| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| fish321 |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 01:15:22
http://blog.contv.com/new-dd-trailer-shows-drizzt-and-demons/?utm_source=socialmedia&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=dnd
Thought some of you might enjoy this and I didn't see it posted anywhere. Forgive me if I'm wrong about either part but personally I got a bit excited :-D |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Eltheron |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 02:58:00
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
I know that WotC's choices are led by what they see as the most profitable product to make (every company's choices are), I was just pointing out why I dislike the current model.
I understand. I'm just saying you're in good company and sympathizing, really.
quote:
Oh, I acknowledged this when they stated ''no reboot'' and took adamant position over it. I was willing to put up with the Sundering because we were promised that it was the last deus-ex-machina to restore the cool elements that the FR had lost along the edition. I was willing to ignore the metastory because WotC basically said that it was the ''RSE to end them all'' and I was hoping what this last cataclysm would bring use a FR with the organizations, deities, nations and so on that define it, but starting anew and going onwards without the cheese of one RSE after another.
They did say all that, but apparently delivering it was much harder to do with their current resources.
What I think is interesting is they always seem to nod knowingly and say, "wait and see" while smiling. I sometimes wonder if they actually don't understand, or if they're just trying to placate the person talking to them so they just go away.
quote:
I don't think that this model is so old. I started playing/running the game in late 2011 and I too identify in it. I can't understand what people see in the new encounters model: If I mainly wanted the fighting, I would rather play a VG. It's cheaper, it has the same result, requires less work and is less time consuming.
Personally, I did what I could to tell them what I want (and I bought the one thing that they made and was an example of what I wanted: the latest Ed's sourcebook).
I really just meant "old" model in the sense that it's definitely not their current model. I agree it wasn't so long ago time-wise that we had Dungeon magazine and one-shot modules. But it's definitely not on their plan-book any more - or at least it seems not to be. It's just AP after AP.
|
| Irennan |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 02:39:27
@Etheron.
I know that WotC's choices are led by what they see as the most profitable product to make (every company's choices are), I was just pointing out why I dislike the current model.
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
I think the thing most people are not wanting to see, not wanting to acknowledge, is that at this point the Realms are defined by that metastory cheese.
There's more Realms content done in the RSE/BBEG style than there is of the varied, low-power kind.
Oh, I acknowledged this when they stated ''no reboot'' and took adamant position over it. I was willing to put up with the Sundering because we were promised that it was the last deus-ex-machina to restore the cool elements that the FR had lost along the edition. I was willing to ignore the metastory because WotC basically said that it was the ''RSE to end them all'' and I was hoping what this last cataclysm would bring use a FR with the organizations, deities, nations and so on that define it, but starting anew and going onwards without the cheese of one RSE after another.
quote:
I think that's reflective of "old model" thinking, really. It's certainly the classic, highly varied, lower powered content that I want, but I personally identify with the "old model" where DMs bought modules and supplements for support - just as you're saying.
And even though surveys and the grapevine, and certainly people at the 'Keep say they want the old model - it's just not what they buy. In other threads, I talked about the mixed messages we send: we insist we want one thing, then we don't buy it. Even during the old days of late 1E and early 2E, I'm told that people didn't buy wonderful products like the Volo Guides - not at the volume of sales that made profit for the company.
What does appear to make profit are these APs with a growing threat that end in saving the world. They are plug-n-play, they fit people who prefer Encounters-style play, they're great for people who don't have a lot of time to weave together a bunch of really cool but individual varied modules or plot hooks from sourcebooks.
I don't think that this model is so old. I started playing/running the game in late 2011 and I too identify in it. I can't understand what people see in the new encounters model: If I mainly wanted the fighting, I would rather play a VG. It's cheaper, it has the same result, requires less work and is less time consuming.
Personally, I did what I could to tell them what I want (and I bought the one thing that they made and was an example of what I wanted: the latest Ed's sourcebook). |
| Eltheron |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 01:54:59
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
What about variety? That's the main point I tried to make. The Realms offer a huge variety of stories to be told, why must they all be about stopping BBEGs#12634667252 from conquering/destroying everything. What about trying to mix various kinds of stories/quests in those self-contained campaigns that you are talking about? Just to keep things fresh and to avoid repetitivity (and to make books more usable).
