And here I thought the way they wrote Tasha in TCoE was intentional.

[Deathtongue]

I got the vibe from reading Tasha's that it's what they were going for. A bag of hot air who, for all of her power, is mostly a Hot Topic Goth less witty than she thinks she is. Which is honestly pretty interesting in light of how D&D gradually shines a more negative light on major NPCs as the game progresses. Fixtures of the franchise like Elminster, Halaster, Raistlin, and Mordenkainen are over time painted less as antiheroic, sarcastic badasses and more like Homelander-style moral infants with too much magic and too little pushback. Not because of how their personality changes, but just because the audience from beyond the 4th wall changed in their tastes and outlook while the characters didn't.

[Abracadangit]

I think what happened was they tried to copy what they did in Xanathar's, except they tried way too hard to sound edgy or snarky, or... something. Whatever Tasha's supposed to be.

Xanathar was an easy character to write - he's comically arrogant and pompous, and is sort of like a villain from a Saturday morning cartoon stuck in the D&D world. Part of the humor was that as a beholder, he totally misses the point of various subclasses or mechanics, and just prattles on about them from a beholder's point of view. Then they decided to try the same tack with Tasha's but... it feels like whoever they got to write the blurbs just had an off-key sense of humor. Like there's jokes about sushi, and "mood lighting and evening wear"?

It's this weird blend of unfunny anachronism, trying too hard, and sometimes not even really understanding the theme of a given entry. (Bard of Creation: "One bard's song of creation is the score to another person's nightmares." Wat.) I don't think they intended for it to sound the way it does - I legitimately think whoever wrote these (and they all seem to be written by the same person) really thought they were a laugh riot. And to top it off, yeah, it makes this quasi-mythical D&D character sound sort of lame.

I'm sure there are some people who dig it, but it wasn't for me.

[Deathtongue]

I legitimately think whoever wrote these (and they all seem to be written by the same person) really thought they were a laugh riot. And to top it off, yeah, it makes this quasi-mythical D&D character sound sort of lame.That's where I disagree. It feels like they were intentionally trying to make the character kind of lame, the way she talked about making her spells look like chickens to impress her evil nana. Which is a thing in current metafiction. It's quite fashionable in fantasy fiction to increasingly paint once-unquestionably badass wizards like Elminster and Yoda as, well, prats with more arrogance than sense. You might not like it, but there is precedent.

[Abracadangit]

That's where I disagree. It feels like they were intentionally trying to make the character kind of lame, the way she talked about making her spells look like chickens to impress her evil nana. Which is a thing in current metafiction. It's quite fashionable in fantasy fiction to increasingly paint once-unquestionably badass wizards like Elminster and Yoda as, well, prats with more arrogance than sense. You might not like it, but there is precedent.

I think those were definitely attempts to humanize her. Like the chicken thing, for example - they want to be like "Ooo hey look at Tasha, she's three-dimensional, she feels stuff, she snarks at her magic teacher because she's got PERSONALITY," etc.

But I also think, again, that whoever wrote these didn't intend for the jokes to fall flat. These aren't written to make you cringe at Tasha, they're supposed to genuinely make you laugh - there's a distinct sense of humor there, it's just one I happen to find unfunny and feels like a tonal mismatch for a D&D book.

But you could be right, maybe it's all intentional. Hard to say.

[Tanarii]

Just dropping in to point out Raistlin was never an anti-hero, even before he switched to black.

[MaxWilson]

Just dropping in to point out Raistlin was never an anti-hero, even before he switched to black.

He wasn't?

Are you saying he was a regular hero, or always a villain?

[Kuulvheysoon]

I'd argue pseudo-sympathetic villain over antihero for Raistlin, from my slightly faded memories of the OG novels.

[PhantomSoul]

That's where I disagree. It feels like they were intentionally trying to make the character kind of lame, the way she talked about making her spells look like chickens to impress her evil nana. Which is a thing in current metafiction. It's quite fashionable in fantasy fiction to increasingly paint once-unquestionably badass wizards like Elminster and Yoda as, well, prats with more arrogance than sense. You might not like it, but there is precedent.

And/or just fitting with their intentional "we want things to appeal to young players / kids" pattern in general. So it's bad because it's meant to seem immature and stupid... because they think that will appeal to and/or draw in a specific target audience. (Presumably because those people might be customers longer-term...?)

[Kvess]

There are only so many one-liners you can tell about Wild Magic Barbarians, but for what it is it’s serviceable. Maybe I’m grading it on a curve because it’s already flavour about flavour text. I think Tasha’s intended to be like a morally-questionable magical aunt.

If you want to enjoy it, imagine the text read by Kathryn Hahn.

[MaxWilson]

There are only so many one-liners you can tell about Wild Magic Barbarians, but for what it is it’s serviceable. Maybe I’m grading it on a curve because it’s already flavour about flavour text. I think Tasha’s intended to be like a morally-questionable magical aunt.

With a dad-joke sense of humor?

I don't think WotC is self-aware enough to deliberately and ironically use an uncool narrator (so that readers will make fun of the narrator? How does that make a good marketing strategy anyway?). Their artwork definitely tries to make her look cool, not dorky.

I think they were definitely trying to make Tasha sound like the cool magical aunt who encourages you to break the rules and be cool too. But their execution flopped, as far as I'm concerned anyway. (The artwork is far better executed than the dialogue though.)

[Kvess]

Okay, shoot. Give us a better joke for wild magic barbarians.

[PhantomSoul]

Okay, shoot. Give us a better joke for wild magic barbarians.

Wild Magic Sorcerers

[Xihirli]

Hey, that joke got me.

[Lord Raziere]

Okay, shoot. Give us a better joke for wild magic barbarians.

