Quote from: RabidWookie on January 08, 2023, 04:13:42 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 02:49:28 AM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 08, 2023, 02:36:40 AM
Did Monsters of the Multiverse make any egregious changes to the books it's based on?

That is how much of the text description they redacted from the Neogi from Mords.  Does it look like the CIA's files they will release on the CIA's involvement with the Kennedy Assasination or D&D 5E content?  Hard to tell the difference isn't it.  For multiverse they pulled all world lore that was included on races, monsters and demons across Mords and Volo's, they ripped it out.

That seems like it might actually be an improvement to me. I generally hate lore/fluff in WotC books because it's almost never done well, so I'd rather just come up with my own background info and use the provided stats.

The problem is, if the fluff/lore is in the book, you can just ignore it. People that like it can't make it materialize by wishing for it.

So the old way did no more than, at most, mildly inconvenience you; whereas removing the fluff/lore screws many enthusiasts.

  The paragraph in Basic/the PHB was the first sign of the game explicitly promoting the New Order, and you could find similar flags and signals in subsequent products, but as I understand it, it didn't start really picking up speed until Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, which made Waterdeep sound like Fantasy Seattle. (The only 5E product I ever owned was Curse of Strahd, and I've sold it off.)

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 08, 2023, 09:39:05 AM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 08, 2023, 04:13:42 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 02:49:28 AM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 08, 2023, 02:36:40 AM
Did Monsters of the Multiverse make any egregious changes to the books it's based on?

That is how much of the text description they redacted from the Neogi from Mords.  Does it look like the CIA's files they will release on the CIA's involvement with the Kennedy Assasination or D&D 5E content?  Hard to tell the difference isn't it.  For multiverse they pulled all world lore that was included on races, monsters and demons across Mords and Volo's, they ripped it out.

That seems like it might actually be an improvement to me. I generally hate lore/fluff in WotC books because it's almost never done well, so I'd rather just come up with my own background info and use the provided stats.

The problem is, if the fluff/lore is in the book, you can just ignore it. People that like it can't make it materialize by wishing for it.

So the old way did no more than, at most, mildly inconvenience you; whereas removing the fluff/lore screws many enthusiasts.

The lore section is what gives you the understanding of the concept of good and evil.  Anything that depicts good or evil actions by a race are removed by Seattle D&D.  They do that so when their political allies do evil, people won't have a moral compass to understand what is being done is arguably evil.  It takes a while to change a people to an entities liking but you do it through their culture, myth and religion and D&D is part of culture.  Do you think a communist likes being aligned with Lawful Evil by D&D's alignment system, no so get rid of the alignment system so that analogy can't be made. 

The crap we are seeing in D&D is just a symptom and its prevalent in a lot of other media and entertainment.  If it was just a one off, no big, but its in most companies now and they are making financial decisions that costs them $100M's+ to promote this narrative while the public refuses to buy it.  D&D is an avenue where they aren't losing as much because they get them subconsciously as kids 12+ and most parents don't have a reference point.  Meanwhile, "Strange Worlds" going gay, a lot of parents are aware and they can chose not to take their kids to see if it is something they don't want to expose their 12 years old to.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 10:10:48 AMDo you think a communist likes being aligned with Lawful Evil by D&D's alignment system, no so get rid of the alignment system so that analogy can't be made.

As we're still in the revolutionary stage, I'd argue that the rank and file useful idiots are Chaotic Evil. Only the puppet masters are Lawful Evil.

Quote from: dkabq on January 08, 2023, 06:04:03 AM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 07, 2023, 09:23:16 PM
Easy, the paragraph in chapter 4 that says, "You don't need to be confined to binary notions of sex and gender."

This set the precedent that the DM cannot veto a player's character concept no matter how much that concept doesn't fit into the game's setting. It was all downhill from there.

Only if you think that the DM cannot override any rule in the book.

By that logic no game can ever be woke because the DM can just override all the woke parts. And if that's the standard what's the point of even talking about a game?