Personally, I'd love to see more variety, and I think a lot of us here at the Keep would as well. The golden age had a ton of variety, with modules, Dungeon magazine, the occasional AP or even a regional sourcebook.
But variety requires several things they might not have at the moment: staff, funds, and a vision for sandbox-style play.
It's hugely easier to develop a single, long adventure path. It's easier in terms of staff, it's easier in terms of branding, it's cheaper in terms of advertising, and it falls in line with their vision to diversify into multiple medias. It's not hard to notice that literally everything right now is focused on the Sword Coast, whether it's their MMO, their iso-cRPGs, comic, tabletop RPG, and so on. Brand once, advertise once, attempt to capture a wide audience by using multiple nets.
quote:
Also, I don't get why level 15 implies dealing with world destruction or whatever. If a group of characters reach high levels, they aren't automatically supposed to stop gods from destroying the worlds. As I said, that isn't the only kind of story that you can tell.
Adventure Paths culminating in a world threat are certainly overused, but they tend to sell better than unconnected, highly varied content. They also match the classic model of tension-building in adventure novels. Whether we like it or not, the world threat as part of an ongoing AP is now THE model from which they get the most bang for their buck.
quote:
Now we have this ''a world ending threat per year'' (or 2-3 storylines about saving the world per RW year) thing, which is rather ridiculous, if you look at it from an in-world perspective (especially if they all focus on the Sword Coast). It also leads to even more cheese, because every world ending threat is inevitably defeated by some band of random adventurers. It really breaks immersion, when you look at the setting.
I think the thing most people are not wanting to see, not wanting to acknowledge, is that at this point the Realms are defined by that metastory cheese.
There's more Realms content done in the RSE/BBEG style than there is of the varied, low-power kind.
quote:
Finally, modules are supposed to support people's games. They could be used as a campaign, but there are many players and DMs who don't like to run over a binary set by WotC's story. Also, some groups want to make their own stuff, and then take something from modules to enrich their game, if they wish. WotC received a lot of feedback about this and they have recognized that people *want* different kind of stories, so this is a rather shared sentiment over their customer base.
I think that's reflective of "old model" thinking, really. It's certainly the classic, highly varied, lower powered content that I want, but I personally identify with the "old model" where DMs bought modules and supplements for support - just as you're saying.
And even though surveys and the grapevine, and certainly people at the 'Keep say they want the old model - it's just not what they buy. In other threads, I talked about the mixed messages we send: we insist we want one thing, then we don't buy it. Even during the old days of late 1E and early 2E, I'm told that people didn't buy wonderful products like the Volo Guides - not at the volume of sales that made profit for the company.
What does appear to make profit are these APs with a growing threat that end in saving the world. They are plug-n-play, they fit people who prefer Encounters-style play, they're great for people who don't have a lot of time to weave together a bunch of really cool but individual varied modules or plot hooks from sourcebooks.
|
| Seravin |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 01:48:28
SO um...Drizzt versus Demogorgon? What did I just watch? |
| Irennan |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 01:09:58
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
I think some of you might be missing the point
Why are all the 5th ed modules save the world events?
Because they take the characters from levels 1 to 15 and by level 15 you'd be ready to face badass opponenets.
To answer Georges question whats the difference between rescueing the farmers daughter and saving the world?
The answer is scope
Rescueing the Farmers daughter might take a level 1 party to level 3
WOTC have decided to make self contained camapigns for 5ed (and persoanally Im not going to argue with that because otherwise we would be getting short 48-96 page modules products for a narrow field of levels)
What about variety? That's the main point I tried to make. The Realms offer a huge variety of stories to be told, why must they all be about stopping BBEGs#12634667252 from conquering/destroying everything. What about trying to mix various kinds of stories/quests in those self-contained campaigns that you are talking about? Just to keep things fresh and to avoid repetitivity (and to make books more usable).
