I personally like the new art for that version of Vecna that is being presented. Sure it would be fun to have some art somewhere in 5e that shows a rotting, eyeless, handless version of Vecna (and maybe there is and I've just missed it). But then I also think the more art the better, of all kinds. I'm a visual person and art (including official D&D art as well as other sources) is a major source of inspiration, so any art for Vecna or Acererak or whomever will probably inspire me, even if it's just to go and homebrew something totally different.
As for old art being gorier or more pulpy or whatever, what I remember from my 1e days is that the art of that era often came across as heavily influenced by comic art of that time. Just my personal opinion, but I find the art for an Owlbear in 5e far cooler/scarier than the rather goofy looking one in the original monster manual. Just my two cents though.
He's a core character in the game. He is the game, in a lot of ways.
He really, really isn't. I've been playing since the Red Box days and have never once been in a campaign that encountered him or any of his relics
Also, as for the game not being "gory" enough for your tastes... Van Richten's is only about a year old
Oh, well, to be clear on that point; I'm pointing out that he's important to the business. Vecna is an important IP character of the game and any changes to the core game might be reflected in any future changes to any of the other important characters, settings, etc. that are owned by WoTC. My point of view is only upon the business end and how future publications will look and feel.
Vecna is not in the least bit "important to the business". He's not even the most recognizable, unique IP monster -- that would probably be a beholder
If Vecna never existed, D&D would be exactly the same, and the kids on Stranger Things would be fighting Acerarak or something
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
After all, why does this this new Vecna have his hand and eye? Is there any reason you can tell me why that is?
Because they haven't been severed yet.
Why not have him without a hand and eye? I'm familiar with all the old modules and history, there's no reason even this "in the before time" Vecna couldn't be missing his hand and eye. Is there???
Yep. Because they haven't been severed yet.
It's an in game explanation, sure, but as a character change, it seems like a rationalization of why this new Vecna art looks like this.
It's not a character change. It's encountering a character earlier in their timestream. Like River Song and the Doctor.
And I guarantee this version of Vecna was conceived and constructed before the art was commissioned.
And yes of course, I'm not saying the gore, etc. will disappear. We can have the Ravenlofts, etc. But as I said, that shunts that content into it's own thing and away from what is the core game. And Vecna is a core character, and important IP to the business, and what D&D looks and feels like in general. So, I'm speculating that there's some core change coming.
Vecna is not a "core character" to 5e. Aside from the items severed from his body, this is the first time he's actually appeared in 5th edition. And I know old-schoolers hate hearing this, but...every edition is its own thing. He hasn't been truly relevant since 3.5e, barely getting more than a mention in 4e.
Basically, a lot of the premise you're operating from beginning with your first post is pretty flawed. The answers are very simple, you just don't like htem.
After all, why does this this new Vecna have his hand and eye? Is there any reason you can tell me why that is? Why not have him without a hand and eye? I'm familiar with all the old modules and history, there's no reason even this "in the before time" Vecna couldn't be missing his hand and eye. Is there???
With respect, you do not appear familiar with the models and history of Vecna. Your question is a bit like watching Star Wars: Episode 1, and asking “why does Darth Vader not have his breathing devices or anything else that makes him look like Darth Vader???”
Vecna lost his hand and his eye after he got blown to pieces fighting his second-in-command, Kas. That has been the story for decades. This version is before Kas betrayed Vecna, and thus before he lost his hand and eye.
Yes, I get your point. What I'm saying is that this will be the only version of Vecna from now on. The old version may only appear in some other supplement outside of core D&D publishing, like Ravenloft was and is. As you pointed out earlier. That's a big change, right?
Or I'm wrong. I'm just speculating on what's to come and how things will look. But if I'm right... how do you feel about that?
Edit - Oh yea, and after Stranger Things, Vecna is now the most well known monster in all of D&D. And that makes any change to him a sign of fundamental change to the core game. Maybe.
To take one piece of art and claim it's a "trend" for D&D ... well there's a certain type of "YouTuber logic" where they know antagonistic takes and trend buck takes earn the clicks. If you're going to consume media like that, you gotta be aware that that's the game.
Anycase, this Vecna is fine. What you want him only dripping gore and oozing parasites or something? Now there are other YouTubers and Dicebreaker and BoLS writers out there thinking this Vecna content is not _only_ a way to capitalize on Stranger Things but part of a "long con" lore back story tied into the obelisks through 5e adventures. Crawford and whoever's been planning this all along for the transition to 5.5. etc. I mean, could happen, but I digress let's get back to the "trajectory" Vecna art "indicates" (or actually doesn't).
