Trailer here:

Do you expect some relation, or at least easter eggs tied to BG-3?

I don't like the trailer.
For me it looks like a "Guardians of the Galaxy"-Copy in a Fantasy world including the music choice.
Even the plot sounds a little bit like the plot of the first "Guardians"-movie.

It seems the most positive reactions came from people which plays the tabletop.
I only know D&D from games like Baldur's Gate 3 or the Neverwinter Night games or fantasy novels.

Like exploding barrels? Or the whole cast shoving each other repeatedly? :P

Edit: Sorry, I had to. I'm not sure about BG3 specifically but I wouldn't be surprised if for example Volo had a cameo.

I get a very "Warcraft:The movie" sense from it. I mean, made to appease the fans but also trying to have a somewhat easy plot to follow for uninitiated and lots of comical relief. Might actually be ok.

D&D has always been goofy and serious in equal measure. It's important to not take things too seriously, and let yourself have fun. The trailer looks ... okay. Better then I expected honestly, and it kind of gave me Road to El Dorado vibes. But I've built up a natural distrust of trailers over the years, so ultimately I'll have to actually watch the film to judge it.

Considering Guardians had a very D&D team feel to it, it’s not the worst IP to rip off.

The trailer looks… ok. It all depends if the movie manages to entertain.

Yes, the heroes stole BG IP for Larian, and now realised their mistake. Casting Hugh Grant as Sven is not a bad choice.

Looks like crap. Quote me now; print me later.

My only expectation is for this to be abysmal.

You people are so Gumpy so i wonder if you arent actualy cats.

I would never want it any other way! ^_^

Stuff? Bah humbug!

I was pleasantly surprised by the trailer. It looks really fun! I’m glad they didn’t try to make it serious like LOTR or GOT. That’s harder to pull off well. And honestly this feels more like the tabletop experience. They clearly worked with Wizards as well (see the video below). If Larian is smart, they are planning to release BG3 around the time the movie comes out in March.

Yeah, I don't expect to waste my money on a movie like that.

Sorry, but I prefer my fantasy to be serious, which doesn't appear to be the case with the new D&D movie.

Agree completely. Don't understand at all any of the naysaying. The story, the characters, and the visuals all look great. It portrays D&D very well (the monsters, and combat, for example), and it especially looks to do a great job of properly representing Faerun. As a huge fan of the FR novels who has read almost all of the FR novels, it feels very much like having a good and fun FR novel coming to life in a movie. This movie is the *the* D&D thing I'm most looking forward to for 2023 (and possibly the D&D live-action TV show if that happens).

As for Rag's question, this interview mentions Waterdeep, Neverwinter and Revel's End. All places far north from BG. Sure, we don't know the movie plot or the full plot of BG3 but based on the info we have right now...I doubt even more there will be any references between the two.

So Captain Kirk is a Bard?

He is such a one dimensional actor. Unlike Spock (his Spock) who brings something new to the table each time.

Or Rebecca Romijn (speaking of Star Trek). She honestly becomes her part so well, I'm like who's that?

Well...what do you expect with a babyface like that? He's stuck to the pretty boy trope. Could you honestly imagine him being harsh, traumatic, cunning or evil? Nope. Serious character sure, but always with a nice smile for the camera and a quirky joke. So bard it is!

The real question is if there'll be any nods to the first movie. My expectations for that movie were pretty low going in, this one looks...better.

The D&D landscape has changed so much recently that it'll be interesting to see how durable D&D fandom is outside of the streaming boom.

Some of those scenes flashed by too quickly for me to be certain, but I think at one point they showed a mimic attack. I've always wondered what goes through the mind of a mimic ....

"Ah yes, I look just like a treasure chest now. Maybe I will let a little more gold show at the top, hee hee. Yes, I shall wait here quietly now and let time pass as it wills, until that moment when a hapless adventurer comes to me with greedy hands, hee hee. Oh yes, their surprise will be delicious when I strike swift and sure. Oooh, I am so pretty."

With todays media and films this is a definite 'wait and see' from me.

They were also quite a lot talking about the Underdark.

And thank you, its so good so see anybody actualy read the question.
And not just go full "lets complain about a movie we didnt even seen yet".