"Wait, This isn't Wild Magic, all the effects are beneficial."

[MaxWilson]

Wild Magic Sorcerers

Well-timed! Have applause.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Wild Magic Sorcerers

..okay, you got me there. Well played.

[ff7hero]

If you want to enjoy it, imagine the text read by Kathryn Hahn.

Are you suggesting it was Tasha all along?

[Tanarii]

He wasn't?

Are you saying he was a regular hero, or always a villain?
None of the above. Although he certainly later made up for it all by being a dang good villain.


I'd argue pseudo-sympathetic villain over antihero for Raistlin, from my slightly faded memories of the OG novels.That sounds like a post-black description. Before he was just a really smart mercenary, keeping alive the people he needed to keep him alive, who got pulled along for the ride that turned into an adventure.

[Deathtongue]

I don't think WotC is self-aware enough to deliberately and ironically use an uncool narrator (so that readers will make fun of the narrator? How does that make a good marketing strategy anyway?).You say that like The Last Jedi, the Sopranos, and Rick and Morty didn't happen. I'm not saying whether it was a wise marketing strategy, just that the whole 'narrator who fronts like they're a badass anti-hero but the metanarrative clues you in how they're less cool than they think they are' is a thing in popular media now. And the more famous wizards of D&D make juicy targets for this trope for several reasons.


That sounds like a post-black description. Before he was just a really smart mercenary, keeping alive the people he needed to keep him alive, who got pulled along for the ride that turned into an adventure.Raistlin's morality isn't important to my point. I'm commenting on his aesthetic. Going by then-contemporary fiction, you're supposed to see him as a badass with shades of grey to it. And this was undoubtedly how he was accepted by audiences back then. However, it's also not very hard -- especially if you weren't there for the heyday of Dragonlance -- to paint him as a self-interested dweeb who's nowhere near as charming or impressive as he nor the narrative then thinks he is. And this can apply to a ton of famous D&D wizards.

[Xihirli]

....TLJ didn't have a narrator, what are you talking about?

[Deathtongue]

....TLJ didn't have a narrator, what are you talking about?I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

[Catullus64]

The lack of a subversive element to undercut Tasha's self-assured quipping was a weakness of the book's presentation. Xanathar's comments were so inherently ludicrous, and Volo's Guide had Elminster's editorials as a fun counterpoint to Volo's pomposity. Mordenkainen's Tome may not have had this element, but those commentaries weren't trying to be witty; they generally took the material they were commenting upon seriously.

It also doesn't help that half of the comments on subclasses seem like snide insults or pithy dismissals of the character type ("a religion based around mood lighting and evening wear", "it's ok to admit you just want to be a wizard") and by extension anyone who might want to play one.

What I think this series of sourcebook narrators needs is a non-Wizard. If we're going to have this running jokey-joke commentary, I'd much prefer to hear from a jaded tavern-keeper, a dashing thief, or a world-weary warrior than a magic-user so powerful as to be nigh inhuman.

[Lord Raziere]

I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

Hey now.

don't give the rest of the franchise credit for what only Kotor 2 did.

[Kvess]

I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

Which is fair game because Star Wars only made sense, from the point of view of American filmmakers during the Cold War, after 20-odd years of deconstructing Akira Kurosawa films that in turn deconstructed John Ford films.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Tasha's commentary kind of reads like what some corporate suit thinks a zoomer sounds like after spending a week on Instagram. It's got this insincere quality to it.

Tasha ought to have been mocking and scathing, sure, but she also should have been witty and intelligent. Her quotes showcase none of that.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

Kotor 2 is almost 17 years old at this point. "Modern" can be relative I suppose, but...still.

Anyway, it's good that things are viewed through a more critical lens now. Old DnD had a lot of really bad attitudes/behaviors modeled by it's NPCs and adventures, even baked directly into the rules of the system itself. It's good for the "badass wizards" to get taken down a peg or two. Though I think most people playing these days probably have no real idea who any of these characters are. Heck I started back in 3.5 times and it wasn't until the book launched that I knew what a Mordenkainen was.

The Tasha writing is bad but there isn't any great mystery behind as to why: the writers were trying to be funny, and...they just aren't. It takes skill to write effectively, even more so to communicate humor, and the DnD team is little lacking on that front. Narrative and lore writing is one of the weakest parts of 5e, in my opinion. And the few times they've tried to branch out and hire some outside talent with fresh takes and new perspectives, they end to treat that talent very poorly, so it's likely a problem that's going to remain for a while still.

[Abracadangit]

Okay, shoot. Give us a better joke for wild magic barbarians.

But see, that's the thing, right? It didn't HAVE to be jokes - they just felt some strange pressure to keep being funny, since Xanathar was funny. Wouldn't it be way cooler if the bit before each subclass was written more like a journal entry from Tasha's research notes?

"There are tales of warriors from the outlands who, despite a complete lack of magical study, manifest arcane energy in unpredictable displays of fearsome power. People who see them in action have a great many theories to explain their curious condition - a demonic curse, an eldritch anomaly, a wayward spell lodged in their soul. But I have witnessed them, and I know the true source of their power is neither devilry nor dweomer, but the essence of chaos itself. How do I know this? Because much like myself, chaos has found a kindred spirit in these warriors. And much like myself, they will not be tamed." --Tasha

A little wordier, sure. But even though this isn't that great, at least it establishes some things: she knows everything because she's been everywhere, and she doesn't take guff from people. She's like the platonic ideal of a warlock - suffers no fools, puts on no airs, and will do whatever she needs to learn all of the forbidden lore in the world. Sign me up for more of that Tasha.