Also, I don't get why level 15 implies dealing with world destruction or whatever. If a group of characters reach high levels, they aren't automatically supposed to stop gods from destroying the worlds. As I said, that isn't the only kind of story that you can tell.
quote:
and lets be honest the realms has had plenty of save the world modules, novels and and products over the last 25 years, hell First edition had a series of modules to stop Orcus from taking over Vaasa and Damera and ended with the Characters traveling to the abyss to kill orcus and then to the Nine hells to kill Tiamat
The 3 time of Troubles modules (The where stats for bane, Bhaal and Mykrul)
The rage of Dragons novels (A series of novels where the characters stopped Dragonkind from rampaging across Faerun)
Bauldurs gate 1 and 2 (Computer games that revolved around stopping an evil god from returning)
If your asking WOTC to make more "Mundane" (Read low levels modueles) then what your really asking for is shorter products and a return to the 1st edition style campaign where you bounced from Product to product until you finish the campaign at level 20
If something was ''wrong'', so to speak, in the past, it doesn't mean that it has to continue. Besides, looking at what you listed, we have had what, 3-4 storylines over years of publishing and decades of in-world years (on a side note, the Baldur's Gate games didn't deal with world ending stuff. Heck Bhaal has just returned in the Sundering, and the world is still there).
Now we have this ''a world ending threat per year'' (or 2-3 storylines about saving the world per RW year) thing, which is rather ridiculous, if you look at it from an in-world perspective (especially if they all focus on the Sword Coast). It also leads to even more cheese, because every world ending threat is inevitably defeated by some band of random adventurers. It really breaks immersion, when you look at the setting.
Finally, modules are supposed to support people's games. They could be used as a campaign, but there are many players and DMs who don't like to run over a binary set by WotC's story. Also, some groups want to make their own stuff, and then take something from modules to enrich their game, if they wish. WotC received a lot of feedback about this and they have recognized that people *want* different kind of stories, so this is a rather shared sentiment over their customer base. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 31 Aug 2015 : 00:38:37
I think some of you might be missing the point
Why are all the 5th ed modules save the world events?
Because they take the characters from levels 1 to 15 and by level 15 you'd be ready to face badass opponenets.
To answer Georges question whats the difference between rescueing the farmers daughter and saving the world?
The answer is scope
Rescueing the Farmers daughter might take a level 1 party to level 3
WOTC have decided to make self contained camapigns for 5ed (and persoanally Im not going to argue with that because otherwise we would be getting short 48-96 page modules products for a narrow field of levels)
and lets be honest the realms has had plenty of save the world modules, novels and and products over the last 25 years, hell First edition had a series of modules to stop Orcus from taking over Vaasa and Damera and ended with the Characters traveling to the abyss to kill orcus and then to the Nine hells to kill Tiamat
The 3 time of Troubles modules (The where stats for bane, Bhaal and Mykrul)
The rage of Dragons novels (A series of novels where the characters stopped Dragonkind from rampaging across Faerun)
Bauldurs gate 1 and 2 (Computer games that revolved around stopping an evil god from returning)
If your asking WOTC to make more "Mundane" (Read low levels modueles) then what your really asking for is shorter products and a return to the 1st edition style campaign where you bounced from Product to product until you finish the campaign at level 20
|
| Caladan Brood |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 20:50:00
Finally got to see the trailer. It was weird. Drizzt looked weird. The demons..I don't know what I'm supposed to think or feel.
The catchphrase "Dare to Descend" *is* catchy though.
And I agree with "Let's Save the World...Again".. it makes the Realms feel more like a Marvel kind of world than a faux medieval fantasy.
To each his own, I'm going to buy the stuff (already pre-ordered Sword Coast Legends), hoping that my support will result in more Realms stuff. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 16:12:59
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
First off, the guys left over there really aren't 'FR experts', and probably don't know enough to write highly-detailed adventures. Would you want someone who's not all that familiar with the setting writing more lore? Be careful what you wish for.
Already happening. Not to diminish the ''Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide'' (I have hopes for it), but the book that can basically be considered the 5e FRCS doesn't even have Ed among its authors. He has only done unofficial consulting for it. At least Brian Cortijo had a hand in it. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 16:05:20
First off, the guys left over there really aren't 'FR experts', and probably don't know enough to write highly-detailed adventures. Would you want someone who's not all that familiar with the setting writing more lore? Be careful what you wish for.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
What's the difference between "save the universe" adventures with a bit of FR lore tacked on, and smaller in scope "save the farmer's daughter" adventures with a bit of FR lore tacked on?