I agree that the movie won't have references or connections to BG3, and I for one am happy with that. For me, if anything, it's BG3 that ought to be looking at how the Forgotten Realms is portrayed in the movie for its own inspiration.

Hey, i read the question too.
I didn't answer because I didn't think it made any sense.

I never watch movies...just not my thing.

Is that… Michelle Rodriguez as an axe-wielding barbarian? I’m so here for it

It would be nice if they mentioned maybe the city of Baldur’s Gate, but I’m not banking on it much. Looks fun though, better than the old DnD movie.

Sorry everyone, but this film will be your typical MCU comedy action formula with a D&D skin. I'm not impressed or that excited for it. I HOPE I'm proven wrong.

Crappy Marvelesque humor...

Do you know what is truly unfortunate? There are any number of established D&D settings ripe with material ready to be adapted into a solid primarily serious D&D film...and they went with an attempt based on contemporary perceptions/trends/memes of the hobby that is going to age poorly.

Of course it will be. That's the current success formula that everyone tries to copy, as public eats it up and brings Marvel/Disney billions on a silver platter. DC sadly did not show a steady stream of success, proving the point that mindless fun movies sell better.
So why even get upset. We'll all watch it anyways in hopes of getting some DnD content, and supporting this vicious cycle. Might as well try to enjoy it.

Probably because we haven't had any sourcebooks for those settings for more than 10 years. Hell, we haven't even covered the entire Forgotten Realms with the modern sourcebooks. We've had them mentioned in the PHB, but no actual detail. They're into franchise crossovers now, Ravnica, Theros, and Strixhaven, and the 6 planeshift worlds are all from Magic: the Gathering. I posted up the Dragon Lance UA in a D&D group when they came out and only the oldest people there even knew that this was a D&D setting. I don't expect anyone who only started playing D&D in the last decade to know what Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or Dark Sun are. The Ravenloft book detailing the domains of dread was only released last year, and it's not very popular, except with people who already knew the liked the setting.

There's also licensing issues. Wizards don't automatically have the creative rights (let alone film rights) to every setting they've ever published. We might have had sourcebooks for those settings sooner if not for the massive legal negotiations regarding ownership and licensing of specific settings that has been going on for many years now. The fact that we are actually getting a Dragonlance adventure at the end of this year means Wizards must have settled with Weiss and Hickman on that matter.

Not at all, but I couldn't imagine Heath Ledger pulling of the disturbing genius that was The Joker either. Another case of "your kidding right, that was him?".

They could have gone Lord of the Rings, but chose to go Bill and Ted's D&D adventure.

Going to be honest with you, I love both both Lord of the Rings and Bill and Ted for very different reasons.

I don't think the industry today could pull off Lord of the Rings, we won't see something like that again from mainstream film. WB just about killed the Hobbit films with their nonsense, and they DID kill poor Peter Jackson's desire to make movies, and the local New Zealand film industry (they are still suffering from decisions made during the filming of those movies).

That really warms my heart. ^_^
Aaaand we are back in normal.

Im affraid it would be impossible to create something looking worse than old DnD movie.

Especialy since their requisites looked like something you would buy in toy store for 5€ ...
Wich basicaly means that those plastic weapons we were buying for 5€ were actualy exact replicas ... hmm, kinda cool.

This is not true ...
It dont "sell better" its just easier to meet people expectations ... or to make such movie, if you preffer that wording.

Problem DC is facing is that they desprately want to make some dark and serious movie ... but also not too dark and too serious to make it really work ...
So they are splashing somewhere close to the shore, instead of go swimming properly, or screw it and crawl back to the land.

Ah...the inveterate reflexive contrarian.



I take it you are still permanently on legal retainer for Mr. Scratch?

Keep it on topic of the trailer please, Tuco, Ragnarok and Ragitsu.

If i may, the point of topic was not the trailer itself ... but potential links to this game. :-/

Dunno about links/references to BG3 but I am interested to see how they interpret the underdark..... Probably my favourite location in the game so far. Will there be Myconids? Duergar? Slightly off topic.... I get a Star Trek 2009 vibe from the dialogue which is not what I'd hoped for. Prefer the Witcher (TV series) style of delivery and scripting. Its more "natural" than that quippy, snappy, punication (I made that up) that Star Trek and current Marvel media is full of.

