So, I caught the new DnD movie

[svensson]

Well, I caught the new DnD flick.

It wasn't bad. It had most of the tropes covered. The CGI wasn't too bad, although in some spots it was as bad as 47 Ronin. And it proves something d20 players have know since 3.0 came out: bards are useless. 😁

However, it DID really make me wish for a RuneQuest movie... You know, Troy with some Harryhausen thrown in doing Gloranthan themes... empowering Runes, Praxian beast nomads, and the rest of the stuff we love.

Edited April 2, 2023 by svensson

[Baron Wulfraed]

20 minutes ago, svensson said:

However, it DID really make me wish for a RuneQuest movie... You know, Troy with some Harryhausen thrown in doing Gloranthan themes... empowering Runes, Praxian beast nomads, and the rest of the stuff we love.

Dr. Who as villainous sorcerer? 😈  https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Prince_Koura

[svensson]

15 minutes ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

Dr. Who as villainous sorcerer? 😈  https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Prince_Koura

With hopefully less fake Arab-ish.... 😁

[simonh]

14 hours ago, svensson said:

It wasn't bad. It had most of the tropes covered. The CGI wasn't too bad, although in some spots it was as bad as 47 Ronin. And it proves something d20 players have know since 3.0 came out: bards are useless. 😁

They're a kind of dumb idea, but as characters Ive seen them used pretty effectively in 5e. You can go a long way be re-skinning them, a player in one game had a Bard character, but played him as a sinister dark charisma powered psychic manipulator.

[svensson]

On 4/2/2023 at 7:42 AM, simonh said:

They're a kind of dumb idea, but as characters Ive seen them used pretty effectively in 5e. You can go a long way be re-skinning them, a player in one game had a Bard character, but played him as a sinister dark charisma powered psychic manipulator.

The problem with bards [besides the player that likes playing bards] is that the only thing they're good at is talking. If the player and the referee are both good at talking, it can be entertaining. In any other circumstance a bard is a spot in the party that could have been taken up with someone useful.

See also: Monks.

You've seen this before... you have 4 players at the table. Three players are smart enough to fill the needed roles... a tank, a healer, a dps guy. And then one clown decides he 'wants to  play something different'. So, now we have a bard or monk in the party. Every single thing they can do is done better by someone else on the team, so they're almost useful at most things but not really competent at anything.

This focus on the 'four food groups' is one of the reasons why I've totally abandoned class based systems altogether.

Edited October 19, 2023 by svensson

[g33k]

1 hour ago, svensson said:

...

This focus on the 'four food groups' is one of the reasons why I've totally abandoned class based systems altogether.

One  can  play one's D&D in other modes, though... in dungeon-delving / combat, many groups find good use for the high-mobility-combatant Monk class, who can be a direct melee-threat anywhere on the battlemat; some campaigns get deep into politics / socio-economics / courtly/guildish intrigue / etc, where the Bard becomes the premier class in play; etc etc etc.

That being said... I largely agree with you about most class-and-level systems.  That they  can be played  in other modes than the "primary" one (as-designed / per RAW) isn't exactly the most ringing endorsement of their quality...  🙄 

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by g33k

[Darius West]

On 4/2/2023 at 10:08 AM, svensson said:

The CGI wasn't too bad, although in some spots it was as bad as 47 Ronin. And it proves something d20 players have know since 3.0 came out: bards are useless. 😁

Actually you missed how the bard was using inspiration to improve the party's performances with all those pep talks.  

[MOB]

On 4/2/2023 at 10:08 AM, svensson said:

However, it DID really make me wish for a RuneQuest movie... You know, Troy with some Harryhausen thrown in doing Gloranthan themes... empowering Runes, Praxian beast nomads, and the rest of the stuff we love.

We have some irons in the Hollywood fire. The D&D movie becoming a huge popular success and start of a new fantasy franchise will certainly not hurt the chances of a RuneQuest movie/series one day.

