Reblog For A Wider Audience Please!

Reblog for a wider audience please!

That's really good! Wonderful art.

Properly punchable, if I do say so myself

I tried to depict Kelsier's "Hawkish features", tell me what you think! by Barthollamew

This brings me hope

getting defensive on behalf of a widely acclaimed and beloved media object is some of the most pathetic behaviour i can imagine for real. like i dont engage because i believe in nice times on the computer and i dont want to wade into mires of purposefully inflammatory bad faith discourse but the base emotional impulse behind those tiktoks about how anyone who doesn't like marvel just wants to watch ten-hour black and white serbian pigeon movies (and that's a bad thing?) inspires a reaction of profound disdain

This animation without the filter because it fucked with the framerate for some reason (this isn't the intended look otherwise, but bleh)

Welcome to Dragon of the Day, where I give you your daily dose of dragons. Here’s todays dragon. My favorite, Paarthurnax.

God I love Paarthurnax so much. I love that dulled golden color of his scales. I bet they’d be soft if I hugged him. Speaking of hugs, I bet being wrapped up by his wings would be nice…

Anyways, Paarthurnax is from the hit 2011 game, Skyrim. He does cool stuff like debate philosophy, teach you a new language, and get you to kill his brother. He is pretty epic, I give him a 10/10. Screw you Delphine for trying to make me kill him.

That’s all for today’s dragon. I would say come by tomorrow, but you probably shouldn’t.

I think we're finally finding the issue here, which is that dnd has pulled from so many different forms of media and archetypes, and often from different ones that are entirely different in set up and power scaling and magic and such. To simplify, we pulled wizards from things like myths and fancy magic users and the fighter is basically "well its medieval, gotta have a plate wearing sword guy" . And unless you set up a world to accomdate that, to either figure out the neccesarily limitations on magic to have a fighter make sense as being somewhat practical, or expand the magic (non-real elements) to include martial prowess and toughness, the fighter and the wizard basically come from different realities.

Anyway this is why wotc should publish more individual setting books with actual different rules that don't actually work together across settings. Because if you want different themes to your game world, the way players understand that is through the mechanics, and therefore how you define the theme. And if they want to have some big way it all works, they need to stop holding onto these fragments of tradition that say random things about how the rules should be, from earlier editions, that no longer actually work in the setting and world they're trying to build, but are just holdovers.

I doubt that will ever happen. But it would be nice, if they said "these rules are how greyhawk works, this is how eberron works, this is how the forgotten realms works." But at that point the ideal would be to have a different rpg for each one. Which won't happen.

I suppose a compromize could be to establish a firm setting, admit that the rules are unique to that setting and probably shouldnt be one to one ported elsewhere, and then make conversion kits galore for any kind of theme and setting, rather than trying to shoehorn them all into the original setting.

oh but as an aside: in terms of giving classes stuff to do outside their central domain of expertise, you don't really need to look for esoteric stuff for fighters, they've got, like, "being scary", "being beefy", "being good at smashing or moving things", "being athletic", and that's fine? Like if those aren't coming out as useful in a dungeon crawl, or if spellcasters are matching them just on the basis of some handwavey "magic can do anything!" explanation, maybe that's the problem and not that fighters need broader domains of built-in competence. those seem like things that should be useful and character-defining outside of fights, don't they?