Search results

This is certainly true. And I think an interesting point that hasn't yet been examined. What kinds of threats would D&D monsters represent in the more modern milieu you are looking for? Would post-medieval adventurers wear "dungeon armor" in the same way that divers wear shark armor...

Frieren was very good (and would fit the mood of these special edition covers quite well).

Maybe a gelatinous cube?

If this is an Eberron adventure that you ran, what were the medievalist mechanical taxes you felt you were paying by using D&D? Or, what pulpy flair did you feel had inadequate mechanical support?

If anime is any guide, changing from a medieval setting needn't do much in terms of classes, or weapons, and guns needn't be the be all end all weapon of choice.. Watched a show recently that had all the gaslight, steam-powered locomotives, and horse-drawn carriages you could want, and they...

Looks like it was streamed 7 years ago?

Based on personality..probably halfling. If I was choosing..maybe gnome. Like, aspirationally, I really appreciate industrious creativity..But realistically, I'm more of a connoisseur of snacking idly.

Based on the title of the thread, I assume there is a gif missing..I've provided options below..

Sure, I wouldn't disagree. That said, if the cover art inspires more players to look for more nice in-character moments outside of combat, I think that's a good thing.

I think there's a general question of the purpose of the art as representation vs. inspiration. And also how the cover fits into the broader portfolio of the art included in the book. If all someone sees is the cover, then I can see how it would be viewed as disconnected from the game...

Hmm. That certainly qualifies as a reason. Not sure either piece of art indicates that the presence of this dragon is "special" in any way. Like, it's fine, but a little odd.

While I do quite like this, and moreso than the original, it is quite strange that both of them feature ally dragons. Is this a circumstance that happens often for others? Certainly has never occurred for me.

It gives me "lofi art girl" from YouTube vibes. Less melancholy (to me anyway), more chill. I quite like it as well. Note: Bonus points for including both a dungeon and a dragon on the cover. Curiosity points(?) for featuring neither swords nor sorcery.

My preferred flavor of gelatinous cube is cherry, but failing that..green.

Yeah. As long as it's clear to the DM and players that the DM can add or remove spells from the respective categories at their discretion. Edit: stuff that gets coded as 'rare' in player-facing literature often starts to stride into some weird worldbuilding issues.

Yeah thinking something like that. Maybe the first roll made with advantage or something.

I expect that'd be more palatable. Personally I'm partial to something like making it two arcana skill checks, one for each spell you get when you level, with degrees of success/failure. Something like: Crit fail - No spell, or pure random spell Fail - Random(ish?) spell from spell school...

With over 300 spells, I think you'd need to have a pretty heavy thumb on the scales to get to playability for random selection. Probably some mechanism to limit the population of potential results to some reasonable number, maybe 4 or 5. Ultimately, my real issue would be from the narrative...

Can't they only prepare like half of those spells anyway?

Yeah. I'm not sure what the right balance is for how or what spells player's should get. I think narratively, it makes sense that they'd be training to execute some number of spells they want to learn, so I don't think I'd want to take that away entirely. Maybe it could be tied to the Arcane...