And this also sets the wild magic barbarian up as a badass. What does the Tasha bit in the book do now? "Live deliciously." The hell is that?

[MaxWilson]

But see, that's the thing, right? It didn't HAVE to be jokes - they just felt some strange pressure to keep being funny, since Xanathar was funny. Wouldn't it be way cooler if the bit before each subclass was written more like a journal entry from Tasha's research notes?

"There are tales of warriors from the outlands who, despite a complete lack of magical study, manifest arcane energy in unpredictable displays of fearsome power. People who see them in action have a great many theories to explain their curious condition - a demonic curse, an eldritch anomaly, a wayward spell lodged in their soul. But I have witnessed them, and I know the true source of their power is neither devilry nor dweomer, but the essence of chaos itself. How do I know this? Because much like myself, chaos has found a kindred spirit in these warriors. And much like myself, they will not be tamed." --Tasha

A little wordier, sure. But even though this isn't that great, at least it establishes some things: she knows everything because she's been everywhere, and she doesn't take guff from people. She's like the platonic ideal of a warlock - suffers no fools, puts on no airs, and will do whatever she needs to learn all of the forbidden lore in the world. Sign me up for more of that Tasha.

On the one hand, given WotC's track record, any such Tasha notes would almost certainly be a clichéd waste of space that spark zero character concepts or original adventure ideas.

On the other hand, sometimes people surprise you. Maybe some of them would actually be good.

On the gripping hand, even clichés as bad as the PHB class intro blurbs would be better than the painfully unfunny Tasha we actually got. Sign me up for the serious version!

[Trask]

I agree that the way they wrote her was silly and feels like it only was because Xanathar's was and they were trying to repeat that success. But Tasha just inherently isn't as funny a character as Xanathar, a literal floating eye alien. That humor was effortless, this humor feels forced.

I do understand why they'd want a memorable character to work from though, I might have gone with a more haughty wizardess type, maybe even a little sultry if that isnt too spicy for WotC. She is Graz'zt's lover after all and was somewhat of an evil overlord in her own right according to the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth. Give her a more haughty and passionate demeanor and you have a authorial voice thats easier to take seriously while still having potential for some humor.

[hamishspence]

Tasha's a much younger character than her later "Iggwilv" identity though - a little immaturity is plausible.

[Unoriginal]

I found the Tasha's notes funny, personally.

To me, the notes were meant to show that Tasha is powerful, chaotic, and has no reason to care about what other think: she likes what she likes, she knows what she's worth, and she isn't going to make herself less odd to please anyone.



Mordenkainen's Tome may not have had this element, but those commentaries weren't trying to be witty; they generally took the material they were commenting upon seriously.

I disagree with that assessment. Mordenkainen-the-character tries to be serious, true, and think of himself as serious/non-nonsense/professional, but the whole joke is that he's a pompous, arrogant jerk and that shines through no matter what. Cue notes about how how there is no such thing as Halfling luck and the like.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I disagree with that assessment. Mordenkainen-the-character tries to be serious, true, and think of himself as serious/non-nonsense/professional, but the whole joke is that he's a pompous, arrogant jerk and that shines through no matter what. Cue notes about how how there is no such thing as Halfling luck and the like.

And it's something wotc is surprisingly somewhat consistent about, whether intended or not, as most time he's encountered or mentioned he's either failing or being made fun of. True it's not a huge sample size, but the thread of his lack of self awareness is there.

he went to barovia knowing it was ruled by a powerful vampire, doesn't prepare any spells able to destroy a vampire and loses so badly that he goes insane.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I found the Tasha's notes funny, personally.

To me, the notes were meant to show that Tasha is powerful, chaotic, and has no reason to care about what other think: she likes what she likes, she knows what she's worth, and she isn't going to make herself less odd to please anyone.

I'm with Unoriginal here; I found her notes amusing. Most of them weren't funny funny, but these are RPG designers, not comedy writers. The fact that I cracked a smile at all is pretty impressive, imho.

I'll admit to being biased, however; whoever was running the WotC twitter account around the time of release was actually pretty sharp-tongued for the day when they cosplayed Tasha.

[Unoriginal]

And it's something wotc is surprisingly somewhat consistent about, whether intended or not, as most time he's encountered or mentioned he's either failing or being made fun of. True it's not a huge sample size, but the thread of his lack of self awareness is there.

he went to barovia knowing it was ruled by a powerful vampire, doesn't prepare any spells able to destroy a vampire and loses so badly that he goes insane.

I'm pretty certain it's intended.

I remember a video where Mike Mearls characterized Mordenkainen as someone who would go "humility isn't a luxury I can afford" unironically.

[Quietus]

I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

So you're saying that our perceptions of Luke Skywalker have aged about forty years, and are different today, than they were when the movies first came out. And in the meantime, Luke Skywalker has aged about forty years, and is different today than when the movies first came out?

He wasn't even 20 when we first met him; in Last Jedi, he's 53. He's been through an incredible amount, accomplished some incredible things, but suffered absolutely monumental failures that led him to where he is. Of course he isn't the same wide eyed, naive farmboy we saw in New Hope. He's grown, and has the remarkable opportunity to represent that on screen, all using one actor. I personally love where they went with him, and that he got his own small redemption arc at the end.

[Witty Username]

Wasn't Tasha an assumed Identity of a too funny enchanter type of iggwilv. It sounding forced kinda makes sense.

[Catullus64]

I disagree with that assessment. Mordenkainen-the-character tries to be serious, true, and think of himself as serious/non-nonsense/professional, but the whole joke is that he's a pompous, arrogant jerk and that shines through no matter what. Cue notes about how how there is no such thing as Halfling luck and the like.