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 05:56:18 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 03:00:28 AM
The art has been fairly woke with no one allowed to show much if any secondary sexual characteristics. 

There was definitely a striking prudery in the 5e art. Even the white male human barbarian is always fully clothed. There is barely any skin showing, and the iconic knight/paladin type character is hard to tell if male or female - I'm guessing female. Apparently there is not a single belly button in all of 5e art.

The art for 5e has been kind of "blech" across the board, and it's not just the lack of blood and boobies. Generally the poses are boring or nonsensical, the colors are washed out, the details are blurry, and a lot of the characters are just ugly. It's not that the artists for 5e are necessarily without skill, but it feels like there's been a mandate from day 1 to maintain the most mild and inoffensive art style possible in all illustrations.

Though it turns out that the strange case of the androgynous paladin goes back to at least 3rd edition:

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 08, 2023, 11:23:22 AM

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 05:56:18 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 03:00:28 AM
The art has been fairly woke with no one allowed to show much if any secondary sexual characteristics. 

There was definitely a striking prudery in the 5e art. Even the white male human barbarian is always fully clothed. There is barely any skin showing, and the iconic knight/paladin type character is hard to tell if male or female - I'm guessing female. Apparently there is not a single belly button in all of 5e art.

The art for 5e has been kind of "blech" across the board, and it's not just the lack of blood and boobies. Generally the poses are boring or nonsensical, the colors are washed out, the details are blurry, and a lot of the characters are just ugly. It's not that the artists for 5e are necessarily without skill, but it feels like there's been a mandate from day 1 to maintain the most mild and inoffensive art style possible in all illustrations.

Though it turns out that the strange case of the androgynous paladin goes back to at least 3rd edition:

The original D&D art was amateurish, but with heart.

AD&D was was both professional, and beautiful, a true high water mark. I'd happily hang AD&D art on my wall.

3.5 was blandly professional, with ups and downs.

5e is designed by people that dislike beauty and the human form.

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 07, 2023, 09:19:17 PM
I remember reading through the 5e core books upon release in 2014 and thinking they were pretty good. What was the turning point where wokeness started to ruin the game?

I'd say it started with Storm King's Thunder in 2017, which was (to my knowledge) the first adventure to introduce a gay character, a black lesbian who runs an inn in the village of Triboar. Then Ghosts of Saltmarch introduced a "hardened" group of marine veterans run by Tom and Will Stoutly, a married gay couple. I presume things have only gotten worse since then, but I stopped consuming WotC products at that point, so I wouldn't know.

Seriously, WTF is wrong with playing in a setting where non-standard sexual preferences are a behind closed doors thing? Why the need to turn essentially medieval settings in to Portland?

How can you roleplay challenging stereotypes when everyone accepts you? How can you overcome handicaps when you have a magic wheelchair? Woman in a man's world proving her worth? Oh, the captain of the royal guard is a woman.

No challenges, roleplaying or mechanically. Just an auto-win setting where people can roleplay fetishes and talk about food.



ADDENDUM: I focus on sex preference, because that's what we hear 24/7, but if I played a European in 17th century Japan, I'd accept being treated like a circus freak. If I played a black cowboy, I'd know I'd get treated badly by some npc's.

If I was in sci-fi, and crash landed on a Matriarchal world and they enslaved me, I wouldn't throw a shit-fit.

Quote from: Horace on January 08, 2023, 12:34:05 PM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 07, 2023, 09:19:17 PM
I remember reading through the 5e core books upon release in 2014 and thinking they were pretty good. What was the turning point where wokeness started to ruin the game?

I'd say it started with Storm King's Thunder in 2017, which was (to my knowledge) the first adventure to introduce a gay character, a black lesbian who runs an inn in the village of Triboar. Then Ghosts of Saltmarch introduced a "hardened" group of marine veterans run by Tom and Will Stoutly, a married gay couple. I presume things have only gotten worse since then, but I stopped consuming WotC products at that point, so I wouldn't know.

