I wish published official adventures would stop including goofball stuff.

[Evaar]

Maybe I'm just cranky and old and a stick in the mud, but it's how I feel.

This was inspired by Thaco the Clown, who is apparently an NPC in the upcoming Witchlight campaign.

Yes, ha ha, THAC0 was a thing. I get it.

Look, D&D doesn't need help to be silly. If I want to run a goofball game and have my players not take it seriously and not actually get immersed in the world, it's extremely easy to do that. I'll just drop in some Rick & Morty references, quote some movies, give some NPCs some silly names, and my players will take it from there.

Where I actually need help is building a world that DOES immerse the players, that DOESN'T make the world seem ridiculous and anachronistic (here meaning referencing things that would not exist in the quasi-renaissance time period).

I'm talking about things like archmage otters, gameshow announcers (Halaster in multiple levels of DOTMM), or gnome ceremorphs (being drawn and described as far more cute and friendly than a typical mind flayer).

I'm not saying everything needs to be grimdark. But if an adventure is going for a tone, please commit to that tone. The players will provide comedic relief if they want it. If the adventures break the fourth wall to elbow us in the ribs about how silly it all is, that's undercutting my own efforts as a DM to create an immersive experience. And again, I don't need help doing that - I need help with exactly the opposite.

That's it. Just wanted to get that off my chest. Thaco the clown, good lord.

[Willie the Duck]

I mean, that's a reasonable preference to have. However,

'Bree-yark,'
glass rods and rabbit fur as material components for lightning bolt
Temple of the Frog
A wizard named Bargle
Gnome catapult elevators in Dragonlance
Kender
Orcs of Thar Humanoids treating ugly/smelly as pretty and rusty and corroded as positive virtues
Mimics
Gelatinous cubes

If you're looking for the super-serious version of D&D, I've been playing for 38 years and haven't found it yet.

Now, most of it is debatable because it's not jokes per se, but just mild dad-joke level quasi humor. But then again, so is a clown named ThAC0.

[Kvess]

IIRC, Halaster as a gameshow host was from an unofficial DM’s Guild Supplement.

There have always been weird monsters in D&D. We’re talking about a game that popularized flumphs, owlbears and beholders.

I appreciate a bit of lampshade hanging. Used sparingly, humour provides necessary contrast for horror or drama. A movie that is entirely jumpscares isn’t shocking, and neither is having every encounter escalate the stakes. As the DM, you can always embellish or tone down the goofiness as you see fit.

The thing that annoys me is when they introduce a friendly NPC from the novels that the writers are clearly a fan of, is there to ‘impress’ and overshadow the party, and is carrying an artifact that the players absolutely should never be allowed to get their mitts on.

[Anonymouswizard]

Thaco honestly sounds like the kind of name I'd expect a clown/jester to use in a fantasy setting. I mean, it's a cute reference, but it breaks immersion less to have Thaco the Clown than Lord Thaco.

But yeah, D&D has always been somewhat gonzo, I see no reason for WotC to remove it. Especially if it's as minor as a character's name. Yes the level of whacky varies wildly from edition to edition and setting to setting, but if 5e wants to lean even more towards whacky than it is currently (which I believe is 'not very;)then there shopuldn't be an issuer.

But yes, consistency is important. But I really don't think Thaco the clown breaks that. Maybe their real name is Edmund and they just goes by Thaco in professional contexts, which is how the PCs interact with then.

[KorvinStarmast]

The thing that annoys me is when they introduce a friendly NPC from the novels that the writers are clearly a fan of, is there to ‘impress’ and overshadow the party, and is carrying an artifact that the players absolutely should never be allowed to get their mitts on. The ring of Winter in the Jungles of Chult, for example. :smalltongue:

[MaxWilson]

The ring of Winter in the Jungles of Chult, for example. :smalltongue:

What problems arise if the PCs get their hands on the Ring of Winter? It didn't strike me as overly impressive.

Some extra attack spells per day, or some no-concentration CR 2 creatures. About as powerful as two or three Bags of Tricks put together. Neat, especially for a warrior who otherwise wouldn't have any AoEs, but nothing you need to keep away from players.

[Dr.Samurai]

Maybe I'm just cranky and old and a stick in the mud, but it's how I feel.

This was inspired by Thaco the Clown, who is apparently an NPC in the upcoming Witchlight campaign.

Yes, ha ha, THAC0 was a thing. I get it.

Look, D&D doesn't need help to be silly. If I want to run a goofball game and have my players not take it seriously and not actually get immersed in the world, it's extremely easy to do that. I'll just drop in some Rick & Morty references, quote some movies, give some NPCs some silly names, and my players will take it from there.

Where I actually need help is building a world that DOES immerse the players, that DOESN'T make the world seem ridiculous and anachronistic (here meaning referencing things that would not exist in the quasi-renaissance time period).

I'm talking about things like archmage otters, gameshow announcers (Halaster in multiple levels of DOTMM), or gnome ceremorphs (being drawn and described as far more cute and friendly than a typical mind flayer).

I'm not saying everything needs to be grimdark. But if an adventure is going for a tone, please commit to that tone. The players will provide comedic relief if they want it. If the adventures break the fourth wall to elbow us in the ribs about how silly it all is, that's undercutting my own efforts as a DM to create an immersive experience. And again, I don't need help doing that - I need help with exactly the opposite.

That's it. Just wanted to get that off my chest. Thaco the clown, good lord.
In a gesture of solidarity, let me say that I agree with you 100%.

And I am currently playing in the campaign with said otter archmage and when he was described to us I was like "lol... wut?".

But are you able to ignore these things or is it too much effort to replace them with original content? Or are you often the player?

[Sigreid]

In a gesture of solidarity, let me say that I agree with you 100%.

And I am currently playing in the campaign with said otter archmage and when he was described to us I was like "lol... wut?".

But are you able to ignore these things or is it too much effort to replace them with original content? Or are you often the player?

Not the OP, but I'll say for me it's enough to have convinced me I don't need anymore adventure paths they publish. Possibly ever.

[SharkForce]

it could also be lampshading something a bit less silly. (https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/champions/shaco/)

[meandean]

For those complaining about this, realize that there are people who essentially feel the opposite: that it turns them off when the game feels stuffy and humorless. The podcasters the McElroy Brothers played Lost Mine of Phandelver and just could not handle the Super Stereotypical High Fantasy character names. They started off by renaming "Sildar Hallwinter" to "Barry Bluejeans", and gradually veered away entirely from the module as written. They still do play D&D, but I bet they won't play another pre-written module.

Now, is "Thaco the Clown" actually funny? I dunno. As Anonymouswizard said, at least it's a clown, and possibly a minor "Easter Egg" character. I'll reserve my judgment until I see it in context. That's generally how jokes work.