Yeah, it's not perfectly true now that I look back at the book, and there is a certain amount of self-mockery against the figure of Mordenkainen. But I think my point still stands that it's a lot less cringe-inducing than some of the quips in Tasha's, and that it's a mistake to think that all the class commentaries need to be jokes. The game should sometimes take its material a bit seriously.

[Unoriginal]

So you're saying that our perceptions of Luke Skywalker have aged about forty years, and are different today, than they were when the movies first came out. And in the meantime, Luke Skywalker has aged about forty years, and is different today than when the movies first came out?

He wasn't even 20 when we first met him; in Last Jedi, he's 53. He's been through an incredible amount, accomplished some incredible things, but suffered absolutely monumental failures that led him to where he is. Of course he isn't the same wide eyed, naive farmboy we saw in New Hope. He's grown, and has the remarkable opportunity to represent that on screen, all using one actor. I personally love where they went with him, and that he got his own small redemption arc at the end.

Said actor's opinion on the question is that he couldn't imagine Luke act like that, even after decades and the failures he went through.


But I think my point still stands that it's a lot less cringe-inducing than some of the quips in Tasha's,

I disagree on that point.

[Quietus]

Said actor's opinion on the question is that he couldn't imagine Luke act like that, even after decades and the failures he went through.

Certainly, and that has merit. But at the same time, no individual is able to accurately gauge where they are likely to be in forty years. I look back at myself as a teenager, and picture where I thought I would be at this stage in my life. There is a vast gulf between those two people. I'm far more cynical and tired than I ever expected I would be, and I didn't end up turning my nephew into the next incarnation of Vader.

Luke fled, dealing with depression borne out of a deep cutting failure. Depression is a bitch, and can put you in a rough spiral. When someone finally came and knocked him out of it, he was able to muster the strength to be the person he had once aspired to be, one last time. We may not like where he's at, at the beginning of the movie, but by the end of it he proves that despite what he's gone through/is going through, he is still that hero, deep down. We can debate the specifics, but ultimately I find that more inspiring than him just showing up and being the hero still.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Said actor's opinion on the question is that he couldn't imagine Luke act like that, even after decades and the failures he went through.

With all due respect to Mark Hamiil..is Mark well versed in Eastern Philosophy/Religion?

The Force, and the Jedi are based in some small part on Eastern Traditions of thought.

The wiseman that has reached Enlightenment and separates the self from the world is a trope. Luke thought due to Cause and Effect, Dependent Origination, or whatever you wish to call the concept, that any direct action he took would cause the Dark Side to act proportionally...thus leading to further conflict and pain....pain he would be responsible for, Karmically and would prevent him from being one with the Force, and achieving "Blue Glowey" Status.

Likewise any 'Good' that Luke does is also added to his Karma credit account, and since the goal is to have a balance of 'Zero'...also results in an outcome that is less than ideal.

Arguably, Luke's final act at the end of Last Jedi, is greater than the actions Yoda takes. At the end of the day, Yoda resorts to actually violence, and hides for 40 years recommending that Luke sacrifice Leia and Han and Chewie.

Luke creates no violence, he does nothing crudely physical, but uses the Paradox of Illusion to bring the misunderstood aspect of reality to light.

Even from the farthest reaches of the Galaxy, Luke inspires and brings comfort and hope to his Loved Ones and others.

When Luke threw down the Lightsaber in Return of the Jedi, he turned it down for good....except for one brief moment of doubt, where like Mace Windu he reached for the blade to deal with a 'Dangerous Person'.

Like Mace Windu..it ultimately was a mistake, and made things worse for the future.

[Cikomyr2]

None of the above. Although he certainly later made up for it all by being a dang good villain.

That sounds like a post-black description. Before he was just a really smart mercenary, keeping alive the people he needed to keep him alive, who got pulled along for the ride that turned into an adventure.

First of all, pre-Black Raistlin is merely 40% of the exposure we seen of him in the original 2 trilogies.

And even then, Red Raistlin seemed fully, fully aware it was only a question of time before he turned black and didn't bother with the pretense anymore. He isn't an edgy mercenary, he's a smart sociopath who goes along the social conventions as long as it is convenient to avoid aggroing too many people and keeping his outfit of armed mercenaries as bodyguards.

He listened to Caramon not because Caramon made good points, but because Caramon provided insight in how outsiders would view him, and reacted to this information.

But I never seen Raistlin as anything but a villain bidding his time.

[MaxWilson]

Said actor's opinion on the question is that he couldn't imagine Luke act like that, even after decades and the failures he went through.

I think Mark Hamil's opinion this point has more weight than anyone except George Lucas.

Ergo, the events of The Last Jedi can only be an alternate universe with a different Luke, perhaps one who was different from the very beginning. This could also explain some other weirdness like the Vader-worship and the Emperor's survival: perhaps in this universe Vader never returned to the light, never betrayed the Emperor, and died a villain covering the Emperor's retreat from the Death Star.

[Unoriginal]

Certainly, and that has merit. But at the same time, no individual is able to accurately gauge where they are likely to be in forty years. I look back at myself as a teenager, and picture where I thought I would be at this stage in my life. There is a vast gulf between those two people. I'm far more cynical and tired than I ever expected I would be, and I didn't end up turning my nephew into the next incarnation of Vader.

Luke fled, dealing with depression borne out of a deep cutting failure. Depression is a bitch, and can put you in a rough spiral. When someone finally came and knocked him out of it, he was able to muster the strength to be the person he had once aspired to be, one last time. We may not like where he's at, at the beginning of the movie, but by the end of it he proves that despite what he's gone through/is going through, he is still that hero, deep down. We can debate the specifics, but ultimately I find that more inspiring than him just showing up and being the hero still.