Doesn't matter what the topic actually is or isn't, the following part is relevant to approximately nothing and if this was football, I afford you a yellow card. Don't get another one.




(To remove any sort of unclarity: Meaningless back and forth snark is just annoying for everyone else that just want to talk about <insert topic>. I know you two don't like each other. Get a room, don't force it on everyone else. So stop it.)

True Bill and Ted will live on beyond this movie, but is the same genre...zany comedy

Lord of the Rings took itself very seriously (with comedy too)...far end of the spectrum in the other direction....and everyone knew Tolkien (which made it work).


This is certainly a safe zone, given past D&D film success. Feels like they are testing the market again. Probably too much to hope for a more serious minded dramatization in the future.


It would be awesome to see a Baldur's Gate TV series (from the Beginning). I would use body actors to totally lip sink with the original voice actors. (at least with distinct voices like Minsk).

Planescape would also be great, and would be best viewed without prior knowledge. That was part of its mechanic: To keep you guessing, and pull you down the rabbit hole.


Prediction: Fun film, albeit forgettable...get your popcorn and just enjoy it.

Same here. Don't see why I should have to choose between the two.

And for D&D as a game franchise, Bill and Ted's is actually the more accurate representation. In all my many years playing D&D across three editions (having skipped 4e), I never ever played a TT D&D game that did not involve mayhem, hijinks, and copious amounts of uproarious laughter.

This mischaracterization of Dungeons & Dragons as comedy is utterly perplexing.

Each edition of D&D has included a degree of humor in their respective rulebooks and there are humorous references in quite a few officially published modules/adventures...but those are a far cry from "D&D is a comedic game." (implying that it is primarily comedic in tone). Play a funny campaign if you wish - by all means - but please refrain from the perpetuation of this incorrect portrayal.

Well said, Ragitsu.

+1

I'd even wager most PnP groups play their campaigns as serious rather than comical/silly. Granted, that doesn't preclude their sessions from having comedic and hilarious moments, but their general tone is serious.

You know, I expected it. I watched the trailer and thought, "Here we go again. Why can't they create a fricking good D&D movie? It looks like a Sci Fi channel original, tbh. I'll probably still watch it, but I have very very low expectations. It looks like the same quality as the 2000 one with Jeremy Irons and Wynan.

I'd love to see something like Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 brought to the big screen... Or Crystal Shard... Or maybe Pool of Radiance...

Ah! Imagine it. A band of heroes enters Old Phlan to try to figure out why there are so many monsters busting at the walls to try to get at the citizens of the new city. The dark streets, the stench, the trolls... Only to face the bronze dragon at the end... Classic.

On the plus side: I liked the black dragon, the Owlbear moments and the tiefling... Oh, and the displacer beast.

Agreed. Every game I have been a part of, whether tabletop or LARP has been generally serious with some funny moments. One game ages ago (VtM) we had one person who constantly tried to make a joke out of everything and eventually they realised it made things awkward and didn't come back.

As for this movie, I will pass. I rarely watch movies anyway and this one does not look like it will be at all my type.

You can perceive it however you want, but I'm not mischaracterizing anything. I never said the campaign had to be humorous. I said playing D&D, with a bunch of friends around a table, was always very humor-filled for me. The humor comes from how players choose to play their characters, and from how players react to events and outcomes in the game.

And I'd wager the exact opposite.

Playing D&D is about having fun with your friends, and if that is not what's happening in your game then you're doing it wrong.

Players laughing and/or having fun =/= a game system being fundamentally comedic.


At least "Dungeons & Dragons (2000)" is "so bad, it's good"; this attempt looks to be "so derivative, it's immediately forgettable".

Gotta remember trailers can often be deceptive and will often overly highlight elements for marketing reasons..

They went hard on the "misfit team" element because misfit team movies sell. The tone is also a lot like what you'd find and any given table, the face bard who tries to make plans, the paladin trying to go for those glorious kills, the to the point but generally chill barb. I bet the studio is hoping for grass roots advertisement from a lot of fans excited to see their table on the sliver screen.