[Warder]

I don't mind the occasional goofball stuff or injoke or whatever - as long as it's actually funny! I think WotC's writers have consistently failed with that so far in 5e, and not just in adventures. It's like they're convinced that as long as you make a flumph reference, you're hilarious, so why not just double down on them. I'd much rather have no comedy at all than bad comedy.

[PhantomSoul]

The thing that annoys me is when they introduce a friendly NPC from the novels that the writers are clearly a fan of, is there to ‘impress’ and overshadow the party, and is carrying an artifact that the players absolutely should never be allowed to get their mitts on.

Yeah, the writers writing in what are essentially vicarious DMPCs... *gags*


Thaco honestly sounds like the kind of name I'd expect a clown/jester to use in a fantasy setting. I mean, it's a cute reference, but it breaks immersion less to have Thaco the Clown than Lord Thaco.

But yeah, D&D has always been somewhat gonzo, I see no reason for WotC to remove it. Especially if it's as minor as a character's name. Yes the level of whacky varies wildly from edition to edition and setting to setting, but if 5e wants to lean even more towards whacky than it is currently (which I believe is 'not very;)then there shopuldn't be an issuer.

But yes, consistency is important. But I really don't think Thaco the clown breaks that. Maybe their real name is Edmund and they just goes by Thaco in professional contexts, which is how the PCs interact with then.

Yeah, Thaco on its own seems fine (and even cute) to me assuming it's just the name; it's small, it's moderately subtle, and it doesn't really affect the gameplay anyhow. (It also should feel like it fits the race/class/character, but it sounds like they made a decent choice there, like youquoted say. Of course, if there are too many similar references and they don't form a unit (e.g. the circus/clown troupe is entirely named after old mechanics), then that starts going from "a cute easter egg" to distracting or a failed joke. If the clown fits the story, then the clown needed a name anyway! (I see it almost like I see named spells; Bigby's Hand implies Bigby is in your world's history, but it's a little worldbuilding detail instead of a big deal.)

[Lord Vukodlak]

I wish published adventures would stop including Shield Guardians.

[Unoriginal]

I see it almost like I see named spells; Bigby's Hand implies Bigby is in your world's history, but it's a little worldbuilding detail instead of a big deal.

Well the explanation for named spells is that the spell's creator basically left their mark in the drying cement of magic, meaning that *anyone* who discover that spell will have the knowledge that it's Bigby's.


An example given by the game devs was that Mordenkainen could go to a wizard guild or similar in a world he never visited and go "I'm Mordenkainen, you've heard of me for my Hound/Sword/Mansion/etc".

[Dork_Forge]

I wish published adventures would stop including Shield Guardians.

"They can't be in that many surely..."

*Googling occurs*

Well damn, there's Shield Guardians in nine of the published adventures, that's... all kinds of irresponsible adventure design.

[PhantomSoul]

Well the explanation for named spells is that the spell's creator basically left their mark in the drying cement of magic, meaning that *anyone* who discover that spell will have the knowledge that it's Bigby's.


An example given by the game devs was that Mordenkainen could go to a wizard guild or similar in a world he never visited and go "I'm Mordenkainen, you've heard of me for my Hound/Sword/Mansion/etc".

Exactly; there's a Mordenkainen who created the spell (or a Bigby who created a different spell), and in regular gameplay the sole effect is likely to be that you feel like (a) there are/were impressive people, and (b) the world feels alive and deeper [there's history]. Maybe you know who Bigby was as a player (in which case for you it's a reference) or you don't (in which case it mainly just has the effect of feeling like the world has a richer history). Or if things are timey-wimey, there will have been a Bigby who will have invented the spell and imprinted their name into it, since there it's in the nature/visible_"metadata" of the spell rather than in scrolls and history books.

[Zevox]

This was inspired by Thaco the Clown, who is apparently an NPC in the upcoming Witchlight campaign.
...wait, isn't the Witchlight campaign set in the Feywild? Which would be exactly where you would most expect to find goofball stuff, what with the fey including a variety of flavors of pranksters, tricksters, etc who just like messing with mortals for the fun of it? That sounds like the perfect place for such a thing.

[P. G. Macer]

I think I know the answer to your goofball gripe. If I remember correctly from a Dragon Talk interview he gave back in 2017, Chris Perkins, who has been the head writer of the adventures for 5e from Out of the Abyss onwards, mentioned that there are sometimes elements of adventures that appeal greatly to the youngest members of the D&D community, i.e. literal children, that most of the rest of the community dislikes. The case Perkins brought up, since he was promoting Tomb of Annihilation at the time, was a hag in Chult who went by the moniker Nanny Poo-poo (or something of the effect; I never read ToA, and the time I tried to play it DM ghosted everyone after the first or second session). Perkins specifically called out Nanny Poo-poo’s name as something that tested extremely well with the youngest of players, but very poorly with everyone else.

Now, the joke/reference of a clown named Thaco is likely to go right over the youngest players’ heads, so it’s safe to assume that in this case the intended audience is older players. However, Zevox is correct in that The Wild Beyond the Witchlight takes place in the Feywild, and specifically a carnival factors heavily into the campaign, to the presence of a clown makes sense in the campaign, and the wacky name in-universe may fit with the Feywild’s whimsy.

[ProsecutorGodot]

IIRC, Halaster as a gameshow host was from an unofficial DM’s Guild Supplement.


I don't think so, our DM ran one of these levels using the "announcer" Halaster and when we expressed confusion at the tone shift he simply said "it's in the book, we can just ignore it if it gets too annoying"

I didn't mind personally, Halaster is supposed to be an annoying all powerful insane archmage so I didn't think it was that far out of character.

I will second the notion of items being included that have "not for player use" essentially stamped on. Shield Guardians are often "defective" or say their control amulet is inaccessible to the players, meaning they became a glorified monster to overcome with no reward. Azuredge is also held over the players tauntingly, even in the event that you wrestle the weapon away from Meloon it's sentient and prefers him, your DM would have to make a mighty generous ruling to get it to one of the players. They doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering the circumstances of his you encounter Meloon.

I'm generally fine with silly monsters or encounters, at least when they're handled with appropriate timing. If Halaster pulls out his gameshow host shtick when we show up at his tower and calls us silly names for the entire encounter I'd be a bit miffed. I think a lot of the silliness is given to the DM to manage, everything is simply a suggestion after all

[Rynjin]

If it's just a name, it's easily changed on the DM side of the screen if your group wouldn't take it well for whatever reason.

I'd save my ire for more elaborate jokes, like the aforementioned entire Kender race.

[BigRedJedi]

What problems arise if the PCs get their hands on the Ring of Winter? It didn't strike me as overly impressive.

Some extra attack spells per day, or some no-concentration CR 2 creatures. About as powerful as two or three Bags of Tricks put together. Neat, especially for a warrior who otherwise wouldn't have any AoEs, but nothing you need to keep away from players.

Ugh, I've had not one, but two ToA campaigns derailed by this (DM didn't go all out with Cimber fighting back in either case)...