With all due respect to Mark Hamiil..is Mark well versed in Eastern Philosophy/Religion?

The Force, and the Jedi are based in some small part on Eastern Traditions of thought.

The wiseman that has reached Enlightenment and separates the self from the world is a trope. Luke thought due to Cause and Effect, Dependent Origination, or whatever you wish to call the concept, that any direct action he took would cause the Dark Side to act proportionally...thus leading to further conflict and pain....pain he would be responsible for, Karmically and would prevent him from being one with the Force, and achieving "Blue Glowey" Status.

Likewise any 'Good' that Luke does is also added to his Karma credit account, and since the goal is to have a balance of 'Zero'...also results in an outcome that is less than ideal.

Arguably, Luke's final act at the end of Last Jedi, is greater than the actions Yoda takes. At the end of the day, Yoda resorts to actually violence, and hides for 40 years recommending that Luke sacrifice Leia and Han and Chewie.

Luke creates no violence, he does nothing crudely physical, but uses the Paradox of Illusion to bring the misunderstood aspect of reality to light.

Even from the farthest reaches of the Galaxy, Luke inspires and brings comfort and hope to his Loved Ones and others.

When Luke threw down the Lightsaber in Return of the Jedi, he turned it down for good....except for one brief moment of doubt, where like Mace Windu he reached for the blade to deal with a 'Dangerous Person'.

Like Mace Windu..it ultimately was a mistake, and made things worse for the future.

What Mark Hammil objected to was the fact that Luke Skywalker gave up on the Galaxy, on his friends, and on his family.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to fight Darth Vader, the most dangerous and terrifying opposition to the Rebels, despite everyone telling him that it was a trap and that he would be killed or corrupted, just in the hope of saving his friends.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to fight *for* Darth Vader, a child-killer, genocider, and galactic oppressor who personally harmed him, just because he believed Vader could be saved.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to *die* just for the vain hope he could save Vader. Who chose to die for his convictions. Who faced pain and defeat in the physical sense just to *hope*.


There's many interesting stories about heroes who gave up and need to be reminded of who they were. There's many stories about heroes making mistakes.

I'm not opposed to Luke making that mistake. The issue is that the Last Jedi, in its self-admitted effort to create a blank slate for Star Wars, decided that making Luke Skywalker give up on Ben Solo was the way to go.

[Tanarii]

But I never seen Raistlin as anything but a villain bidding his time.
Except you can't be a Red Robe and be evil. Your magic won't work. So he really was neutral on the good-evil axis*

It's fair to say he may have had villainous thoughts and villainous plans but didn't act on them regularly. But IMO it's more accurate to say he just wanted power, and he changed the means* he was willing to use when an opportunity for real power came along.

*alignment being an actual axis driven and tracked by points for alignment-weight actions at the time.

[Catullus64]

Except you can't be a Red Robe and be evil. Your magic won't work. So he really was neutral on the good-evil axis*

It's fair to say he may have had villainous thoughts and villainous plans but didn't act on them regularly. But IMO it's more accurate to say he just wanted power, and he changed the means* he was willing to use when an opportunity for real power came along.

*alignment being an actual axis driven and tracked by points for alignment-weight actions at the time.

However you read Raistlin's motives and personality at any given time, I think it's definitely true that it'd be an odd choice to have him making flippant wisecracks about subclasses. Everything I knew about Tasha/Iggwilv prior to the Cauldron suggested she was a figure whose deeds were no less sinister than Raistlin's, albeit less grand in scope. The pivot towards the jovial in her personality suggested by the tone of her interjections in TCE is a little puzzling.

Now that I say that, of course, I hope that any Dragonlance setting guide we get is a joint-narration effort between a pre-black robes Raistlin and Caramon, perhaps with the occasional aside by Bupu.

[Tanarii]

However you read Raistlin's motives and personality at any given time, I think it's definitely true that it'd be an odd choice to have him making flippant wisecracks about subclasses.Yeah, they'd be far more likely to be very insightful and rather disturbing to think about, :smallamused:

[Unoriginal]

Everything I knew about Tasha/Iggwilv prior to the Cauldron suggested she was a figure whose deeds were no less sinister than Raistlin's

Including the fact her most famous spell is about making people laugh themselves into defeat via a small thrown pie and a tickling feather?

[Catullus64]

Including the fact her most famous spell is about making people laugh themselves into defeat via a small thrown pie and a tickling feather?

Uhh...Yeah? Silly material components aside, Tasha's Hideous Laughter has always seemed like a very invasive and frightful spell to be subjected to. Maybe that's just personal fears talking, since rationally it's no worse than spells which roast people with flames or rot their flesh, but being forcible subject to violent, uncontrollable laughter hits a particular note of cruelty for me.

[Unoriginal]

Uhh...Yeah? Silly material components aside, Tasha's Hideous Laughter has always seemed like a very invasive and frightful spell to be subjected to. Maybe that's just personal fears talking, since rationally it's no worse than spells which roast people with flames or rot their flesh, but being forcible subject to violent, uncontrollable laughter hits a particular note of cruelty for me.

So just to make sure we're on the same page, you've always imagined Tasha to be a powerful witch who was sinister and dour, and you're disappointed she's a powerful witch who talks casually and is just enjoying being herself?

[Vulryn]

Luke fled, dealing with depression borne out of a deep cutting failure.

Thank god this garbage isn‘t canon. The guy who believed in the redemption of a child-slaying massmurderer exiling himself to the fringes of outer space and failing all those that he loved in such a spectacular way? Well, nah. Neither consistent in character nor well-written. But that’s what you get when you put lesser men in charge.