From my point of view...
"Save the world" scenario - takes place all over Faerûn, or even just all over The North. We get two pages of lore covering that entire region.
"Save the farmer's daughter" scenario - takes place somewhere small, like in a single village, or maybe Loudwater Vale. We get two pages of lore.
See the difference? If we are getting the same amount of lore in a product (or series), then I would rather that lore be about a smaller geographic location. After awhile, all those 'small bits' will add up to a VERY detailed world, like Ed did in the Volo's Guides. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 14:58:39
Your point is just as valid, and I was only guessing at George's meaning. I have two reasons not to buy the product. One the lack of lore, two the repetitive stories that feel like they have been procedurally generated (i.e. put your hand in a bag and pick out the enemy that is trying to destroy the world this year). |
| Irennan |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 14:42:28
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
I wonder was George's statement more a comment on the lack of lore we are receiving period, rather than which mediocre storyline is attached.
When what you want is lore, and what you receive is a single sentence of "lore" with a "save the world from XXX" adventure attached, what does it matter if they change the adventure to "solve the nobleman's murder", or "rescue a group of slaves from slavers", or "stop a group of monsters from wrecking a nearby settlement".
Doesn't matter what adventure they publish, I'm still not buying it, but apparently they don't want my money anymore.
Oh, nevermind then. I misunderstood. I agree that when it comes to lore, there isn't really much (even if I heard that their elemental evil adventures included a settlement writeup). However, if I liked a story, its NPCs and found that it could be useful to my game, I would probably build it regardless. With ''save the world'' stories, that's never going to happen (unless they include abundant FR lore). |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 14:37:19
I wonder was George's statement more a comment on the lack of lore we are receiving period, rather than which mediocre storyline is attached.
When what you want is lore, and what you receive is a single sentence of "lore" with a "save the world from XXX" adventure attached, what does it matter if they change the adventure to "solve the nobleman's murder", or "rescue a group of slaves from slavers", or "stop a group of monsters from wrecking a nearby settlement".
Doesn't matter what adventure they publish, I'm still not buying it, but apparently they don't want my money anymore. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 14:20:12
I'll try to answer your question.
1)What bothers me isn't just that the current adventures are of the ''save the world'' kind, it's the repetitivity. You get to save the world once, then twice, then thrice and so on. It gets boring. Mixing different kind of stories would introduce variety, appeal to a larger public, keep things fresh. ''Save the farmer's child'' is not the only alternative to ''save the world''. Right off the top of my mind, there can be political intrigue stories, exploration stories, plots revolving around people (or returned deities and their followers) rebuilding after all the cataclysms, and so on. You can even mix the various elements in a single story, without making it all about the n-th cliché villain that has come to ruin everyone's day for the lulz.
2)It's also a matter of content usability. It's hard to introduce a storyline that is about saving the world in a game, without making it about the new menace. Because when such a threat appears, not doing one's own best to stop it would be rather foolish. Different kind of plots are more easily and readily useful.
3)An adventure about saving the world can only end in one way, canonically speaking. That means that those stories won't advance the setting, won't add anything, and everything will return to the status quo after their end. If it were otherwise, the planet would become a wreck. Other kind of sotries can be used to actually introduce new lore, new plot hooks, to enrich the setting.
4)World-ending threats are all of sudden popping out every other in-world year (or every year), and all of them happen to want to wreck the Sword Coast. Honestly, this is ridiculous, it's extra cheesy and makes saving the world become an ordinary chore, rather than something dramatic. It removes the appeal of a serious menace: to the inhabitants of Faerun, hearing that someone wants to destroy the world must be like what hearing that it is going to rain is to us. Uber powerful beings also lose their charm: ''oh, what cosmic entity will try to burn us to ashes this year? Wanna bet?''