Cold Immunity is nice against the Frost Giants, but the permanent immunity to detection and scrying, coupled with the DC 17 saves for all of the included spells in the ring (of which you get 12 charges, all of which recharge at dawn), none of which cost more than 3 charges, or create up to 3 animated ice beasts (for beasts up to CR 2) over the course of a day. It is a very significant increase in firepower and/or utility for a party.

P.S. To say nothing of the ability to permanently create frozen regions, just because...

[Schwann145]

Agree wholeheartedly with OP. It's a hell of a lot easier to add silliness if you want it than it is to remove it once it's written in. Mostly though, the vast majority of Realms reference material is not goofy or campy. You'll have little examples of "fun" pop up here and there, but it's otherwise a setting that takes itself seriously... and then the D&D side of it doesn't take *anything* seriously, which is jarring as hell!


What problems arise if the PCs get their hands on the Ring of Winter? It didn't strike me as overly impressive.

Some extra attack spells per day, or some no-concentration CR 2 creatures. About as powerful as two or three Bags of Tricks put together. Neat, especially for a warrior who otherwise wouldn't have any AoEs, but nothing you need to keep away from players.
The Ring of Winter is supposed to be one of, if not *the,* most powerful artifact in the Realms. As 5E has nerfed everything magical into the ground, the RoW is now a joke of an artifact. Artus Cimber has gone from one of the most powerful people in the world to just a guy with a magic ring.

[luuma]

I think adding occasional injections of humour is alright, and certainly have no problem with naming a clown thaco (I don't think it's intending to mock the system, just to reference it). I also do not think that humour is 5e's strong suit.

The main example that rubs me the wrong way i tasha's quote boxes in TCoE, because they are absolutely dire. Tasha should be written with a barbed tongue. This is a book by a prodigal master witch, mean as all hell, manipulating demon lords and on the level of a demigod, and she's dropping damp squib one liners like:
- Mortals can't resist anything with bubbles!!!!!!!!
- Classic artificer logic right here. "What if, when our invention goes explosively wrong, we're inside it?" !!!!!
- Battle smiths turn their genius toward forging puppies and kitties. Maybe I've underestimated them!!!!!!
- I can't believe I'm writing this but I think I could get behind a faith focused on mood lighting and evening wear!!!!!!!!

We can't believe you're writing it either, Tasha. Is she in a facebook young mum group.

On the flipside, I think Kandlekeep Dekonstruktion from Candlekeep Mysteries is a great exception to this rule. The jokes are so intentionally groan-worthy that it crosses over and becomes a good laugh again. The entire theme of the adventure is nonsense, there's a cult of people with codenames based on food, and it just looks like a grand romp.

[Amnestic]

I think it really depends on the context of the campaign/adventure personally.

Thaco the Clown showing up on Curse of Strahd wouldn't work, but at a feywild carnival full of whimsy and wonder feels pretty appropriate for it. If any adventure was going to have a bunch of weird metahumour, it's probably this one.

Likewise the infamous Otter wizard in Descent into Avernus felt really out of place to me because it's a (mostly) serious story about a city getting dragged into hell and infernal bargains and then it's like "lol otter wizard! so random!" before it's dropped and never spoken of again. It's like they felt obligated to do something weird and wacky and just shoved it in briefly before everyone moved on.

[Anonymouswizard]

For those complaining about this, realize that there are people who essentially feel the opposite: that it turns them off when the game feels stuffy and humorless. The podcasters the McElroy Brothers played Lost Mine of Phandelver and just could not handle the Super Stereotypical High Fantasy character names. They started off by renaming "Sildar Hallwinter" to "Barry Bluejeans", and gradually veered away entirely from the module as written. They still do play D&D, but I bet they won't play another pre-written module.

To be fair that just tells me that D&D, being by far the biggest name in the industry, might need multiple lines of adventures that say how serious/silly they are.

Also SHFNs are generally silly. The last two serious high fantasy settings I worked on to the point I considered running them didn't use them, one used normal English names while the other named everybody after plants* (trees for men, flowers for women, whatever you want if you decide to present as genderqueer). Both work a lot better, even if the latter leads to some silliness (yes there is an NPC in the latter called Orchid). But not the kind of silliness that I think reduces immersion because this is a simple rule.

The latter also uses the X-daughter/X-son mechanism for surnames, but using an opposite gender parent. So you might be Bluebell Rowansdaughter. Which sounds like a fantasy name while being relatively easy to grasp.

* Because it just happened to be a thing I did for the first two characters that I kept up.


Now, is "Thaco the Clown" actually funny? I dunno. As Anonymouswizard said, at least it's a clown, and possibly a minor "Easter Egg" character. I'll reserve my judgment until I see it in context. That's generally how jokes work.

We won't know if Thaco the Clown is funny until we see his performance. Maybe he'll throw some pies, but if this is the Feywild my money's on Gentleman Juggling.

[Dr. Cliché]

I can't help but recall an article from back in 3.5 where the designers were explaining why they didn't include "funny" material. I thought their answer made a lot of sense. Basically, they pointed out that humour tends to differ table by table and that it generally happens because of off-the-cuff moments - not pre-designed jokes. Hence, they thought it was better to let players find their own fun and make their games as funny or serious as they prefer.



I don't mind the occasional goofball stuff or injoke or whatever - as long as it's actually funny!

Well, part of the issue with this instance is that "Thaco the Clown" isn't actually a joke, it's just a reference.

Unfortunately, we live in an age where most "comedy writers" don't appear to understand the difference between the two.

[Chronos]

Quoth luuma:

On the flipside, I think Kandlekeep Dekonstruktion from Candlekeep Mysteries is a great exception to this rule. The jokes are so intentionally groan-worthy that it crosses over and becomes a good laugh again. The entire theme of the adventure is nonsense, there's a cult of people with codenames based on food, and it just looks like a grand romp.
If the party (and, for that matter, the rest of the world) reacts in exactly the unrealistic way the module writers expected them to at every turn, then maybe. But if they ever once behave in any realistic manner, then the entire adventure just disappears in a puff of logic. I've been meaning to make a thread complaining about the absolute utter idiocy of that adventure.

[luuma]

If the party (and, for that matter, the rest of the world) reacts in exactly the unrealistic way the module writers expected them to at every turn, then maybe. But if they ever once behave in any realistic manner, then the entire adventure just disappears in a puff of logic. I've been meaning to make a thread complaining about the absolute utter idiocy of that adventure.

Not so good in practice then I guess lol - I do still want to have a crack at running it as a oneshot though, so certainly wouldn't mind reading a thread about its issues!

[Kvess]

I don't think so, our DM ran one of these levels using the "announcer" Halaster and when we expressed confusion at the tone shift he simply said "it's in the book, we can just ignore it if it gets too annoying"


I am almost certain that the scenario was added in a companion PDF by Wyatt Trull, because I have run it for the first three levels. It gives the dungeon of the mad mage an overall plot, which the campaign largely lacks by default.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I am almost certain that the scenario was added in a companion PDF by Wyatt Trull, because I have run it for the first three levels. It gives the dungeon of the mad mage an overall plot, which the campaign largely lacks by default.