While I liked most of the stuff in Tasha‘s, the commentary of the character herself wasn‘t very funny. It was boring, uninspired and not very well balanced (much like a certain cleric domain). But cringeworthy edginess is what the kids like, I guess? Certainly that’s where the bucks are.

[Catullus64]

So just to make sure we're on the same page, you've always imagined Tasha to be a powerful witch who was sinister and dour, and you're disappointed she's a powerful witch who talks casually and is just enjoying being herself?

Sort of. The comparison with Raistlin Majere which sparked my earlier comment isn't a perfect one. I've read novels with Raistlin as a fully fleshed-out character, whereas I've only ever seen Tasha described in sourcebooks. But I definitely got the impression of her as a dark figure of grand and terrible ambition; for me, the familiar tone and the way her comments are layered into the book's content suggest somebody a lot more laid back, more interested in enjoying life than conquering the cosmos. It was a bit counter to my expectations, although that's not necessarily what makes it bad.

[MaxWilson]

Including the fact her most famous spell is about making people laugh themselves into defeat via a small thrown pie and a tickling feather?

"The victim of this spell perceives everything as hilariously funny. The effect is not immediate, and the creature feels only a slight tingling on the round the spell is cast. On the round immediately following, the victim begins smiling, then giggling, chuckling, tittering, snickering, guffawing, and finally collapsing into gales of uncontrollable, hideous laughter."

Remember that it's not a spell which helps the caster tell funny jokes. It's a spell which makes decidedly unfunny things like being stabbed with a sword seem unreasonably funny, temporarily. Yeah, that sounds pretty sinister actually.

[Millstone85]

I just want to say that I know the perfect follow-up to The Last Jedi.

That Force-sensitive kid at the end, with the broom? Looking hopefully at the stars after hearing the heroic tale of Luke Skywalker, Jedi Master?

Yeah, let's have him become the next Sith Lord.

[Catullus64]

Whoever brought Star Wars into this, look at what you've done. Hope you're happy.

[Quietus]

What Mark Hammil objected to was the fact that Luke Skywalker gave up on the Galaxy, on his friends, and on his family.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to fight Darth Vader, the most dangerous and terrifying opposition to the Rebels, despite everyone telling him that it was a trap and that he would be killed or corrupted, just in the hope of saving his friends.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to fight *for* Darth Vader, a child-killer, genocider, and galactic oppressor who personally harmed him, just because he believed Vader could be saved.

Luke Skywalker, who chose to *die* just for the vain hope he could save Vader. Who chose to die for his convictions. Who faced pain and defeat in the physical sense just to *hope*.


There's many interesting stories about heroes who gave up and need to be reminded of who they were. There's many stories about heroes making mistakes.

I'm not opposed to Luke making that mistake. The issue is that the Last Jedi, in its self-admitted effort to create a blank slate for Star Wars, decided that making Luke Skywalker give up on Ben Solo was the way to go.

This is the most well put together, cogent argument against Last Jedi's treatment of Luke that I have seen. I don't know that it completely changes my mind, but certainly gives me something to think about, particularly the last line there. Thank you.

[Xihirli]

Luke Skywalker does not give up on Ben Solo in TLJ, he says "I can't save him" and when someone suggests that he's beyond redemption he says "no one's ever really gone." The difference between "he can't be saved" and "I can't save him" is an entire galaxy of people minus one.

[loki_ragnarock]

What does the Tasha bit in the book do now? "Live deliciously." The hell is that?

It reminds me of one of the old English language slogans for one of my favorite Asian cracker brands:

"Square. Delicial. Really."

It's the same... shape... as English language slogans, but not quite there.

So as an alternative interpretation, maybe Iggwilv has been dealing with demons for so long that trying to communicate in mortal languages and perceptions loses something in translation, betraying her ultimately alien nature? It's quality of commentary is off because she's off?

I hadn't considered the angle of over analyzing the blurbs, but if we're going to do it, I'm just going to run with the "stared so long into the Abyss that she's forgot how to be funny for normal people. A smile as a way to bare teeth, from someone who has forgotten what smiles are for."

EDIT:
I guess the best way to describe it as the "Hello, Fellow Kids" meme, except it's the clown from IT instead of Steve Buscemi.

[Chauncymancer]

While the sadism of Hideous Laughter is undeniable, I also think we have to admit that Mrs. Tasha "What if I slapped myself in the face with a pie so hard you laughed yourself to death?" Iggwilv has just... a terrible sense of humor. It's the kind of spell a comedian would come up with after getting booed off stage on open mike night.

[MaxWilson]

So as an alternative interpretation, maybe Iggwilv has been dealing with demons for so long that trying to communicate in mortal languages and perceptions loses something in translation, betraying her ultimately alien nature? It's quality of commentary is off because she's off?

Reminds me of this hilarious blurb:

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/the-object-of-emulation/

"Probably one would have to be a lot smarter than average to effortlessly simulate normality, particularly in real time. It is said that John von Neumann could do this. In much the same way, emulating an obsolete computer is fairly easy – for machines that are a decade more advanced."

(I assume the von Neumann reference is a joke, a way of saying "this is impossibly difficult for regular human beings.")

Tasha's humanity emulator is buggy.

[Keltest]

Eh, i found most of the commentary to be lightly amusing. I didnt really burst out laughing at any of them (except the one about the amazing power she calls "words"), but most of the commentary is a flavor of sarcasm that i partake in pretty regularly, and thus appreciate.

[Unoriginal]

While the sadism of Hideous Laughter is undeniable, I also think we have to admit that Mrs. Tasha "What if I slapped myself in the face with a pie so hard you laughed yourself to death?" Iggwilv has just... a terrible sense of humor. It's the kind of spell a comedian would come up with after getting booed off stage on open mike night.