The only people who have to read that shit are the DM's if they are using WotC material.  Even then, just throw out the perversion and replace their shit.  You don't have to spread the degeneracy to people.  My suggestion is use 4E content and ignore 5E lore/writing completely.

5E went woke somewhere in 3E when they started using female pronouns exclusively or using the "White male" fighter character as the running joke/dead body in all the art.

Quote from: Zelen on January 08, 2023, 02:17:42 PM
5E went woke somewhere in 3E when they started using female pronouns exclusively or using the "White male" fighter character as the running joke/dead body in all the art.

This is true. From what I recall, the designers were actually mad that the marketers prominently used the white male fighter in the artwork. Or maybe they were mad that the fighter even was a white male. I don't remember the specifics. All I remember is that 3E D&D was super-woke for its time -- just slightly more reined in than what we have today.

I actually stopped playing D&D during the 3E playtest because of things like this. What really got to me, though, besides the terrible artwork (sorry, completely impractical and ahistorical spiky-armor Emo-goth fans) was the removal of class/race restrictions. Apparently that was supposed to be some sort of selling point at the time ("You can play a gnome paladin! Hurray!") but it was an abomination to me. That's when I decided that D&D wasn't a game I wanted to play and its fans were not people I wanted to associate with.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 07, 2023, 09:23:16 PM
Easy, the paragraph in chapter 4 that says, "You don't need to be confined to binary notions of sex and gender."

This set the precedent that the DM cannot veto a player's character concept no matter how much that concept doesn't fit into the game's setting. It was all downhill from there.

That's why I did not buy ANY 5e book at all. I could see where it was going right at that moment.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 01:24:08 PM

Quote from: Horace on January 08, 2023, 12:34:05 PM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 07, 2023, 09:19:17 PM
I remember reading through the 5e core books upon release in 2014 and thinking they were pretty good. What was the turning point where wokeness started to ruin the game?

I'd say it started with Storm King's Thunder in 2017, which was (to my knowledge) the first adventure to introduce a gay character, a black lesbian who runs an inn in the village of Triboar. Then Ghosts of Saltmarch introduced a "hardened" group of marine veterans run by Tom and Will Stoutly, a married gay couple. I presume things have only gotten worse since then, but I stopped consuming WotC products at that point, so I wouldn't know.

The only people who have to read that shit are the DM's if they are using WotC material.  Even then, just throw out the perversion and replace their shit.  You don't have to spread the degeneracy to people.  My suggestion is use 4E content and ignore 5E lore/writing completely.

Don't give your money to them in the first place. Your money is what is helping to enable/spread it.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 01:24:08 PM

Quote from: Horace on January 08, 2023, 12:34:05 PM

Quote from: RabidWookie on January 07, 2023, 09:19:17 PM
I remember reading through the 5e core books upon release in 2014 and thinking they were pretty good. What was the turning point where wokeness started to ruin the game?

I'd say it started with Storm King's Thunder in 2017, which was (to my knowledge) the first adventure to introduce a gay character, a black lesbian who runs an inn in the village of Triboar. Then Ghosts of Saltmarch introduced a "hardened" group of marine veterans run by Tom and Will Stoutly, a married gay couple. I presume things have only gotten worse since then, but I stopped consuming WotC products at that point, so I wouldn't know.

The only people who have to read that shit are the DM's if they are using WotC material.  Even then, just throw out the perversion and replace their shit.  You don't have to spread the degeneracy to people.  My suggestion is use 4E content and ignore 5E lore/writing completely.

I would be interested to find out what was said about the innkeeper in Triboar in a 1e/2e/3e product and see what was mentioned.  I'm betting that if *any* hint of the sexual orientation exists in older product, it would have been subtle and easily ignored.  Greenwood was never shy about sexuality, but never in your face.  The 5e writers are nowhere near as talented - so any blatant mention of orientation is a combo of wokeness *and* lack of talent.

As to 4e lore? No thanks.  Hated it.  I'll stick to 1e and 2e with 3e to fill in the blanks.