Edited April 4, 2023 by MOB

[svensson]

2 hours ago, MOB said:

We have some irons in the Hollywood fire. The D&D movie becoming a huge popular success and start of a new fantasy franchise will certainly not hurt the chances of a RuneQuest movie/series one day.

Would it be too much to ask to have the hero be a Rhino Rider?

Yeah, probably. 😉

[Qizilbashwoman]

the best comment i've seen about the new D&D Movie so far is someone asking what game system they should use to run an adventure in it, hahaha

[Bill the barbarian]

Oh, there's a DnD flick... wake me when it is over....

 

[Qizilbashwoman]

2 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Oh, there's a DnD flick... wake me when it is over....

 

this one has had good reviews (unlike any other D&D film ever made)

[PhilHibbs]

A "D&D" movie is a strange concept. What world is it set in? Greyhawk? Dragonlance? Dark Sun? Birthright? Order Of The Stick? I assume it's the first of those, if any. But that is the more interesting question to me. Making a movie about a game, rather than the world that the game is set in, odd. I mean I do understand it, it has the broad name recognition that none of the world settings have.

But I guess if there ever was a Glorantha movie, I can understand it being branded "RuneQuest" for the same reason. At least RuneQuest and Glorantha are closer to a 1:1 correlation than D&D and its various official worlds.

Looking forward to the OOTS animated feature.

[Nozbat]

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

What world is it set in

Its set in Ireland... in studios and locations close to where I live...lol

Oh.. that's where it was filmed... not set 😇

[simonh]

Apparently it's Forgotten Realms, or so I'm told.

I suppose you could look at it in the same way as movies with genre names.

Edited April 5, 2023 by simonh

[PhilHibbs]

7 hours ago, simonh said:

Apparently it's Forgotten Realms, or so I'm told.

Oh right, I'd forgotten about that one.

[g33k]

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Oh right, I'd forgotten about that one.

The FR is, I think, the biggest / most-popular setting that D&D has ...
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q="forgotten realms",%2Fm%2F0cn8z,exandria,%2Fm%2F019134&hl=en
("Exandria" is the custom world created by Mercer&Co for their popular "Critical Role" web series)

In case folks didn't know:  the FR is akin to Glorantha, in that it began in the 1960's, before Gygax & Arneson & that cadre began adapting their wargames.

Stafford was creating his world as an exploration of myth & sociology & c.
Ed Greenwood created the Realms as an explicitly-kitchen-sink fantasy setting where he could place any sort of fantasy fiction, whether comedic or pulpy or high-fantasy, from shorts to novels to multi-volume sets.

Each of the creators met RPG's, and realized the new medium would be a good match for their world.

Edited April 5, 2023 by g33k

[svensson]

It's no more or less than a 'DnD Marvel movie'.

That said, they were careful with the matte work behind the CGI to look like illustrations. They were [naturally] accurate as Hell with the beasties, spells, and other mechanics. They never explicitly said that it was set in the Forgotten Realms, but this became clear when the plot involved Harpers and the adventure took place mostly in Neverwinter. Extra points for the Underdark chapter NOT including drow.

As I understand it, there are discussions as to whether or not Drizzt will get film exposure or not. Both a TV series and a movie have been mentioned on the 'Net. Several things militate for and against that. Pro is the reception of Witcher Season 1, Game of Thrones, and the LOTR movies. Anti- is the reception of Witcher Season 2, the lukewarm ratings of Rings of Power [I'm a lifelong LOTR honk, DON'T get me started on 'Game of Rings'], and every Conan movie ever made [after the first Schwarzeneggar one]. We'll see if this rendition of 'Intro to That Game Your Kid Plays' is enough to tip the scales one way or another.

Honest good things about the movie:

-- Chris Pine is a good actor. He took a fairly lackadaisical script and tried to do something with it.

-- I enjoyed the acting of Rege-Jean Page, Justice Smith [suitable name for a paladin], Sophie Lillis and Daisy Head.