The spellcasting equivalent of Joker Gas, in other words?

[Drascin]

You know, it's funny, because far as I'm concerned, knowing that Tasha is actually just a petty sadist with a sense of humor based on hurting others (which is what the quips in Tasha's all seem to point towards) makes her more usable as a potential antagonist, not less. I can do something with "powerful sorceress who thinks she's the Joker".

[Millstone85]

I guess the best way to describe it as the "Hello, Fellow Kids" meme, except it's the clown from IT instead of Steve Buscemi.Great, now I am picturing Tasha like Sir Pentious from Hazbin Hotel.

https://i.imgur.com/hLecphM.png

Joke aside, I like the idea of Tasha's manners conflicting with her youthful appearance.


You know, it's funny, because far as I'm concerned, knowing that Tasha is actually just a petty sadist with a sense of humor based on hurting others (which is what the quips in Tasha's all seem to point towards) makes her more usable as a potential antagonist, not less. I can do something with "powerful sorceress who thinks she's the Joker".Agreed. Intentional or not, this makes her notes in TCoE much more bearable.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yeah, let's have him become the next Sith Lord. Sign me up. But, Disney hasn't the juevos to do that.

While the sadism of Hideous Laughter is undeniable And when it works, my allies take advantage of it ... I kept that spell Until about 9th or 10th level as a bard.

I think Tasha’s intended to be like a morally-questionable magical aunt. Auntie Maim.

to paint him as a self-interested dweeb who's nowhere near as charming or impressive as he nor the narrative then thinks he is. I had him classified as a selfish (censored) from Dragons of Autumn twilight, and my view never changed - though his character arc was fun to read at the time.

He isn't an edgy mercenary, he's a smart sociopath who goes along the social conventions as long as it is convenient to avoid aggroing too many people and keeping his outfit of armed mercenaries as bodyguards. Said more eloquently than I did.

What Mark Hammil objected to was the fact that Luke Skywalker gave up on the Galaxy, on his friends, and on his family. Since Kylo Wren is his nephew, it was a strange story beat for Luke, raised by his uncle, to leave his family after he discovered/confirmed Leah as his sister.
Or maybe his fear was that lust leads to incest leads to the dark side and needed to stay away from his sister because deep, deep down in his heart he still desired her... but Disney and Lucas both would never take that Freudian basis for a plot. And I am not sure I'd have been to keen on it going that way.

Except you can't be a Red Robe and be evil. Your magic won't work. So he really was neutral on the good-evil axis**alignment being an actual axis driven and tracked by points for alignment-weight actions at the time. Yep.

Everything I knew about Tasha/Iggwilv prior to the Cauldron suggested she was a figure whose deeds were no less sinister than Raistlin's, albeit less grand in scope.
Iuz was a, or the, major villain in quite a bit of Greyhawk lore. Tasha's his mom.

perhaps with the occasional aside by Bupu. ... no, please all deities of all multiverses, just no.

[Catullus64]

... no, please all deities of all multiverses, just no.

You're right. The asides should all be from Tasslehoff Burrfoot instead.

[KorvinStarmast]

You're right. The asides should all be from Tasslehoff Burrfoot instead. While I detest that character, that would be consistent with what they've done in the other books.

[ZRN]

I'm talking about the entirety of Jedi religion as not-so-flatteringly represented by Luke Skywalker. Who was not supposed to, in his original apperance, be a crusty, bitter, milk-drinking curmudgeon -- even though more modern works like Kotor2 would say that it's the logical endpoint of such a character. It's an aesthetic that only makes sense in modern times, with 40+ years of deconstructing the series.

Dude, every other Jedi in the original trilogy (which is to say, Obi-Wan and Yoda) ended up as a crusty curmudgeonly hermit, and Luke was explicitly following in their footsteps.

[KorvinStarmast]

Dude, every other Jedi in the original trilogy (which is to say, Obi-Wan and Yoda) ended up as a crusty curmudgeonly hermit, and Luke was explicitly following in their footsteps.
With great power comes great curmudgeonity :smallyuk:

[Wintermoot]

None of the above. Although he certainly later made up for it all by being a dang good villain.

Gotta disagree. It's all in the context of the reader.

One of my very first, if not my very first, D&D Adjacent experiences as a wee child was reading a choose-your-own-adventure with Raistlin as the protaganist, called Soulforge.

Because of that, when I got around to reading the Chronicles Raistlin was "the hero" or "main character" in my brain while reading them.

Edgelord indeed, but still a "hero" even if he falls then redeems himself in Legends.

[MaxWilson]

Dude, every other Jedi in the original trilogy (which is to say, Obi-Wan and Yoda) ended up as a crusty curmudgeonly hermit, and Luke was explicitly following in their footsteps.

Yoda crusty? The little guy who fights R2 for Luke's lunch? I-can-be-your-backpack-while-you-run Yoda?

[Telok]

Yoda crusty? The little guy who fights R2 for Luke's lunch? I-can-be-your-backpack-while-you-run Yoda?

You think there's clean water for taking baths in that swamp? Best he can do is a fresh coat of muck. As soon as it dries you're crusty again.

[Evaar]

That's where I disagree. It feels like they were intentionally trying to make the character kind of lame, the way she talked about making her spells look like chickens to impress her evil nana. Which is a thing in current metafiction. It's quite fashionable in fantasy fiction to increasingly paint once-unquestionably badass wizards like Elminster and Yoda as, well, prats with more arrogance than sense. You might not like it, but there is precedent.

This strikes me as the fluff equivalent of the argument we see so often when pointing out poor design of class mechanics -

The "have you considered that it's supposed to be bad?" argument.