No, he does for floor 15, as it's officially published.

I remember it vividly because he expressed intense disappointment that our Sorcerer escaped the lava trap by the skin of his teeth while my character was separated throwing a mess kit at the wall to test for traps.

[Kvess]

Ah, gotcha. I had not read that far into the module because running and playing a megadungeon sounded a lot better in theory for our group than in practice.

[Unoriginal]

I think adding occasional injections of humour is alright, and certainly have no problem with naming a clown thaco (I don't think it's intending to mock the system, just to reference it). I also do not think that humour is 5e's strong suit.

The main example that rubs me the wrong way i tasha's quote boxes in TCoE, because they are absolutely dire. Tasha should be written with a barbed tongue. This is a book by a prodigal master witch, mean as all hell, manipulating demon lords and on the level of a demigod, and she's dropping damp squib one liners like:
- Mortals can't resist anything with bubbles!!!!!!!!
- Classic artificer logic right here. "What if, when our invention goes explosively wrong, we're inside it?" !!!!!
- Battle smiths turn their genius toward forging puppies and kitties. Maybe I've underestimated them!!!!!!
- I can't believe I'm writing this but I think I could get behind a faith focused on mood lighting and evening wear!!!!!!!!

We can't believe you're writing it either, Tasha. Is she in a facebook young mum group.

Uhm, I need to point out that Tasha is known for her Hideous Laughter, which require a little pie (as in, the kind clowns throw) and a feather (as in, to tickle people and make them laugh). And that's not taking into account how she sought to create a combat spell that makes people laugh themselves into defeat, in the first place.

I don't know what made you imagine Tasha as a serious figure, but she never was. She's the "I'm enjoying myself, living my best life, and too odd, powerful and decontracted to care people think I'm odd' kind of arch-witch.

[KorvinStarmast]

Well damn, there's Shield Guardians in nine of the published adventures, that's... all kinds of irresponsible adventure design. Yeah. In the hands of a PC, that's a heck of an asset. Seen it, watched an assassination (by an NPC assassin) go wrong because of one.

...wait, isn't the Witchlight campaign set in the Feywild? Which would be exactly where you would most expect to find goofball stuff, what with the fey including a variety of flavors of pranksters, tricksters, etc who just like messing with mortals for the fun of it? That sounds like the perfect place for such a thing. Pixies would for sure love this joke.

Perkins specifically called out Nanny Poo-poo’s name as something that tested extremely well with the youngest of players, but very poorly with everyone else. It's one of the few parts of that adventure that I dislike. On the other hand, Frost Giants wandering around in a Jungle was a bit of an odd juxtaposition.

... The Wild Beyond the Witchlight takes place in the Feywild, and specifically a carnival factors heavily into the campaign, to the presence of a clown makes sense in the campaign, and the wacky name in-universe may fit with the Feywild’s whimsy. Fair point, context wise.

Agree wholeheartedly with OP. It's a hell of a lot easier to add silliness if you want it than it is to remove it once it's written in. Most players and DMs add enough humor, and sometimes too much. (We have one player in our game who demands that we knock off the puns, we have gone overboard (wait, I just did it again, my bard's a pirate).

The main example that rubs me the wrong way is Tasha's quote boxes in TCoE, ... Tasha should be written with a barbed tongue. Her origin is likewise dire. She is originally a 1e or even earlier seriously powerful wizard. (Back when you had to earn level 11 to even be called a wizard. (In the world of Greyhawk).

Iggwilv, also known as Tasha or Natasha, was an Oerthian archmage and demonologist. She wrote the Demonomicon of Iggwilv, a tome on demonic lore.
Child(ren): Drelnza, Iuz
Iuz is a seriously bad character in that world, and Tasha's his mom.
It's one thing to be eccentric, and Natasha / Iggwilv was always eccentric. It's quite another to behave like an over-the-top silly blogger or ironic twitter persona. I find the tone in the book more jarring than amusing. She was created by Gary Gygax as an NPC. It's too bad that she isn't, like Robilar or Tenser or Drawmij, based on one of the players in his campaign.

Thaco the Clown showing up on Curse of Strahd wouldn't work, but at a feywild carnival full of whimsy and wonder feels pretty appropriate for it. Another fair point.

Basically, they pointed out that humour tends to differ table by table and that it generally happens because of off-the-cuff moments - not pre-designed jokes. Beyond a few of the material components, some of which are deliberate gags. (Since AD&D 1e).

[Warder]

Well, part of the issue with this instance is that "Thaco the Clown" isn't actually a joke, it's just a reference.

Unfortunately, we live in an age where most "comedy writers" don't appear to understand the difference between the two.

Yeah, I don't disagree. But another part of the issue is that the D&D writers aren't "comedy writers", and it's so painfully obvious. Someone pointed to the Tasha quotes - I'd like to point to the Xanathar quotes in XGtE, which are all meant to be jokes. How many of them are actually even a little funny?

Comedy is really difficult! Forcing it into material that's otherwise serious, when comedy writing isn't your specialty, well, that's just a recipe for failure, imho.

[Misery Esquire]

Well, part of the issue with this instance is that "Thaco the Clown" isn't actually a joke, it's just a reference.

Obviously THAC0's stat block is going to include the note that if you attack him you hit automatically and he complains that this is all backwards.

/bad joke intensifies
:smalltongue:

[T.G. Oskar]

I think adding occasional injections of humour is alright, and certainly have no problem with naming a clown thaco (I don't think it's intending to mock the system, just to reference it). I also do not think that humour is 5e's strong suit.

The main example that rubs me the wrong way i tasha's quote boxes in TCoE, because they are absolutely dire. Tasha should be written with a barbed tongue. This is a book by a prodigal master witch, mean as all hell, manipulating demon lords and on the level of a demigod, and she's dropping damp squib one liners like:
- Mortals can't resist anything with bubbles!!!!!!!!
- Classic artificer logic right here. "What if, when our invention goes explosively wrong, we're inside it?" !!!!!
- Battle smiths turn their genius toward forging puppies and kitties. Maybe I've underestimated them!!!!!!
- I can't believe I'm writing this but I think I could get behind a faith focused on mood lighting and evening wear!!!!!!!!

We can't believe you're writing it either, Tasha. Is she in a facebook young mum group.

I must dissent on this, because I do see Tasha doing exactly this. Consider the first note she writes, where she's basically gloating, but then she explains that, to get her book written, it had to pass through Mordenkainen and the other wizards, so it got through editorial hell. All of the notes make a lot of sense if you see them as a complete act of sarcasm.

This is best seen on the Spells page, when she then asks "what happened to Mordenkainen's Bountiful Back-Patting, Heward's Hot Air, and all the rest?" This isn't just an insult (the names of the spells, making the other wizards sound self-serving), but also a threat (you wanted to alter my content, I made it so that it didn't happen), implicitly stating that she found a way to bypass their oversights. And she did it through sarcasm.