For every Wild Beyond the Witchlight (which isn't as Disney G cartoon as its detractors proclaim) or Strixhaven (ditto, that fractal and quantum magic is kinda spooky) you got a Van Richten's Guide to Ravensloft and a Netherdeep book. There's quite a bit of what horror fans back in the day would call splatter and gristle in them books. It just seems there's a sort of internet logic where a consumer sees something, doesn't care for the art in that instance and therefore creates a vision of systemic problems with the thing they're consuming. And then they really lock down into their imagined one directional trajectory. The truth is D&D is trying to do a lot of things at this point in the 5e lifecycle.
If you're going to make a totalizing claim about a game with the breadth of content and stakeholders as D&D, it's probably best to be able to speak to more than one piece of art, and also be aware of the content that refutes your totalizing claim. There isn't a map to D&D's destiny. There's a product development pipeline which will adapt to audience demand and creator interest as it has for 5e's lifecycle to date.
I mean Acerak is still there lording over the cover of the DMG. It's not like they're putting out "nerfed of grit" products and also saying "and please, avert your eyes from the DMG, that's not us."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
He's a core character in the game. He is the game, in a lot of ways.
He really, really isn't. I've been playing since the Red Box days and have never once been in a campaign that encountered him or any of his relics
Also, as for the game not being "gory" enough for your tastes... Van Richten's is only about a year old
Oh, well, to be clear on that point; I'm pointing out that he's important to the business. Vecna is an important IP character of the game and any changes to the core game might be reflected in any future changes to any of the other important characters, settings, etc. that are owned by WoTC. My point of view is only upon the business end and how future publications will look and feel.
I would just like to say: Before Stranger Things, there wasn't a single character in all of D&D that was important to the business. You could maybe make an argument for Drizzt, but being "important to the business" would constitute a profitable IP that that could continue to bring in new customers all on its own. D&D has never had an Iron Man or a Batman or a Mickey Mouse. It has never been high-profile enough for that, and even today, with its much more public/mainstream standing, the closest thing you'll get to characters "important to the business" are the cast of Critical Role, like it or not.
Vecna is not in the least bit "important to the business". He's not even the most recognizable, unique IP monster -- that would probably be a beholder
Vecna is probably quite important to the business as things currently stand (though I agree that historically he was not, and further agree with SemanticAvenger that no single character was important prior to D&D becoming more mainstream). In addition to Stranger Things, he also was a major character in Critical Role’s first season (and maybe the subject of the worst DMed fight in D&D history) which, love it or hate it, has been a major factor in getting people into the game. Now that they have a show on Amazon that was watched by folks who were not interested in D&D, Vecna (or their IP sanitised version thereof) likely will only be a more notable name.
That said, nothing about the current iteration actually harms Vecna’s image, as OP suggests. But it also is incorrect to say he is not a useful business asset.
He's a core character in the game. He is the game, in a lot of ways.
He really, really isn't. I've been playing since the Red Box days and have never once been in a campaign that encountered him or any of his relics
Also, as for the game not being "gory" enough for your tastes... Van Richten's is only about a year old
Oh, well, to be clear on that point; I'm pointing out that he's important to the business. Vecna is an important IP character of the game and any changes to the core game might be reflected in any future changes to any of the other important characters, settings, etc. that are owned by WoTC. My point of view is only upon the business end and how future publications will look and feel.
I would just like to say: Before Stranger Things, there wasn't a single character in all of D&D that was important to the business. You could maybe make an argument for Drizzt, but being "important to the business" would constitute a profitable IP that that could continue to bring in new customers all on its own. D&D has never had an Iron Man or a Batman or a Mickey Mouse. It has never been high-profile enough for that, and even today, with its much more public/mainstream standing, the closest thing you'll get to characters "important to the business" are the cast of Critical Role, like it or not.
Oh yes, certainly. I keep referring to Vecna as an "important IP" and so on, but I agree this way of viewing how important he and other characters, settings, etc. in the core game is recent. And likely a big part of what may or may not be happening. So, like Drizzt, as you point out, the importance of these characters has become a big part of how D&D is going to be sold in the future. Maybe?
Yes, I get your point. What I'm saying is that this will be the only version of Vecna from now on. The old version may only appear in some other supplement outside of core D&D publishing, like Ravenloft was and is. As you pointed out earlier. That's a big change, right?