Not entirely on topic, but since it's so prominently displayed at end of the trailer... the current D&D logo/font looks super weak to me there. I don't think I've liked any iteration since like 1999 when they ditched the AD&D font and went back to all caps, but seeing it flash across the screen in the trailer just reminded me. Maybe it's the serifs? I don't know, but the new Amp too, with the grayscale gradient since 2014 definitely isn't doing it for me either. Looks a bit better when they keep it all in crimson like at the top of this page, but even there the rest of the text is meh. I get that they were trying to recapture the spirit of Chainmail and First Edition, but they kind of missed the mark completely when they just went with that boring ass flat bold typeset. They've had 3 logo change misses in a row now, like two decades worth of bland. Of course the movie couldn't be anything but camp comedy with Sci-Fi channel caliber CGI heheh

The OG logo had such style and such charm, you know, like an actual human being was behind it. I can saddle up for the AD&D 2nd edition blue, cause that's my era for sure, but I think the last one I actually enjoyed was this one...

Everything since has been pretty downhill

Give me half hour of that wonderful cute fluffy (?) Owlbear and i will be totally satisfied with my my pira... ehm, i mean totally legaly buyed copy!

This is it exactly. And the vast majority of the millions of people worldwide currently playing D&D will surely see it that way: "This is *my* tabletop D&D game up on the silverscreen. How cool is *that*!"

And I would wholeheartedly agree with them. It is D&D movies that should be about and leave you with a feel of TT D&D, and NOT a D&D cRPG.

Yeah. I have to disagree. Here's why: No single D&D movie has done well (at least that I know of). They all flop. Why? No one takes them seriously because those who create them don't create them to be a serious fantasy movie. They create D&D movies to be campy, (I don't know how else to put this) and cheesy. The story lines are lacking. The acting is usually not good, even from famous actors, the directing usually sucks, and I usually cringe the entire time I watch them.

If D&D wants people to actually pay to see their movies, and they want to make good money on them and make more, they need to stop goofing around with them. They need to make a high quality Lord of the Rings style fantasy story that captures people's attentions. Honestly, the Harry Potter series was made for children, and it was still full of goofy moments, but it captured the hearts and minds of adults as well. Why? It had depth and wasn't some cheesy story. It was serious enough to grab people's hearts and minds.

I know I'm pre-judging this movie. It could wind up being VERY good. I'm going to see it. I just have very low expectations based on D&D 2000, Warcraft movie, and others like them. Thus far, I see nothing that makes me think this movie won't be just like them - very cheesy and nothing like the serious fantasy stories D&D CAN and OFTEN is.

I'm just saying. Why don't they ever create movies based on stories like Demon Stone, Crystal Shard, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 (imagine Irenicus on the big screen - wait. Nevermind. Video games never make good movies), Pool of Radiance, Dragonlance, the Ravenloft series, The Moonshae series... SOMEthing more serious and deep.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: "Dungeons & Dragons is goofy - because, uh, we say so - so let's not take this proposed Dungeons & Dragons film seriously."


Don't mind them; between all of the officially published settings and their accompanying novels, it is certainly possible to create at least one good Dungeons & Dragons film. By the way...given how much modern day consumers love grimdark, a pay-per-view television series based on the War of the Spider Queen books could really rake in the bucks.

You know what I blame? I blame the big YouTube D&D productions (Critical Role in particular is big offender).

I'm not sure why, most D&D series I've watched on youtube all take themselves very seriously, with few instances of wacky hijinks. The exception being Dimension 20 D&D shows, which are short form campaigns made by comedians specifically.

I think people here are in danger of confusing a "beer and chips" style game, which is more focused on having an adventurous fun romp (Princess Bride style, not too serious, and relatively low risk, but still an adventure), with a deliberately comedic wacky hijinks game like Dungeon and Daddies.

Humperdinck! HUMPERDINCK!

Humor doesn't nessisarily make things campy or cheesy, hell even gritty GoT in the good seasons had its humor.