-- There is at least one really funny 'player character solution' to a problem... I honestly laughed my butt off at it.

-- The druid putting a beat-down on a bad guy at the end was also funny.

-- Again, most of the movie was true to the source material.

Honest bad things about the movie:

-- Hugh Grant comes across ridiculously smarmy and downright 'icky'.

-- Michelle Rodriguez has been trying to break out into bigger roles and this one simply doesn't help her. She's still a sidekick, a well paid sidekick, but...

-- The script was almost stupidly simple. Like 'Disney' simple. Not 'Disney+ insider jokes for grown ups'... just vanilla 'Cindarella' Disney.

-- The rubber 'Dennis the Menace' slingshot attached to the bracer on the druid was stupid. So stupid, in fact, that I'm going to have to warn my players that any such attempt will be Very Bad For Them.

Edited May 22, 2023 by svensson

[Rob Darvall]

On 4/4/2023 at 8:26 PM, svensson said:

Would it be too much to ask to have the hero be a Rhino Rider?

Yeah, probably. 😉

Would it be too much to ask to have the hero be a Rhino?

Asking for a nephew.

[svensson]

4 minutes ago, Rob Darvall said:

Would it be too much to ask to have the hero be a Rhino?

Asking for a nephew.

 

[Baron]

On 4/2/2023 at 8:22 AM, svensson said:

The problem with bards [besides the player that likes playing bards] is that the only thing their good at is talking.

See also: Monks.

I finally saw the movie myself. According to the numbers I've seen, which I'll share here, it might not have done well enough to merit a sequel. Although they could push ahead anyway on a second try. There's also a TV show in the works, that might make another movie palatable.

The numbers (I'm just copy-pasting someone else):

April 17th:

Domestic Box Office $74,248,871

International Box Office $82,933,261

Worldwide Box Office $157,182,132

Source: https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Dungeons-and-Dragons-Honor-Among-Thieves-(2023)#tab=summary

Budget: $151 million

Standard to break even 2.5X the budget: $378 million

Currently losing: 378-157 = $221 million

https://screenrant.com/how-much-ant-man-wasp-quantumania-cost-to-make/

So, the film has grossed ~97 million (assuming that Hasbro got the normal 60% of the ticket sales... but it could be less if Hasbro didn't have as good as contract as the other big players) on a budget of $150 million to make (and a reasonable estimate of an additional $100 million to promote).

It tanked.

April 27:

Well, at this point I think it's safe to say it did tank:

Grosses:

Domestic (46.5%) $83,262,439

International (53.5%) $95,800,000

Worldwide $179,062,439

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl1879410177/

May 14:

Budget: $151 million

Standard to break even 2.5X the budget: $378 million

Worldwide Box office: $203 million

Currently losing: 378-203 = $175 million

Those numbers are to date AND very generous BTW the multiplier is 2.5 to 3 X it's budget to break even.

 

I do have to speak up for the bard (and monk) though. Of course, I'm speaking from the POV of 1st ed AD&D, which is my D&D. I can't speak to other editions. The bard is supposed to be based on the Celtic figure, who studied under druid tutelage. He studied law and acted as an arbiter. He was the society's historian. He acted as herald. He also held the role our modern press is supposed to fill, that is, a check on unsuitable rulers. He supposedly has powers one might attribute to magic. Now, that's the history. In 1st ed he has to be a powerful fighter, then possess the skills of a powerful thief. That latter probably for the stealth skills as opposed to stealing. Finally he gets druid spells and other magical powers. Again, I can't speak for other D&D editions, but in 1st ed he's a power to be reckoned with, which is why he appears in an appendix instead of the rules proper, as an option some DMs might not employ.

If you're interested in more, I recommend Keith Taylor's Bard series.

