Search results

Dragons are always a part of our game, but the are not very often featured in play. The are to be feared and avoided if at all possible. The last time my group encountered one (a black dragon) they had to run for their lives and barely escaped. Dungeons / ruins / caverns make up about 25-30% of...

That is 100% not what @Zardnaar said I call BS - prove it please. So here is the first piece of art in the PHB. Please let me know how it is to "cartoony" and what pencil art is 5x better (whatever that means)

I am not sure 100% what you mean by "shiny cgi type," but I am pretty sure that is false. I see art that follows many different styles, depending on the artist. Digital art is often not of the shin cgi look. I had a conversation with another poster and they were adamant that a particular piece...

Did it go somewhere?

Having done both (and acrylic, pencil, and watercolors), I would disagree. It was much harder for me to become decent at digital art and I never was as good as it as I was with traditional art. For example, it was much easier for me to blend and shade with pencil or paint than it was with my...

I will admit I am having a hard time expressing what I am trying to say, so I apologize for that. However, I think this is a horrible analogy: Reading a story and playing a game are not even within the same realm IMO. I want to be clear that I am not saying a game shouldn't be designed to...

What is different, to my eye, about AI art is that if can look technically good, but the compositions almost always feel stiff and unnatural. Some human artist have the same issue, but almost all AI currently seems to have that issue IMO.

Question for you @Zardnaar: why are you so dismissive of artistic skill? I mean if someone on facebook has skills to match a published artist - great! That isn't a knock on either artist's skill. I mean before Elmore and Caldwell were published they had the skills, they were just not published...

Not sure were you get your AI art, but I haven't seen AI generated art better than what is in the core books (with the exception of one terrible piece in the MM IMO). Of course art is subjective, but AI general just looks off to me.

I think the 2e era of core book interior art was the worst. Some of the 1e art is pretty bad too, but that is the edition I started with so its nostalgia value is hard to beat. EDIT: Actually there is some bad art in 3e too. Now that I think of it more. Each edition has some good and bad art...

While I agree some higher level adventures would be nice, I think the level ranges they provided are adequate for the majority of their marker.

I can't put a % to it, but both of these books appear to be vastly more useful to me than all of the adventure books set in FR. I used to buy those just for the monsters and some times for encounter locations!

Art is subjective ( I think this the best art of any edition of the game), but it is objectively not AI slop. Not to mention you are getting lore and mechanics too. So you appear to be very uninformed about the product.

So was the 4e Underdark book

Maybe me and my group are weird, but I (the DM) find it easy to structure fun and effective play that doesn't rely on the nova/rest/repeat tactic. Heck, it is easy to punish the tactic if I want. We emphasize diverse solutions based on the particular needs of the tasks. Now, I should clarify...

I agree! Unfortunately the rest of your post is too long and since I am at work I don't have time to read it - sorry! Maybe latter.

Sure - that is not really what I was pushing back on. My point, an RPG is played to have fun, so have fun. Don't let "tools" get in the way of that.

Look I am not pushing back against the general idea. I am just pushing back that anyone should play a game like D&D in a manner that is not fun. The most important tool in an RPG is your imagination and "tools" can't take that away from you. Just have fun.

I'm going to push back on this a bit. IMO, if a "best" strategy is not fun, then it is not the best strategy!