5)Villains should be less cliché. Give them actual purposes, not just gathering power and conquering the world for the sake of it, or -even worse- destroying everything, because man, that surely is a very smart thing to do. Many D&D villains just aren't compelling, they are walking tropes. I understand that this can't be if they use demons and the likes, so they should also use other kind of villains as well, while world-ending stories usually come with the first kind. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 04:06:08
quote:
Originally posted by Joran Nobleheart
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
The trailer was nice... I'm just bored of their stories. They're all the same, with some godlike evil suddenly coming out of the woodwork to destroy/conquer the world, and ''heroes'' having to save it for the 1265374732875th time. I wonder how long this will go on, before the devs and/or people get tired of the repetitivity and finally decide to do something else.
Yes. Exactly.
I actually spoke with Mike Mearls at GenCon for a few minutes, and told him that people were getting sick of the big events going on in every storyline, and he smiled, nodded and told me he understood. I mentioned that modules like The Shattered Circle, The Haunted Halls of Eveningstar were classics that are remembered for a reason, and that they are legends, like White Plume, Tomb of Horrors, and Ravenloft that people speak about years later. The big events that are so commonplace as to be laughable - not so much. He grinned at me, looked at the guy with him who laughed and nodded back at Mike who looked at me and said, "We know. All I can say is wait. Just wait for it." They glanced at each other again and shared another laugh. I'm hoping that's a good sign. Along with what they did, how they acted, etc when I asked if Ravenloft was going to be coming back in 5E.
What's the difference between "save the universe" adventures with a bit of FR lore tacked on, and smaller in scope "save the farmer's daughter" adventures with a bit of FR lore tacked on?
-- George Krashos |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 30 Aug 2015 : 04:00:58
D&D needs a open world style action adventure game with RPG elemnents using Drizzt as the main character, something in the scale of Assassin's Creed, Shadows of Mordor, or the latest Witcher. He fits the motif and is probably the property's best chance of breaking out to the mainstream.
Its probably somewhat unfair comparing the trailer to some of the best intro trailers for Triple A games in recent memory. Those games probably had an extra zero or two in their budgets compared to Sword Coast Legends and were aimed at an entirely different scale of market, even the Neverwinter MMO. This isn't even the trailer for Sword Coast Legends, this is primarily for a pen & paper product.
The Rage of Demons trailer still manages to look better than many comparable trailers and gave some of the big dogs a run for their money. It has been about a decade since the last truly memorable D&D video game. It takes a hit to re-establish the world in people's minds. This isn't meant for that, but is another building block to hopefully support the video game products Wizards has in their pipeline. At this point, the only way for the tabletop RPG side to be safe is to have a strong non-tabletop portion, be it video games, movies, or the like. Similar to how comicbooks became a secondary supporting media to their massive box office offshoots. |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 21:47:11
That's a good point. I didn't think about that, honestly. And yes, I hope it contains "current clack" also. Always interesting to see what's going on in the world... |
| Irennan |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 21:38:44
I don't really that they will receive substantial mention. After all, they are supposed to end with the BBEG's defeat and everything returning to ''normality''. Maybe if the book will include a ''current clack'' section... |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 21:31:11
I agree with you both! Also, I'm wondering just how much the three adventures will be mentioned in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. Any ideas gentlemen, or is there any information available that mentions them being spoken of in the book? |
| Irennan |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 20:24:57
Another thing that comes to mind is that Faerun, and especially the Sword Coast, where ALL the world ending threats seem to gather, must be a really depressing place to live in. On the bright side, there you can go from ''apprentice who can barely use magic to ignite a fire'' to ''terrific archmage'' in the span of like 6 months (seeing that a threat is defeated and a new one rises every other in-world year...) |
| Delwa |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 20:21:23
quote:
Originally posted by Joran Nobleheart
You know, this just came to me - imagine that the heroes of Tyranny of Dragons are sitting in the Dripping Dagger, regailing their adventures to the taproom, when the table next to them starts talking about their adventures, which are more perilous and grand from their adventures in Elemental Evil. From out of nowhere, the third table there with them speak up about their experiences with Rage of Demons! Then it turns to who ended up being the bigger hero with the most important "I saved the world best from a bigger evil than you!"
Just a funny little scene to picture is all. ;-)
Could lead to a fun bar fight.  |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 20:05:30
You know, this just came to me - imagine that the heroes of Tyranny of Dragons are sitting in the Dripping Dagger, regailing their adventures to the taproom, when the table next to them starts talking about their adventures, which are more perilous and grand from their adventures in Elemental Evil. From out of nowhere, the third table there with them speak up about their experiences with Rage of Demons! Then it turns to who ended up being the bigger hero with the most important "I saved the world best from a bigger evil than you!"