Or I'm wrong. I'm just speculating on what's to come and how things will look. But if I'm right... how do you feel about that?
I mean, you are wrong now. Vecna the God is still very much part of the present lore. He is mentioned a number of times in the DMG, and references to his godly self are found in multiple adventures. He does not have a stat block as a god, but you do not need a stat block to be part of the game. Asmodeus doesn’t have a stat block either, but he is still a major character.
I do not normally like dealing with hypotheticals - especially ones that are all-but-guaranteed to never come to pass as the one you present - but I would probably react with indifference.
They have not brought back my favourite element of Vecna for 5e (the Lawful Good cults dedicated to him, and other Good uses for Vecna), but that doesn’t mean I cannot include those elements in my game. Would it be nice to see them in 5e? Yes. Am I going to be upset if they don’t? No - I can just keep using the earlier lore and teach others about it if they are curious.
Oh yes, certainly. I keep referring to Vecna as an "important IP" and so on, but I agree this way of viewing how important he and other characters, settings, etc. in the core game is recent. And likely a big part of what may or may not be happening. So, like Drizzt, as you point out, the importance of these characters has become a big part of how D&D is going to be sold in the future. Maybe?
Actually, if anything, I think WotC is actively moving away from a character-centric direction. The players should be the important characters. I know I mentioned Iron Man earlier, but in Avengers movies, the characters are the draw. In D&D, being the characters is the draw. Having major IP-type characters that recur in that way actively takes away from the entire fantasy of the game. D&D is not a movie, and marketing it that way and steering the entire ship that direction would likely be detrimental in the long run.
Yes, I get your point. What I'm saying is that this will be the only version of Vecna from now on. The old version may only appear in some other supplement outside of core D&D publishing, like Ravenloft was and is. As you pointed out earlier. That's a big change, right?
Or I'm wrong. I'm just speculating on what's to come and how things will look. But if I'm right... how do you feel about that?
I mean, you are wrong now. Vecna the God is still very much part of the present lore. He is mentioned a number of times in the DMG, and references to his godly self are found in multiple adventures. He does not have a stat block as a god, but you do not need a stat block to be part of the game. Asmodeus doesn’t have a stat block either, but he is still a major character.
I do not normally like dealing with hypotheticals - especially ones that are all-but-guaranteed to never come to pass as the one you present - but I would probably react with indifference.
They have not brought back my favourite element of Vecna for 5e (the Lawful Good cults dedicated to him, and other Good uses for Vecna), but that doesn’t mean I cannot include those elements in my game. Would it be nice to see them in 5e? Yes. Am I going to be upset if they don’t? No - I can just keep using the earlier lore and teach others about it if they are curious.
Yes, I'm wrong now. lol
But we will get a new DMG in 2024. A new set of core books. There will be all that comes after too. And yea, I'm hypothetical boy here. :)
Yes, I get your point. What I'm saying is that this will be the only version of Vecna from now on. The old version may only appear in some other supplement outside of core D&D publishing, like Ravenloft was and is. As you pointed out earlier. That's a big change, right?
Or I'm wrong. I'm just speculating on what's to come and how things will look. But if I'm right... how do you feel about that?
I mean, you are wrong now. Vecna the God is still very much part of the present lore. He is mentioned a number of times in the DMG, and references to his godly self are found in multiple adventures. He does not have a stat block as a god, but you do not need a stat block to be part of the game. Asmodeus doesn’t have a stat block either, but he is still a major character.
I do not normally like dealing with hypotheticals - especially ones that are all-but-guaranteed to never come to pass as the one you present - but I would probably react with indifference.
They have not brought back my favourite element of Vecna for 5e (the Lawful Good cults dedicated to him, and other Good uses for Vecna), but that doesn’t mean I cannot include those elements in my game. Would it be nice to see them in 5e? Yes. Am I going to be upset if they don’t? No - I can just keep using the earlier lore and teach others about it if they are curious.
Yes, I'm wrong now. lol
But we will get a new DMG in 2024. A new set of core books. There will be all that comes after too. And yea, I'm hypothetical boy here. :)
Well, why stop with “Wizards could decide to fundamentally change a character that was consistently the same and is an important part of their brand on a whim, even though basic logic and business acumen would say ‘that’s obviously baseless speculation.’”
I mean, we could speculate that the DMG will make Wildemount the main campaign setting - that was the setting for the most recent adventure published (until next week), could that mean that they are going to set everything in Wildemount moving forward?