From what we've seen of the adaptation it has proper graphical fidelity and has proper care put into world and costume design

I'm not saying humor means campy and cheesy. I'm saying that from what I can see based on the trailer, it looks campy and cheesy, like they are focusing more on making yet another campy and cheesy D&D 2000 movie than a serious Lord of the Rings style epic story. To me, it looks like a Sci Fi original of the same caliper as Warcraft, and even Harry Potter was a more serious fantasy than this one appears, at first glance, to be.

I'm not pumped. I'm more disappointed. I'm more interested in the Rings of Power than this movie, and that's kinda saying something. I don't have a lot of faith in Rings of Power either.

Also keep in mind that whatever the movie will end up being like, the trailer will make it look like the most MCU-iest MC that ever U'd

Is it any wonder you stick to fan-fiction?

This is why I said I distrust trailers, they are marketing tools designed to hype and create interest. Trailers aren't always accurate representations of the films that they are supposed to be about, and I've been interested in a film by the content of its trailer, only to later watch the film and realise that the tone and story were nothing like what was advertised.

Who says I stick to fan-fiction? I enjoy LOTS of non-fan-fiction.

True. But in the case of the film D&D : Honor Among Thieves, there's a good chance that the MCU-vibe that many people is getting is likely going to be found in the film, not just a trailer.

Indeed, one of the producers (Jeremy Latcham) has produced a number of MCU films, including Guardians Of The Galaxy. Meanwhile, the directors-writers (Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley) were also writers for Spider-Man : Homecoming. So Hasbro/Paramount is not just adopting the MCU style, they have hired some Marvel people.

That doesn't mean everything, but I won't be surprised if the film indeed leaves me with a Guardians Of The Galaxy vibe after I've watched it.

Chris Pine is a decent actor and can probably give us a somewhat likeable protag, but will the writing be up to snuff? I really don't have much faith in these writers anymore. Just too much trash coming out nowadays.

So with that in mind, as much as I would love to see something more serious along the lines of Dragonlance or the Dark Elf Trilogy, they would almost assuredly screw those up. A schlocky action comedy, though? Maybe they can pull something like that off.

Also...since this seems to be a common trope nowadays...there's probably be a pretty good chance that Michelle Rodriguez's barbarian character will turn out smarter than the bard and outwit him at every opportunity. Just a hunch.

That way, you control the horizontal. You control the vertical. You can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity.

(Basically, you get exactly what you want from your setting-of-choice when you are the impetus behind the pen.)

If I had to guess I would say it'll end up being a boiler-plate cavalcade of D&D tropes, some old ones, but mostly the ones that the Wizards of the Coast era of the game has capitalized on, i.e. D&D as spectator sport.

It'll be light, fun but most of all, it'll set up the next movie. Which is the most MCU thing of all.

Didn't have time to watch the trailer before, but now that I have watched it, I'm not really sure. I mean, it looks not bad (really like the tiefling lady turning into an owlbear and back) but it feels like a Marvel movie and I'm so done with Disney Marvel mostly. The one thing, I still like are teh Guardians of teh Galaxy. But I don't need the Guardians in a D&D setting. So I really hope, they just made the trailer liek that to appease the Disney crowd and the movie is better than this.
From the group, I think I might like the tiefling lady (although I'm not sure, what class she is - I don't think a druid would turn into an owlbear of all thing? Maybe I have to watch the traielr again for clues) and the barbarian (I like Michelle Rodriguez, despite her mostly playing in movies, I don't watch).
I really don't like the music - totally immersion breaking. And I would have liked to see one of the smalelr races - halfling, gnome or dwarf. I mean it looked to me, as if most main characters are humans (not sure about the wizard though), which is boring. If they have enough money to pay actors like Pine and Rodriguez, they should have enough money for some cgi to make an actor look smaller, or even something like a dragonborn (I mean, from what I saw, the CGI is not bad).


GMforHim: I don't think, using a pc rpg like Baldurs Gate 1 or 2 would be a good idea. I'm still mad that they made Revan a white male in SWTOR, when my Revan weas a female asian (and totally light side btw, not a dark side nutjob like in SWTOR) and I really don't want to see any other potential character of mine butchered like that. I could see them using a campaign as a film or series script - maybe Descent to AVernus or the ever talked about Curse of Strahd (which would also please the vampire crowd, I guess).