The monk also appears at the end of the chargen section as optional in 1st ed. With his high movement rate, ability to deflect missile weapons, stunning strike (or even "quivering palm," which is a one-shot death blow), special abilities like speaking with plants and animals, and multiple attacks, he has lots of potential. If you say he's not as effective as a warrior with great equipment, well I guess that depends on what you want to accomplish. The game isn't all about combat. But as an unarmored and unarmed combatant, he can be a lot of fun to play. You don't choose a monk if you just want to hit things with your sword.

So yeah, I didn't think the movie was all that, but it made me laugh. And its bard didn't stack up to the other "player characters." A missed opportunity in my book.

[svensson]

1 hour ago, Baron said:

I finally saw the movie myself. According to the numbers I've seen, which I'll share here, it might not have done well enough to merit a sequel. Although they could push ahead anyway on a second try. There's also a TV show in the works, that might make another movie palatable.

The numbers (I'm just copy-pasting someone else):

April 17th:

Domestic Box Office $74,248,871

International Box Office $82,933,261

Worldwide Box Office $157,182,132

Source: https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Dungeons-and-Dragons-Honor-Among-Thieves-(2023)#tab=summary

Budget: $151 million

Standard to break even 2.5X the budget: $378 million

Currently losing: 378-157 = $221 million

https://screenrant.com/how-much-ant-man-wasp-quantumania-cost-to-make/

So, the film has grossed ~97 million (assuming that Hasbro got the normal 60% of the ticket sales... but it could be less if Hasbro didn't have as good as contract as the other big players) on a budget of $150 million to make (and a reasonable estimate of an additional $100 million to promote).

It tanked.

April 27:

Well, at this point I think it's safe to say it did tank:

Grosses:

Domestic (46.5%) $83,262,439

International (53.5%) $95,800,000

Worldwide $179,062,439

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl1879410177/

May 14:

Budget: $151 million

Standard to break even 2.5X the budget: $378 million

Worldwide Box office: $203 million

Currently losing: 378-203 = $175 million

Those numbers are to date AND very generous BTW the multiplier is 2.5 to 3 X it's budget to break even.

 

I do have to speak up for the bard (and monk) though. Of course, I'm speaking from the POV of 1st ed AD&D, which is my D&D. I can't speak to other editions. The bard is supposed to be based on the Celtic figure, who studied under druid tutelage. He studied law and acted as an arbiter. He was the society's historian. He acted as herald. He also held the role our modern press is supposed to fill, that is, a check on unsuitable rulers. He supposedly has powers one might attribute to magic. Now, that's the history. In 1st ed he has to be a powerful fighter, then possess the skills of a powerful thief. That latter probably for the stealth skills as opposed to stealing. Finally he gets druid spells and other magical powers. Again, I can't speak for other D&D editions, but in 1st ed he's a power to be reckoned with, which is why he appears in an appendix instead of the rules proper, as an option some DMs might not employ.

If you're interested in more, I recommend Keith Taylor's Bard series.

The monk also appears at the end of the chargen section as optional in 1st ed. With his high movement rate, ability to deflect missile weapons, stunning strike (or even "quivering palm," which is a one-shot death blow), special abilities like speaking with plants and animals, and multiple attacks, he has lots of potential. If you say he's not as effective as a warrior with great equipment, well I guess that depends on what you want to accomplish. The game isn't all about combat. But as an unarmored and unarmed combatant, he can be a lot of fun to play. You don't choose a monk if you just want to hit things with your sword.

So yeah, I didn't think the movie was all that, but it made me laugh. And its bard didn't stack up to the other "player characters." A missed opportunity in my book.

In later editions, the bard is not the badass Fighter + Thief + Magic guy in 1st edition. They are NOT Gellor from the Gord the Rogue books. From 3.0 onwards, bards are the dilettante talky guy. This is fine if the player is a social, clever, 'talky' person AND if the referee is social and witty enough to work with it.. But it sucks if the player doesn't have that personality. They can do a lot of things, but they don't do anything well enough to take up that necessary spot in a 4-player party.