Now, this may be personal opinion, but a pet project I've been doing is a story where one of the characters is an ancient, bored, insane and powerful sorceress that has lived through countless identities (from passing off as goddesses, at least one ancient queen, servant to Cleopatra, teacher to Morgan le Fay, a hedge witch married to a Portuguese man, a Soviet burocratic officer who worked as a double agent for the Stalin regime against the Nazis, an employee of the Department of State from which she's cashing in a pension, and currently as a Russian emigré with heavy soccer mom vibes), and this is the exact behavior she's showing. It's the kind of response that a powerful sorceress uses when she can't use her spells freely, has spent a lifetime dealing with people trying to fend her off, and has spent a long time living on her own does when she's pissed off by something, at least IMO. The funny thing is that the character organically developed this way long before TCoE was released - in fact, seeing Tasha's quotes was a bit jarring, since they echoed that character I'm working on so well. Hence, why I claim I can see Tasha doing this.

It also helps me explain the reason why you see it that way - you're seeing Tasha as a villain, while the devs are presenting her as a sort of anti-hero. She's not good, or even a hero, in any way; she'll even gloat that she went down with Graz'zt, a friggin demon lord - but her presentation in this book makes her a bit more sympathetic in the lines of "if you don't piss her off just by being there, she's not that bad". The sarcastic barbs she throws every now and then are reflections of what she thinks about the content - and if you have a complaint about it, the best you can expect is "well, I'd love to see what you can do about it", as you'll probably realize she's an archmage with a vast amount of knowledge and power. She can afford being punny, quirky and sarcastic because of that vast amount of knowledge and power. Perhaps it may rub you as odd and unbecoming that she makes silly jokes, but they take a whole new meaning when uttered by someone that powerful - who are you to tell her otherwise?

I mean, when you're a sorceress that has lived for 2.5 million years and your original form was Australopithecus afarensis who then took over one of the first Homo sapiens through magic, I think you can afford doing monkey jokes on your behalf - though, if someone called you a monkey, you could say "dear, I'm no monkey, I'm an ape" with a straight face and a mocking tone. Note that I'm not talking about Tasha, mind you.

[Unoriginal]

Yeah, I don't disagree. But another part of the issue is that the D&D writers aren't "comedy writers", and it's so painfully obvious. Someone pointed to the Tasha quotes - I'd like to point to the Xanathar quotes in XGtE, which are all meant to be jokes. How many of them are actually even a little funny?

All of them, as far as I'm concerned.



Comedy is really difficult! Forcing it into material that's otherwise serious

D&D is never "otherwise serious", IMO.

D&D is camp. Very camp, and equally pulpy.

Denying D&D its glorious silliness is like taking a comic book about over-the-top heroicss in bright spandex and turning it into a muted-colors angsty story: there is an audience for that, sure, but why are you using this soecific source material to tell this tale, if they clash so much?

[sethdmichaels]

Well, part of the issue with this instance is that "Thaco the Clown" isn't actually a joke, it's just a reference.

Unfortunately, we live in an age where most "comedy writers" don't appear to understand the difference between the two.

agree so much in general

fortunately i think it's a reference that will fly right by most people, so it will just be a random name instead of a "joke" to them

[KorvinStarmast]

But another part of the issue is that the D&D writers aren't "comedy writers", and it's so painfully obvious.
Xanathar quotes in XGtE, which are all meant to be jokes.
They seem to be meant as taunts, mostly, by a not-quite-sane sentient being, but some are just silly.
Then again, so is Xanathar's obsession with his goldfish. I think that they are trying to paint a picture of "he's not quite like a rational mortal" but are using watercolors.

Comedy is really difficult! True, it is difficult to do well.

[Ertwin]

Would you be annoyed by Thaco the clown if you didn't know that Thaco was a reference? Thaco seems like a perfectly cromulent name.

[Warder]

All of them, as far as I'm concerned.


Thank you for saying that! I think that highlights the problem with comedy writing very succinctly, in that it's entirely subjective. This entire thread is proof of that; for some, it works, for others, it falls entirely flat. That might've been fine, but at least in my experience, when a joke falls flat, it can really pull you out of the moment. Xanathar making kensei/can't say puns on the same page as the rules trying to build up kensei into cool swordfighters is such a jarring view of D&D, for me.


D&D is never "otherwise serious", IMO.

D&D is camp. Very camp, and equally pulpy.

Denying D&D its glorious silliness is like taking a comic book about over-the-top heroicss in bright spandex and turning it into a muted-colors angsty story: there is an audience for that, sure, but why are you using this soecific source material to tell this tale, if they clash so much?

You misunderstand, or I'm not explaining myself well enough. I do think D&D is camp and pulpy, but I also think it is serious. D&D can be all of those things, and it can be comedic, it can be horror, it can be almost every genre. I'm fully on board with this. The issue I have is when the tone of any given piece is all over the place and can't decide if it wants to be a joke or take itself seriously, as I think is very often the case in 5e.

And just to clarify, when I play D&D, we laugh and have fun at all the ridiculous stuff that can happen - but that comes from a place of spontaneity, at reacting to the situations we find ourselves in. The worldbuilding and characters are all "serious" at their core, and that's how I prefer it, at least.

[Keravath]

I more or less agree with the OP. It is better to leave humor to the table and the DM rather than try to write it into a module. Humor is subjective - some find it funny and some don't. Furthermore, a lot of the "humor" that is included into modules breaks the 4th wall and the concept of immersion. D&D may be "campy", "pulpy" and lots of other things but many folks play to become immersed in the fantasy world presented by the game. "Humorous" references or easter eggs can break that immersion for some players and DMs.

However, D&D modules have always had "terrible" names. "Nanny PuPu" is actually pretty mild compared to some. A character named Thaco isn't a big deal for many since unless you played D&D decades ago, the entire concept of THAC0 disappeared with the introduction of 3e circa 2000. It has no significance for anyone who has only played 3e, 4e, 5e or Pathfinder.

Finally, an NPC name is one of the easiest and most trivial elements for a DM to change since it doesn't change anything mechanically. Just call the clown "Thak" or "Thac" or "Whac" or whatever you like. The more challenging humor elements to deal with are ones where encounters are based on something in the real world. For example, including an entertainment competition using tag lines or elements too similar to "American Idol" or "Mystery Singer" or perhaps some over used fantasy trope.

It is fine for a DM to homebrew it since they know the tone of their campaign and how their players will react but when designers include elements like this in published material the DM has to decide whether to use the content as written, significantly modify it or leave it out altogether. (I found CoS uncomfortable to run for this reason since there were some elements that I needed to either modify or remove entirely - I think the Abbey was supposed to be funny but I found it quite the opposite for example - but then CoS has a number of issues along those lines).

