directed towards Crawford?

Given his proclivities? I'd assume the British word for cigarette or bundle of wood....

Failing that, retard would be my other go-to as well.