Pretty sure the tiefling is a Druid, and not a low level one either, although that is assuming they stick to any kind of consistent power background. 5e Druids can't turn into Owlbears, because they aren't beasts, but they are probably hand-waving this and having her turn into an owlbear instead of a regular bear so they can pack in more iconic monsters. Monstrous shape was totally something you could do with a high-level Druid in older editions (not going to lie, I do wish they would bring back a lesser form of it for high-level druids in 5e. Monstrous shape and dragon shape were great, maybe they will if we ever get an epic level handbook for 5e).

I did also notice that pretty much everyone seemed to be human, and our tief has almost no infernal features, which I don't hate on principal, as I'm not a fan of 4e/5e's homogenisation of tieflings, but it seems like it may have been done so they didn't have to spend as much time and money on prosthetics and make-up. And that's a bit sad. I'll have to console myself by going and appreciating the good costumes and makeup from Deerstalker pictures.

Yeah, Deerstalker is pretty funny, even though this is the typical murderhobo group.

I just saw an interview with teh cast and it indeed looks like the tiefling is a druid.
And yes, I hate, taht nearly everyone in the cast is human. Why make a D&D movie, when you stick to the most boring and basic race. It''s like teh Star Wars movies: You have this universe filled with inetresting alien races, but every single main character, apart from Chewbaca, is a human - and not only that, a Skywalker (exaggerating a bit, but only a bit). CGI has com so far, it shouldn't be too hard to at least make one character smaller. And I don't think, that a pair of elf ears would ruin production costs.

Edit: I actually like this breakdown of the movie trailer, which gives some very plausible theories about who those red figures (and especially their main dude) are - probably not that big a revelation for us DnD nerds, but the internet was full of 'Oh wow - Vecna' (thanks Stranger Things), that I found this refreshing.

I for one thought the trailer looked awesome and I am now actually looking forward to watching the actual movie. And you know, I think the trailer promised a fair representation of D&D...because D&D can be and is a lot of things. I'm not that big into D&D but I know many people who are, and from what I've gathered, it's not like Call of Cthulu or Bluebeard's bride or World of Darkness, where there's a tone that it's geared for right down to it's roots. It's flexible, and that flexibility is part of why people like it. My friends will tell me about harrowing emotional moments just as readily as they'll talk about when their characters did something wholly ridiculous that got everyone at the table laughing. And since somone mentioned Critical Role, I remember in this current campaign, that it started off with them fighting living furniture, and one of their party member's is a therapy robot. And I remember the episode where one of the party was murdered alone in an alley, and how utterly sincerely they played the moment and the fallout for their characters afterwards, to the point where they named their group after the fallen member. And then that player came back with an elderly gnome werewolf rogue. Maybe it wasn't always like that, but that's what D&D is now, and I think as a game, that's the better way forward.

Personally I think the trailer captured something that's vitally important in nearly all fantasy; wonder. I watched the trailer and saw the druid turn into an owlbear and back, saw the mimic attack, saw the dragon and the casting wizard and the paladin, and I just felt like, "wow, I want to see more of this world." Which is more than any other bit of D&D that I've experienced, including BG3, has managed to do for me.

Fishmalks are the reason ...
In WoD setting there is clan of Vampires (Malkavains) that are all crazy ... and you can play it any way you want ...

There is usualy one group of people who actualy know something about vertain mental illness witch their character express ...
And then there is other group of people who thinks that corectly played Malkavian is just like cartoon Harley Quin ... where nothing they do makes sense and they are often chaotic just for the purpose of being chaotic.

First group hates the second one ... and since people tend to often tell people "how are they suppose to play" ... this was source of many argues.
In the time people started using therm Fishmalks for theese chaotic players.

---

In my experience many people are therefore affraid to do something funny or crazy, just bcs they dont wish to upset others and they dont know what amount of silliness would be apropriate.
So they choose none ... wich is boring, but safe.