[Segev]

On the Shield Guardians and the Ring of Winter - I dropped hints to both in my run of ToA, and my players never found either (nor the NPC(s) associated). I think they are okay, given that they're either rare encounters or the party has to deliberately seek them out. And the PCs would really have loved the Shield Guardian, but they didn't determine a good means of hunting for its amulet, despite having found the golem itself. Inactive, for those unaware of the module.

I agree that TCE's blurbs sound... childish in a pathetic sort of way that is disappointing coming from what is supposed to be a black witch of utmost charisma. I want more Morticia or Wednesday and less Elle Woods. (Elle was a great character; don't get me wrong. But she's no Tasha.)

[Evaar]

Good input overall.

For clarity, and I should've said this in the original post - there's a reason I said "stop including goofball stuff" instead of "stop including humor." Humor is fine, but it requires some level of craft. What we mostly get is goofball "lol random" or "hey I remember that" stuff.

I personally don't think the Feywild is a goofy/silly place when done well. It's whimsical, sure. There should be a clown. Should the clown's name be a 4th wall breaking reference to an old game system? No, not really. You can just change the name, but when they're talking about this NPC and advertising his name as a feature it sets a context for how people will approach the adventure.

Regarding the McElroys, you kind of prove my point. They brought the actual humor to the game, they didn't need help with that. The best moments in the show are Taako shouting "Abraca****YOU" or any of the variety of interactions with Angus or my personal favorite - when Taako points out that they can't just loot a lockbox they found in a bank when they're supposed to be there to stop a robbery of the same bank. The McElroys are good at comedy. WotC... isn't. TAZ wouldn't be funnier if they had run into an otter archmage or Thaco the Clown.

[Segev]

Good input overall.

For clarity, and I should've said this in the original post - there's a reason I said "stop including goofball stuff" instead of "stop including humor." Humor is fine, but it requires some level of craft. What we mostly get is goofball "lol random" or "hey I remember that" stuff.

I personally don't think the Feywild is a goofy/silly place when done well. It's whimsical, sure. There should be a clown. Should the clown's name be a 4th wall breaking reference to an old game system? No, not really. You can just change the name, but when they're talking about this NPC and advertising his name as a feature it sets a context for how people will approach the adventure.

Regarding the McElroys, you kind of prove my point. They brought the actual humor to the game, they didn't need help with that. The best moments in the show are Taako shouting "Abraca****YOU" or any of the variety of interactions with Angus or my personal favorite - when Taako points out that they can't just loot a lockbox they found in a bank when they're supposed to be there to stop a robbery of the same bank. The McElroys are good at comedy. WotC... isn't. TAZ wouldn't be funnier if they had run into an otter archmage or Thaco the Clown.

This is a bit of a "where do you draw your lines?" thing, but to me, "Thaco the Clown" sounds like the kind of thing that somebody not familiar with To Hit Armor Class 0 would read and think, "Ah, that's a clown with a clown-name," and be fine with it as long as they're fine with a clown. It's more than subtle enough, and you can say "Thaco" as a name without it being awkward. It's a reference, yes, but it's not "goofy" in a way inappropriate to the context.

[Kuulvheysoon]

To be fair, I consider Thac0 the clown to be more of a nod or a cheeky reference more than an attempt at actual humour.

The otter archmage, on the other hand... context is important, I guess? It could be taken seriously if the PCs are in a place with a ton of anthropomorphized animals, but if it's just a random awakened otter that just so happens to be an archmage hahah, then that's... yeah, that's a different story.

[sithlordnergal]

"They can't be in that many surely..."

*Googling occurs*

Well damn, there's Shield Guardians in nine of the published adventures, that's... all kinds of irresponsible adventure design.

I'll be honest, I actually like having Shield Guardians in the published adventures. I make use of them as the DM. Does it add some power to the party? Yeah, a little bit, in early levels. But because its attacks aren't magical, it has no damage resistances, and its only damage immunity is poison, they're actually pretty easy to deal with. Those attacks are gonna become useless pretty quickly once resistances and immunities come into play. After which it just becomes an item that lets you store 1 spell slots and lets you take half damage. But more importantly, you can turn that auto-regeneration against the party.

For example, my favorite monster to toss at a party with a Shield Guardian is The Hungry. Whenever it sees something heal it has advantage on all attack rolls and its bite, which already deals 4d8+4 damage, deals an extra 4d10 damage. Since the Shield Guardian automatically regenerates, the party's strongest magical item turns into a glaring weakness.

You can also set up special traps and situations where healing automatically hurts the party. How are they gonna get through a puzzle room where, if a creature heals in the room, everyone takes damage?

[Dork_Forge]

I'll be honest, I actually like having Shield Guardians in the published adventures. I make use of them as the DM. Does it add some power to the party? Yeah, a little bit, in early levels. But because its attacks aren't magical, it has no damage resistances, and its only damage immunity is poison, they're actually pretty easy to deal with. Those attacks are gonna become useless pretty quickly once resistances and immunities come into play. After which it just becomes an item that lets you store 1 spell slots and lets you take half damage. But more importantly, you can turn that auto-regeneration against the party.

For example, my favorite monster to toss at a party with a Shield Guardian is The Hungry. Whenever it sees something heal it has advantage on all attack rolls and its bite, which already deals 4d8+4 damage, deals an extra 4d10 damage. Since the Shield Guardian automatically regenerates, the party's strongest magical item turns into a glaring weakness.

You can also set up special traps and situations where healing automatically hurts the party. How are they gonna get through a puzzle room where, if a creature heals in the room, everyone takes damage?

My issue is that they're surprisingly prevalent, that can really bite a newer or just unsuspecting DM in the butt and makes them generally feel less special.

In terms of a party having one, it's a massive boon not only in terms of another meaty creature, but also as a defensive boon to the amulet wearer. When you have a +2AC on someone else's reaction and your damage is halved like a superior version of Warding Bond (since it isn't resistance, it will stack with resistance) on a creature with regeneration. Then there's the spell storing...

Your solutions are interesting, but it's just targeting the Shield Guardian, which isn't necessarily bad, but leaves a bit of a bad taste for some, especially if the challenges seem to be purely there to exploit that weakness, rather than belonging there.

[Jophiel]

Maybe I'm just cranky and old and a stick in the mud, but it's how I feel.
I agree and would like to sign up for your newsletter. And the usual disclaimer that we all enjoy some fun and laughs at the table but they never seem to come from TSR/WotC's cringy attempts at humor. With that in mind, a few other random thoughts from the thread...

I mean, that's a reasonable preference to have. However,
glass rods and rabbit fur as material components for lightning bolt
[...]
Gnome catapult elevators in Dragonlance
Kender
Glass rods & rabbit fur for lightning bolt or bat guano for fireballs never bothered me because they had a pseudo-scientific feel. On the other hand, stuff like "Speak an arcane word of power such as Zip-Po..." for a fire cantrip hurt my 12 year old soul even back in 1985.