[ProsecutorGodot]

This strikes me as the fluff equivalent of the argument we see so often when pointing out poor design of class mechanics -

The "have you considered that it's supposed to be bad?" argument.

At least in narrative writing reaching for the worst outcome can actually be a good goal with a successful outcome. A poorly written character can be successful if that writing is integral, or at least fitting, to framing how they're supposed to be perceived.

If someone at this stage of 5e released a subclass under the idea that it's bad and you aren't supposed to use it that would be so far outside of the current design trend and player expectations that there's no way to call it a success even if it actually becomes the worst subclass to date, as intended.

[Drascin]

This strikes me as the fluff equivalent of the argument we see so often when pointing out poor design of class mechanics -

The "have you considered that it's supposed to be bad?" argument.

Not really. There's a difference between "it's bad" and "it's not meant to be impressive".

Basically, you can't make someone like Elminster or Tasha actually serious to the current readership of D&D. You can either try to make them serious and cool and inevitably fail because people can smell the tryhard from a mile away, or try to make them kind of amusingly pompous and roll the dice on whether you manage to pull it off.

[PhantomSoul]

Basically, you can't make someone like Elminster or Tasha actually serious to the current readership of D&D. You can either try to make them serious and cool and inevitably fail because people can smell the tryhard from a mile away, or try to make them kind of amusingly pompous and roll the dice on whether you manage to pull it off.

You know when a player accidentally rolls 1d12 or something instead of 1d20? I feel like WOTC does that for a living.

[Tanarii]

If someone at this stage of 5e released a subclass under the idea that it's bad and you aren't supposed to use it that would be so far outside of the current design trend and player expectations that there's no way to call it a success even if it actually becomes the worst subclass to date, as intended.
Conversely if they released a spell called Ball of Fire that did 6d6 but was otherwise identical to Fireball which was intended to be worse because it was explicitly for DMs to use instead of Fireball for caster monsters, since it'd be in-line with 3rd level spells instead of an outlier, that'd be an example of successfully hitting the target.

But players would still complain anyway.

[KorvinStarmast]

But players would still complain anyway. Yes. Yes they will. :smallwink::smallwink:

[Monster Manuel]

I wasn't a fan of the tone they used in Tasha's going all the way back to when the title was announced. "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" worked as a title, because you could believe that a pompous, out of touch alien being would use a title like that. Of course it's not really a guide to literally EVERYTHING, but Xanathar is a bit of a buffoon, so it works.

Then WotC decided they had to keep the "everything" part of the title, to tie them together as a series. And, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything doesn't work. It sounds forced. They could have even re-worded it to make it less silly; Tasha's Cauldron of Many Things, or something. Let it sound mythic and mysterious, rather than a forced also-ran title drawing from the last book.

The flavor text did the same thing, in my opinion. Xanathar's goofy quips worked, the kids ate it up. Let's do that again.

[Warlush]

Honestly the crunch was so good I didn't really notice the fluff.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I wasn't a fan of the tone they used in Tasha's going all the way back to when the title was announced. "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" worked as a title, because you could believe that a pompous, out of touch alien being would use a title like that. Of course it's not really a guide to literally EVERYTHING, but Xanathar is a bit of a buffoon, so it works.

Then WotC decided they had to keep the "everything" part of the title, to tie them together as a series. And, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything doesn't work. It sounds forced. They could have even re-worded it to make it less silly; Tasha's Cauldron of Many Things, or something. Let it sound mythic and mysterious, rather than a forced also-ran title drawing from the last book.

The flavor text did the same thing, in my opinion. Xanathar's goofy quips worked, the kids ate it up. Let's do that again.

This was probably right. I'm not even necessarily sure it was the writer's fault, as it smells like the sort of thing mandated by someone higher up after some presentation on demographics involving some big pie chart.

I got much the same feel in Van Richten's regarding old returning content versus the completely new stuff. There was clear inspiration and imagination that went into making new domains that felt lacking in their coverage of the old ones. Like the writers got shackled to churning out soulless, cynical nostalgia when they would much rather be making their own material.

It's kind of our fault in a way, for demanding it in the first place. Myself absolutely included.

[Unoriginal]

I wasn't a fan of the tone they used in Tasha's going all the way back to when the title was announced. "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" worked as a title, because you could believe that a pompous, out of touch alien being would use a title like that. Of course it's not really a guide to literally EVERYTHING, but Xanathar is a bit of a buffoon, so it works.

Then WotC decided they had to keep the "everything" part of the title, to tie them together as a series. And, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything doesn't work. It sounds forced. They could have even re-worded it to make it less silly; Tasha's Cauldron of Many Things, or something. Let it sound mythic and mysterious, rather than a forced also-ran title drawing from the last book.

The flavor text did the same thing, in my opinion. Xanathar's goofy quips worked, the kids ate it up. Let's do that again.

They should have called it Tasha's Cauldron of Plenty.

[Millstone85]

I guess one of Xanathar's jokes did land, because it made me wonder how strong are a beholder's closed eyelids, and if it would in fact be possible for the creature to become a monk.

I was also mildly amused by his repeated complaints about people bringing the weather indoor.

[Unoriginal]

I guess one of Xanathar's jokes did land, because it made me wonder how strong are a beholder's closed eyelids, and if it would in fact be possible for the creature to become a monk.

Unarmed attacks don't need to be made with limbs or tentacles, in any case. But yeah a beholder could become a monk.

[Segev]

I've said it elsewhere, but I would have vastly preferred an Addams Family vibe from Tasha's quips. Something more like Morticia or Wednesday Addams, with hints that Baba Yaga is like Grandmama.