Obviously that is not going to happen. Their other settings are too popular and it would not make business sense to license someone else’s world for your main campaign setting. But, hey, if we are wildly speculating from one piece of data and ignoring all the other evidence pointing in the other direction, it could happen!
To take one piece of art and claim it's a "trend" for D&D ... well there's a certain type of "YouTuber logic" where they know antagonistic takes and trend buck takes earn the clicks. If you're going to consume media like that, you gotta be aware that that's the game.
Anycase, this Vecna is fine. What you want him only dripping gore and oozing parasites or something? Now there are other YouTubers and Dicebreaker and BoLS writers out there thinking this Vecna content is not _only_ a way to capitalize on Stranger Things but part of a "long con" lore back story tied into the obelisks through 5e adventures. Crawford and whoever's been planning this all along for the transition to 5.5. etc. I mean, could happen, but I digress let's get back to the "trajectory" Vecna art "indicates" (or actually doesn't).
For every Wild Beyond the Witchlight (which isn't as Disney G cartoon as its detractors proclaim) or Strixhaven (ditto, that fractal and quantum magic is kinda spooky) you got a Van Richten's Guide to Ravensloft and a Netherdeep book. There's quite a bit of what horror fans back in the day would call splatter and gristle in them books. It just seems there's a sort of internet logic where a consumer sees something, doesn't care for the art in that instance and therefore creates a vision of systemic problems with the thing they're consuming. And then they really lock down into their imagined one directional trajectory. The truth is D&D is trying to do a lot of things at this point in the 5e lifecycle.
If you're going to make a totalizing claim about a game with the breadth of content and stakeholders as D&D, it's probably best to be able to speak to more than one piece of art, and also be aware of the content that refutes your totalizing claim. There isn't a map to D&D's destiny. There's a product development pipeline which will adapt to audience demand and creator interest as it has for 5e's lifecycle to date.
I mean Acerak is still there lording over the cover of the DMG. It's not like they're putting out "nerfed of grit" products and also saying "and please, avert your eyes from the DMG, that's not us."
All very good points, I can't not agree.
Well yes, I'm literally speculating on the future publications of D&D based on this one piece of art. Guilty as charged. But what I'm saying is, is this a sign that Acererak will not appear on the cover of the DMG again? He's an important IP now too, I reckon.
Oh yes, certainly. I keep referring to Vecna as an "important IP" and so on, but I agree this way of viewing how important he and other characters, settings, etc. in the core game is recent. And likely a big part of what may or may not be happening. So, like Drizzt, as you point out, the importance of these characters has become a big part of how D&D is going to be sold in the future. Maybe?
Actually, if anything, I think WotC is actively moving away from a character-centric direction. The players should be the important characters. I know I mentioned Iron Man earlier, but in Avengers movies, the characters are the draw. In D&D, being the characters is the draw. Having major IP-type characters that recur in that way actively takes away from the entire fantasy of the game. D&D is not a movie, and marketing it that way and steering the entire ship that direction would likely be detrimental in the long run.
Pretty much the "multiversal" model that 5e explicitly embraced starting this past winter, that model's challenge to anything like canonical integrity (which I think is not a bad thing from a keeping a product alive standpoint) makes stable IP brand characters difficult since there isn't a set MCU, rather a multiverse of "What If's?" (please see what I did there, folks).
I think this Vecna thread is a much milder form of the Drow threads from about this time last summer. Anyone remember the devastation prophecized in those? Yeah. The game's fine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
But what I'm saying is, is this a sign that Acererak will not appear on the cover of the DMG again? He's an important IP now too, I reckon.
Why would he? He was not on the DMG in 4e, 3e, AD&D. Frankly, having him be on the cover of the new version would be a silly choice - if you are selling a new version, you want to use sufficiently new art so folks know it is new and that they should spend money on the newest iteration of the DMG as well.
That, of course, would literally have no effect on Acererak as a character. It would just be a simple, sensible graphical design choice.
To take one piece of art and claim it's a "trend" for D&D ... well there's a certain type of "YouTuber logic" where they know antagonistic takes and trend buck takes earn the clicks. If you're going to consume media like that, you gotta be aware that that's the game.
Anycase, this Vecna is fine. What you want him only dripping gore and oozing parasites or something? Now there are other YouTubers and Dicebreaker and BoLS writers out there thinking this Vecna content is not _only_ a way to capitalize on Stranger Things but part of a "long con" lore back story tied into the obelisks through 5e adventures. Crawford and whoever's been planning this all along for the transition to 5.5. etc. I mean, could happen, but I digress let's get back to the "trajectory" Vecna art "indicates" (or actually doesn't).