Then there are people like Taika Waititi ... who dont give a shit about this and just spam their screenplay with caddence of 1000 jokes per minute.
And it easily can become disruptive, unorganic and quite honestly anoying. :-/

I belong to the first group of Malks, having personal experience myself, but I don't hate the second group. I don't hate people, that play D&D as a comedy eitehr - whatever works with a group. As long as all players are on board, do what you want.

I clearly should have ben more exact, but i naively thought that there is no reason to say that there are exceptions in any group you describe, since we all are aware of that.

There are even people who concider Taika to be brilliant and inovative director ...
I find his work to be often childish, his humor to be disruptive, often forced and in situations where it is quite inapropriate ... so im quite affraid of his Star Wars movie. :-/

But that was my point ... there are people who dislike that way of playing.
And while there are people who politely suffer in silence ... there are also those, who will spam every single social media they have acess to with their opinions.

Not gettind too deep in this ...
In short many people who play extremely serious characters just decided to "rather play safe" and keep their silines down ... wich (lets be honest for a seond) in some cases actualy is the best approach they can choose ...
Since its often quite hard to play silly character in a way that is not anoying ... wich is (just by the way) source of my universal hatred to Bards.

//Edit:
Also this ...
Let me quote one wise Elven Druid: "Chaos is good, in small doses it help keep the ballance."

Fishmalk (at least as i use that word) is not about "small doses" here and there ...
Fishmalk is constant, permanent and undending borbandment of bullshit and disturbting any play (i wanted to write plan, but i made a typo ... and it seemed to fit even better ) you even try to make, or execute ... no matter how hard you try to explain to that person that they should slow down a little.
Fishmalk ... is > this <.

And that is the point.
Occasional silly joke here and there dont offend anyone, as it was said, even serious stuff as GoT had jokes ...
Problem starts when you overstepp that amount ...
Or if you are unsure wich amount would be apropriate ...
Or, and that is in my honest opinion the most common case, if you have different idea of "apropriate amount" than others.

Yeah. If you notice, I took it back. I suddenly had an image of Jack Nicholson as Irenicus, or the Rock as Minsc...

Cringe... No. Just no.

I agree about Revan, too. They ruined the KOTOR story.

Just watched She Hulk trailer. Yep. Both trailers seemed to roughly have the same tone.

I don't expect relations to BG3. If there were some, I wouldn't care at all.

I will probably watch the movie in cinema, it looks impressive from the visuals and I'm curious about the details. I don't expect well done characters or a good story. Take Lord of the Rings as an exemple, there is only one mildly interesting figure (Gollum) the rest is stereotype or worse, the story is quite boring, the combat is borderline silly, plus the late medieval look is a betrayal of the books, nevertheless the movies were quite entertaining and well made. And I watched every movie in the cinema, something I would never do for the terrible X-men or other Marvel superhero universe stuff (I watch some of them, in free TV only, partly even with pleasure, like the first GotG movie).

My biggest, very professional, criticism of the movie after watching the trailer, there is much too few naked skin to see.

Sorry, I must have overlooked that. And yeah, Revan is so annoying. I headcanon, that the guy in SWTOR is an imposter, but I'm still mad.
Tbh most trailers nowadays look the same - I still have hope, that the endproduct might be better. At least they tried with the spells and creatures and stuff, so maybe there will be enough for a D&D fan to appreciate.

The sorcerer character in the movie is supposedly half-elf.

What happened with Revan was a true shame. Remember the reddit AMA where it was basically outright stated that they made Revan lightside Caucasian male because just to appeal to the lowest common denominator of the playerbase....and made the exile a woman because revan was a man so they could afford to make the less popular/less important protagonist one.

Same story always repeating itself with rpgs that pride themselves on player choice and defining your own character. Abdel Adrian, Vault Dweller, Nerevarine etc. Seemingly can't leave well enough alone and let players enjoy the game the way they played it.

I'm still hoping that Larian gives us a bit of wiggle room to define our Bhaalspawn. The in-game material at least uses gender-neutral pronouns to describe them, which is a step in the right direction.