Just a funny little scene to picture is all. ;-) |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 19:57:07
It was my pleasure, Delwa! I'm sorry that I forgot to post that until now, but a lot of things were going on. I'm definitely hoping to see things more along those lines, or even Fighter's Challenge from 2E. It's a great deal more fun for me and my players than "saving the world again this year, with plenty of time still left to do it again" like they are favoring at present... |
| Delwa |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 19:12:40
I'll yeild to y'all on the quality of animation. I have no clue how to judge that. Like most art, I know when I think something is pretty, but I can't tell you why when it comes to balance, composition, etc.
I still liked it, and I am definitely in the "tired of Drizzt" camp. However, I understand that I'm not 100% of the FR fanbase, so I'll leave it at that.
I did enjoy the visuals, just as I still enjoy the BG animations. They give me something to really sink my imagination into and help me describe what I see in my head.
Oh, and Joran, thanks for that tidbit from Mearls. Maybe we'll see a revisit to Evenstar or something soon. |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 18:05:06
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
@Joran Maybe. After all, we're getting a FRCS (sort of) out of the blue, and that's a pleasant surprise. I hope that there are more of the in store.
I completely agree.
By the way, I actually heard a few older gamers at GenCon still talking about their characters that, years before, ventured into Castle Ravenloft. I was so incredibly envious... |
| Irennan |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:53:10
@Joran Maybe. After all, we're getting a FRCS (sort of) out of the blue, and that's a pleasant surprise. I hope that there are more of the in store. |
| Eltheron |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:51:58
Here's what the trailer said to me: more Drizzt, more Underdark stuff, some demons doing random stuff, and "let's try and be edgy and spooky."
Honestly, the animation IS pretty dated and looked a bit cheap. The original Baldur's Gate 2 had this level of animation. It was great, for the time, but this is decades later.
In contrast, here's what the printed advertisements (Forbes especially) said to me: yeah, there will be demons and stuff, "madness" and "insanity" in their wacky/kooky forms, but rather than scary/terrifying moments it's going to have a huge portion of ridiculously silly jokes, goofy names for villains, and pure schlock moments.
What I missed from BOTH, other than the inclusion of Drizzt, is any indication of a feeling or tone of the Forgotten Realms.
|
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:47:16
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
The trailer was nice... I'm just bored of their stories. They're all the same, with some godlike evil suddenly coming out of the woodwork to destroy/conquer the world, and ''heroes'' having to save it for the 1265374732875th time. I wonder how long this will go on, before the devs and/or people get tired of the repetitivity and finally decide to do something else.
Yes. Exactly.
I actually spoke with Mike Mearls at GenCon for a few minutes, and told him that people were getting sick of the big events going on in every storyline, and he smiled, nodded and told me he understood. I mentioned that modules like The Shattered Circle, The Haunted Halls of Eveningstar were classics that are remembered for a reason, and that they are legends, like White Plume, Tomb of Horrors, and Ravenloft that people speak about years later. The big events that are so commonplace as to be laughable - not so much. He grinned at me, looked at the guy with him who laughed and nodded back at Mike who looked at me and said, "We know. All I can say is wait. Just wait for it." They glanced at each other again and shared another laugh. I'm hoping that's a good sign. Along with what they did, how they acted, etc when I asked if Ravenloft was going to be coming back in 5E. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:35:16
The trailer was nice... I'm just bored of their stories. They're all the same, with some godlike evil suddenly coming out of the woodwork to destroy/conquer the world, and ''heroes'' having to save it for the 1265374732875th time. I wonder how long this will go on, before the devs and/or people get tired of the repetitivity and finally decide to do something else. |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:24:31
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I liked the trailer, but I didn't like that it seemed to be 'all about Drizzt'.
Yeah, I hated that, too. I'm really tired of that character... |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 29 Aug 2015 : 17:21:23
I'm surprised at how dated the special effects were. Warhammer and DC Online, even Neverwinter MMo had better cinematic graphics.
It really looks low budget. |
|
|