Few people seem to think that Tinkerer gnomes and Kender were a success; if anything they're reason to knock that stuff off.


D&D is camp. Very camp, and equally pulpy.
I don't think that's free reign though. Conan strolling through a ruined jungle temple, threatened by snake-men is pulpy. A paladin in shining armor saving a princess might be campy. Neither is really benefited by, say, a duck cleric named Stinky Butt-Quack jumping out and throwing eggs at them just because "it's pulpy and campy". IMHO, Your Mileage May Vary, etc etc.

Dibs on Stinky Butt-Quack the duck cleric and no you can't use him.

[Warder]

Glass rods & rabbit fur for lightning bolt or bat guano for fireballs never bothered me because they had a pseudo-scientific feel.

Exactly how I feel. In the Spelljammer novels, the somatic component for Lightning Bolt was even described as rubbing the fur against the rod, and that never felt strange or "goofbally" to me.

[Lord Vukodlak]

My issue is that they're surprisingly prevalent, that can really bite a newer or just unsuspecting DM in the butt and makes them generally feel less special.

In terms of a party having one, it's a massive boon not only in terms of another meaty creature, but also as a defensive boon to the amulet wearer. When you have a +2AC on someone else's reaction and your damage is halved like a superior version of Warding Bond (since it isn't resistance, it will stack with resistance) on a creature with regeneration. Then there's the spell storing...

Your solutions are interesting, but it's just targeting the Shield Guardian, which isn't necessarily bad, but leaves a bit of a bad taste for some, especially if the challenges seem to be purely there to exploit that weakness, rather than belonging there.
Not to mention the PCs can just have the shield guardian withdrawal from combat. If it takes two rounds of hits it’s already done an amazing job even if it didn’t deal a single point of damage.

And most creatures don’t actually have outright immunity or even resistances to non-magical weapons in published adventures. He proposes rewriting the adventure for a shield guardian the publisher put in.

When it’s far easier to simply rewrite the adventure to remove the shield guardian.

[sithlordnergal]

Not to mention the PCs can just have the shield guardian withdrawal from combat. If it takes two rounds of hits it’s already done an amazing job even if it didn’t deal a single point of damage.

And most creatures don’t actually have outright immunity or even resistances to non-magical weapons in published adventures. He proposes rewriting the adventure for a shield guardian the publisher put in.

When it’s far easier to simply rewrite the adventure to remove the shield guardian.

You don't really need to bother targeting the Shield Guardian. As long as its owner takes some damage, it will take some damage and activate the regen. Meaning you can essentially ignore it if it can't deal any damage.

As for creature immunity, they tend to pop up with high CR creatures, Undead, Fiends, and Constructs. All of which are pretty common.

Finally, I'd be throwing those things at the party anyway. I also like to add in the Star Spawn whenever I can get away with it because they make for such fun, dangerous creatures. So you're not really rewriting the campaign.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Would you be annoyed by Thaco the clown if you didn't know that Thaco was a reference? Thaco seems like a perfectly cromulent name.
Better than most in the Forgotten Realms.

[Azuresun]

The main example that rubs me the wrong way i tasha's quote boxes in TCoE, because they are absolutely dire. Tasha should be written with a barbed tongue. This is a book by a prodigal master witch, mean as all hell, manipulating demon lords and on the level of a demigod, and she's dropping damp squib one liners like:
- Mortals can't resist anything with bubbles!!!!!!!!
- Classic artificer logic right here. "What if, when our invention goes explosively wrong, we're inside it?" !!!!!
- Battle smiths turn their genius toward forging puppies and kitties. Maybe I've underestimated them!!!!!!
- I can't believe I'm writing this but I think I could get behind a faith focused on mood lighting and evening wear!!!!!!!!

We can't believe you're writing it either, Tasha. Is she in a facebook young mum group.

That was my reaction too, and I'm trying to figure out why that bugged me when the Xanathar quotes didn't. I think it's a subtle thing where the Xanathar's bad jokes feel like they're actually being told by it. It fits the character of this unstable, egomaniacal crime lord who is used to the room erupting in laughter for minutes at a time (because nobody wants to be seen as the first one to stop laughing) when he tells a joke to his henchmen. Tasha, on the other hand, feels much more like the writers dissing their own creations with a glib, 2kool4skool attitude.

[Jerrykhor]

Thaco the clown sounds mild. Fin Diesel the Koa-Toa however....

I'd stab it without hesitation if it says something about family.

[neonchameleon]

It also helps me explain the reason why you see it that way - you're seeing Tasha as a villain, while the devs are presenting her as a sort of anti-hero.

More to the point the devs are presenting Tasha as presenting herself as an anti-hero. To her she's a sympathetic character even if she isn't to anyone else.

[neonchameleon]

This is a bit of a "where do you draw your lines?" thing, but to me, "Thaco the Clown" sounds like the kind of thing that somebody not familiar with To Hit Armor Class 0 would read and think, "Ah, that's a clown with a clown-name," and be fine with it as long as they're fine with a clown. It's more than subtle enough, and you can say "Thaco" as a name without it being awkward. It's a reference, yes, but it's not "goofy" in a way inappropriate to the context.

If I were thinking of famous names for clowns both Boffo and Bingo certainly qualify and Thaco certainly doesn't sound odd along side them. Also if Thaco isn't terribly funny then he's a clown. It's entirely on brand.

I'm reminded by the otter that comfortably the highest level druid in Eberron is Oalian, an awakened tree. And that's both making a point (where there are high level NPCs they have restrictions), slightly goofy, and not at all immersion breaking; a big part of why he's so high level is that he's thousands of years old because some trees can get ancient.

[Segev]

That was my reaction too, and I'm trying to figure out why that bugged me when the Xanathar quotes didn't. I think it's a subtle thing where the Xanathar's bad jokes feel like they're actually being told by it. It fits the character of this unstable, egomaniacal crime lord who is used to the room erupting in laughter for minutes at a time (because nobody wants to be seen as the first one to stop laughing) when he tells a joke to his henchmen. Tasha, on the other hand, feels much more like the writers dissing their own creations with a glib, 2kool4skool attitude.

Yeah. I admit, I don't know what Tasha's personality has canonically been in the past. Maybe this is entirely on-brand for her. If so, it's very disappointing. But "mother of Iuz, wife to Grazzt, daugther of Baba Yaga?" I can see her being flippant. I can see her being mercurial. I can see her being sardonic, jocular, funny, even. But it needs to be deep black humor, not mild pseudo-goth edgelady mixed with "facebook maven" posts-for-likes stuff that are lame by the end of freshman year in college.

Xanathar's quotes, for all their sometimes childish nature, have a genuine edge of menace to them. He's self-aware in weird ways, but oblivious in others, and he's got the vibe of a very dangerous child who will turn around and surprise you with just how smart and insightful he is if you try to take advantage of him in any way. It's funny because you're safe behind the fourth wall, but you can see how he would be TERRIFYING to deal with due to his caprice.