As for the movie, Pine is not an actor that I particularly enjoy. I don't mind hijinks emerging in games I play or DM, but that seems very much like WoTC wants to market D&D (and the Realms) on the emergent pop/meme culture perception of D&D where this is sort of the default state. Doesn't quite appeal to me-I'd much more prefer something that took the settings a bit more seriously ala the LoTR movies (which doesn't mean there shouldn't be humor or lightheartedness, which the trilogy definitely had as well). Doesn't mean the movie will be bad (D&D movies have a poor track record, admittedly) but I don't see myself going to see it, the whole 'Guardians of the Galaxy' style of marvel movies that got really popular burned me out on that sort of thing very quickly, and it's just not a theme I would have looked out for or really needed/wanted to see in D&D/Forgotten Realms to begin with.

Glad to see, I'm not the only one being mad about Revan. As much as I love SWTOR (and I play it for ten years now), this was a dumb decision by Bioware.

And yes, I'm not the biggest fan of Pine either.

All same here. KOTOR was my all time favorite game. Then 2 came out and pissed me off to no end. It wasn't polished and left me upset because I wanted to know what happened to Revan and the whole hole in the Force thing didn't sit well with me. But I was willing to forgive because I was hoping for number 3.

Then The Old Republic. Don't get me wrong. Like you, I LOVED that game too. I was really into the original story, though. The DLCs started to lose me - ESPECIALLY when I got to the Revan arc. I was eating the whole story up until I learned what happened and such. Then I was like, "Really? What did you do to my Revan? He was my all-time favorite Star Wars character - and that's saying something because I have a LOT of favorites (like Thrawn)."

Anyway, I know this is off topic a bit, but it is nice to chat with some people who feel the same about it. And now, to bring it back to the topic: Pine is also not one of my favorites. I thought he played Kirk well, but that's about it. I didn't like him at all in Wonder Woman... or pretty much anything else that I've seen him in. We'll see if he's good in this one.

Ahh yes, good 'ol sci-sop.

Yes the Revan follow up was a little week. It felt like it was put together in a weekend Grad student cram session. It would have been more disappointing to me if I wasn't trying so hard to grind my tank up for end game raids...shrug and move on.

Personal take:

I actually liked KOTOR2 over 1...slightly (and in spite of the choppy ending). Kreia is one of my favorite villains of all time (and the other two Sith Lords were pretty good too).

The whole cast was engaging and very well thought out.


Do you know how many sith are on this base?

Jolee: "12 no 13".

KOTOR 1 was the first and will always be special though.

Ok. This is kinda cool.

https://screenrant.com/dungeons-dragons-movie-chris-pine-cast-reason/

Aw, that's really sweet.

Killing orcs and drow by the dozen. Looting ancestral grounds. Devastating local economies with bulging sacks of gold.

Sounds like a perfect way to prepare them for life after education :P

Yep. We have a saying in my family. "The family that kills together, stays together."

You know. That sounds incredibly sick now that I'm saying it to others. It always brings a few laughs with my wife and kids and me. Playing video games, RPGs... Out of context, we sound like a family of serial killers.

I love people. I do. I'm not evil. I swear. I just really like killing bad guys in games. 😳

It certainly helps that there really are monsters wandering about.

Here's another interesting article.

https://screenrant.com/dungeons-dragons-movie-sophia-lillis-owlbear-transformation-controversy/

Rule of Cool

Sounds like Larian's right on target with that. As long as it's cool, who cares about the rule.

Not that that's all that bad, mind you, as long as the game doesn't prove to be frustrating because of something supposedly cool.

I loved the trailer! Showed it to my husband too... and we agreed that it's probably going to be some 6.5 rated fantasy flick that's way too predictable but we'll still be watching it cause it sounds fun (and well, it's designed to appeal to a certain fanbase and we're in that fanbase XD; I liked the druid/owlbear, he liked the mimic... we were both a bit ugh! about the bard, but that's nothing new haha)

I don't think it will link to BG3 (or we won't realize the link's there):
1. You can't make gameplay gags until a game's out and the exploits/weird mechanics become well known;
2. You can't make plot connections because of spoilers;
3. It's set in a different location/a few different locations. None of them appear in any of the datamined info (act2,3);
4. We don't know all the main players (villains, allied NPCs & companions) in BG3. (They could add smth and it would only become clear in hindsight.)

Could they prove me wrong? Sure. And that would be fun too.