Their magic is mostly of the support variety, with a mix of charm and sonic damage spells. Their magic is mostly arcane with a small number of clerical spells as leavening. And at no point are they as good at their spells as the wizards or clerics they're supposed replace.

And a even multiclass Fighter Thief is a better combatant and thief than a single classed bard of twice the level.

Their songs can be helpful, but really it's support magic.

Bards and monks are great for the fifth guy in the party, but they simply cannot hold down the workload of they guy they replace any of the four classes you need in a basic 4-person party [tank, cleric, damager, trap-monkey].

[Baron]

56 minutes ago, svensson said:

In later editions, the bard is not the badass Fighter + Thief + Magic guy in 1st edition. And at no point are they as good at their spells as the wizards or clerics they're supposed replace.

And a even multiclass Fighter Thief is a better combatant and thief than a single classed bard of twice the level.

There's an easy answer to all that. Play first edition. 😀

[g33k]

On 5/21/2023 at 6:50 PM, Baron said:

... I do have to speak up for the bard (and monk) though. Of course, I'm speaking from the POV of 1st ed AD&D, which is my D&D. I can't speak to other editions ...

<shrugs>
AD&D1e is my most-played edition, too, beginning in the late '70s.

But -- for better or worse -- the "D&D" brand has moved on.
5e is overwhelmingly more-successful than any prior edition, and the old-school & retro crowds (and the old grognards (and new hipsters) still playing those games) remain in the niche roles they ever were in.

The marketing & the media & the spin-offs & D&DBeyond & the official VTT content &c is necessarily going to be 100% the content that sells into that market.

I got the 2e books, used/cheap, because I (briefly) joined a 2e game; otherwise nada for 2e.

3e comes a close 2nd in my "most-played" edition:  we were on a family trip to a local gaming-Con, and my oldest was old-enough to actually register as an official gamer... and 3e was everywhere.  So I needed to buy the books from the Dealers' Room there at the 'Con, learn the system, then teach & help prep characters, so she could participate.  It was actually a pretty decent rendition of the "D&D" brand, I thought (that was before the splats & the overpowered options took over; but then again, that too is accurate to "the D&D Brand" ... ).  Never played 4e, nor got any of the books.  Have played 5e a bit, but don't own the books (got the Starter Set).

But several other games (RuneQuest, Ars Magica, Shadowrun, Gamma World, Deadlands) clearly lead over D&D in my gaming resume.
 

On 5/21/2023 at 6:50 PM, Baron said:

... The bard is supposed to be based on the Celtic figure, who studied under druid tutelage. He studied law and acted as an arbiter. He was the society's historian. He acted as herald. He also held the role our modern press is supposed to fill, that is, a check on unsuitable rulers. He supposedly has powers one might attribute to magic. Now, that's the history. In 1st ed he has to be a powerful fighter, then possess the skills of a powerful thief. That latter probably for the stealth skills as opposed to stealing. Finally he gets druid spells and other magical powers ...

In contrast to you, I was never impressed with the Bard in AD&D.  The rules made vague, hand-wavey gestures toward those old traditions, but I never felt like there was any there there, to back it up.  The Bard was shoehorned into the "Dual-Classed" (not "multi-class") rules... or maybe the rules themseles were shoehorned around the "Druidic Bard" concept?  The start in Ftr & Dual-Class into Thf before beginning as a Dru(Brd) never sat well with me.

But yeah, Edgin (the Bard in the movie) doesn't really live up to any of the versions of the "Bard" class in any edition of the game.

Still & all, I liked the movie...  And I consider it a solid win for gaming & gamers.

Edited May 23, 2023 by g33k

[Bill the barbarian]

On 4/8/2023 at 4:54 PM, Rob Darvall said:

Would it be too much to ask to have the hero be a Rhino?

Asking for a nephew.

I remember you sharing that tidbit as he created the adventurer. Any more to share in a new topic or...