Tasha... yes, you know she is dangerous and powerful so you don't want to cross her, but it feels like you're dealing with a teenaged girl on all levels, just one who can order her daddy's men to shoot you if you don't please her. It feels less clever and witty, because it's something you can just go on twitter or instagram or facebook and see a dozen times over. And there don't feel like there are the hidden depths, which I can't put my finger on how the Xanathar quotes manage that.


Like I said, I'd have preferred a more Addams Family vibe to her than Legally Blonde.

[gloryblaze]

Thaco seems like a perfectly fine name for a clown (or for a baker, or a blacksmith, or a level 1 fighter, or anyone, really) in a world where your very first quest might be a guy named Volothamp Geddarm asking you to rescue his buddy Floon Blagmarr from a crime syndicate.

[Unoriginal]

Thaco seems like a perfectly fine name for a clown (or for a baker, or a blacksmith, or a level 1 fighter, or anyone, really) in a world where your very first quest might be a guy named Volothamp Geddarm asking you to rescue his buddy Floon Blagmarr from a crime syndicate.

Who was mistaken for Raener Neverember by both the Zentharim and the Xanathar's Guild.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

Personally if anything I'd say that default adventures take themselves far too seriously, which is way more goofy and immersion breaking than any of the goofball stuff you've listed here.

The otter arch-mage is especially cool. Disappointed I haven't played whatever adventure that comes from! I'll grant that some of the other stuff, like references, are a little lazy, but "Thaco the clown" isn't nearly as bad as the parade of classic DnD characters that the game takes deathly serious and expects the players to care very deeply about for little to know reason. Those encourage the players to goof on them far harder, harder than any Thac0 reference could manage.

[Temperjoke]

I guess I'm gonna have to disagree with most of the people here, cause I enjoy the humor and jokes presented in the books. But then I also think people take their D&D world too seriously. (Not that there isn't a time and place for seriousness, just like a time and place for humor)

[Rynjin]

Personally if anything I'd say that default adventures take themselves far too seriously, which is way more goofy and immersion breaking than any of the goofball stuff you've listed here.

The otter arch-mage is especially cool. Disappointed I haven't played whatever adventure that comes from! I'll grant that some of the other stuff, like references, are a little lazy, but "Thaco the clown" isn't nearly as bad as the parade of classic DnD characters that the game takes deathly serious and expects the players to care very deeply about for little to know reason. Those encourage the players to goof on them far harder harder than any Thac0 reference could manage.

What, you're telling me you and every character you make doesn't prostrate yourself to kiss the Drizzit's feet every time he appears?

Must not be a real D&D fan.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The otter arch-mage is especially cool. .
I like the concept as well. It is a throw away NPC in Descent into Avernus, that is 'onscreen' for a brief scene.

I believe the Archmage was transformed into an otter, and enjoyed being an otter more than being a humanoid.

What I love about this is that it demonstrates that Wizards with access to the right spells, reach the point where they can nigh, literally, be anything they want to be.

My next thought is: "What happens if the otter Archmage regains a humanoid form?"

Does a sedate Otter Archmage, that is happy, become a brilliant, but driven, (some say haunted), power hungry potential Sauron or Voldemort?

[Kvess]

... but "Thaco the clown" isn't nearly as bad as the parade of classic DnD characters that the game takes deathly serious and expects the players to care very deeply about for little to know reason. Those encourage the players to goof on them far harder, harder than any Thac0 reference could manage.
A thousand times yes. I don't think I've seen a book-length campaign in 5e that doesn't have someone like Artus Cimber, Laeral Silverhand or Elminster waiting in a bush to jump out and introduce themselves to the party.

[Deathtongue]

Tasha... yes, you know she is dangerous and powerful so you don't want to cross her, but it feels like you're dealing with a teenaged girl on all levels, just one who can order her daddy's men to shoot you if you don't please her. It feels less clever and witty, because it's something you can just go on twitter or instagram or facebook and see a dozen times over. And there don't feel like there are the hidden depths, which I can't put my finger on how the Xanathar quotes manage that.EDIT: Thought that this would be better off as its own topic.

[MaxWilson]

Thaco the clown sounds mild. Fin Diesel the Koa-Toa however....

I'd stab it without hesitation if it says something about family.

Okay, now THAT post is comedy better than anything WotC has ever written. Have my appreciation, good sir.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Thaco the clown sounds mild. Fin Diesel the Koa-Toa however....

I'd stab it without hesitation if it says something about family.

Frill Diesel if you use Lizardfolk.

[DwarfFighter]

The Ring of Winter is supposed to be one of, if not *the,* most powerful artifact in the Realms. As 5E has nerfed everything magical into the ground, the RoW is now a joke of an artifact. Artus Cimber has gone from one of the most powerful people in the world to just a guy with a magic ring.

What was he before, if not "just a guy" with a POWERFUL ring?

-DF

[Dork_Forge]

What was he before, if not "just a guy" with a POWERFUL ring?

-DF

The ring still seems pretty powerful, and so is his ridiculous dagger, though given the choice I'd probably take the dagger.

[Rynjin]

What was he before, if not "just a guy" with a POWERFUL ring?

-DF

I know jack all about FR lore, what the old version of the ring did, or even who this guy is, but I can take a crack at the idea anyway.

Basically, a powerful enough magic item, much like personal power, is enough to give a character worldshaping power. If he could, I dunno, usher in a new Ice Age on a whim, that would give him political power in the same way that nuclear capable countries automatically ahve some kind fo seat at the bargaining table when it comes to world politics.

If all the ring does now is let him cast Wall of Ice 3 times a day or whatever it does, then the justification for him being a powerful and important individual is...slimmer, let's say.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I know jack all about FR lore, what the old version of the ring did, or even who this guy is, but I can take a crack at the idea anyway.

Basically, a powerful enough magic item, much like personal power, is enough to give a character worldshaping power. If he could, I dunno, usher in a new Ice Age on a whim, that would give him political power in the same way that nuclear capable countries automatically ahve some kind fo seat at the bargaining table when it comes to world politics.

If all the ring does now is let him cast Wall of Ice 3 times a day or whatever it does, then the justification for him being a powerful and important individual is...slimmer, let's say.
Immunity to cold, ageless, cone of cold six times a day. Or other spells Bigby’s hand, spiked growth(but ice spikes), flesh to ice and a few others.
Oh and permanent nondection. That’s what I recall if the top of my head.
Frost Giants believe it could freeze the world but only and evil being with a will the ring can’t break could master that power.

[KorvinStarmast]

But it needs to be deep black humor, not mild pseudo-goth edgelady mixed with "facebook maven" posts-for-likes stuff that are lame by the end of freshman year in college. Yes, and your previous "Morticia Addams" point got a head nod from me.

Like I said, I'd have preferred a more Addams Family vibe to her than Legally Blonde. Likewise.