For every Wild Beyond the Witchlight (which isn't as Disney G cartoon as its detractors proclaim) or Strixhaven (ditto, that fractal and quantum magic is kinda spooky) you got a Van Richten's Guide to Ravensloft and a Netherdeep book. There's quite a bit of what horror fans back in the day would call splatter and gristle in them books. It just seems there's a sort of internet logic where a consumer sees something, doesn't care for the art in that instance and therefore creates a vision of systemic problems with the thing they're consuming. And then they really lock down into their imagined one directional trajectory. The truth is D&D is trying to do a lot of things at this point in the 5e lifecycle.
If you're going to make a totalizing claim about a game with the breadth of content and stakeholders as D&D, it's probably best to be able to speak to more than one piece of art, and also be aware of the content that refutes your totalizing claim. There isn't a map to D&D's destiny. There's a product development pipeline which will adapt to audience demand and creator interest as it has for 5e's lifecycle to date.
I mean Acerak is still there lording over the cover of the DMG. It's not like they're putting out "nerfed of grit" products and also saying "and please, avert your eyes from the DMG, that's not us."
All very good points, I can't not agree.
Well yes, I'm literally speculating on the future publications of D&D based on this one piece of art. Guilty as charged. But what I'm saying is, is this a sign that Acererak will not appear on the cover of the DMG again? He's an important IP now too, I reckon.
I think it's obvious that it's not a sign of anything. I mean you're free to tea leaves it, but like I implied above, it doesn't make for sound analysis. You pick one rendering of online art, not really acknowledging the artwork that's appeared on actual books in the past couple of years, and with no notion of what the art will look like on the next two years of cover art (where I'm thinking we'll be seeing at least 6-10 more books). So it becomes a game of self amusement or click gathering.
My take: I think folks should look at the most recent "retailers incentive" binding for the rules expansion box set. One illustrated figure on a plane white book. I believe, at least on the retailer incentive front, given the 50th anniversary of the game, we may seem a design homage to the "white box." Maybe white box for the incentive, and red box for general retail. Merger of origins with contemporary art direction (whatever that will look like in two years, but one picture is not a trajectory). Crap. A Hasbro advance product integrity enforcement chopper just flew over my house, and it's dropping rappelling lines. Gotta go.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean, we could speculate that the DMG will make Wildemount the main campaign setting - that was the setting for the most recent adventure published (until next week), could that mean that they are going to set everything in Wildemount moving forward?
(ngl i have actually speculated the possibility of exandria becoming the default setting for a 6e before the 5.5e "evolution" in 2024 was announced)
Pretty much the "multiversal" model that 5e explicitly embraced starting this past winter, that model's challenge to anything like canonical integrity (which I think is not a bad thing from a keeping a product alive standpoint) makes stable IP brand characters difficult since there isn't a set MCU, rather a multiverse of "What If's?" (please see what I did there, folks).
I think this Vecna thread is a much milder form of the Drow threads from about this time last summer. Anyone remember the devastation prophecized in those? Yeah. The game's fine.
Right, and I've actively argued in the past that any sense of "canon," in the sense of "specific events and characters that definitely existed and occurred in a specific way in any given setting" is detrimental to the core idea of what D&D currently is. If Drizzt is out there drizzting around, then how is your character ever going to compare? There's a little extra leeway with antagonists, but proscribing too much history and lore just guarantees that more and more players and DMs throw it all out to homebrew their own shit so they can be a big deal. Because that is the core appeal of the game as more than just a set of arbitrary math problems and statistical probabilities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I personally like the new art for that version of Vecna that is being presented. Sure it would be fun to have some art somewhere in 5e that shows a rotting, eyeless, handless version of Vecna (and maybe there is and I've just missed it). But then I also think the more art the better, of all kinds. I'm a visual person and art (including official D&D art as well as other sources) is a major source of inspiration, so any art for Vecna or Acererak or whomever will probably inspire me, even if it's just to go and homebrew something totally different.
As for old art being gorier or more pulpy or whatever, what I remember from my 1e days is that the art of that era often came across as heavily influenced by comic art of that time. Just my personal opinion, but I find the art for an Owlbear in 5e far cooler/scarier than the rather goofy looking one in the original monster manual. Just my two cents though.
Vecna is not in the least bit "important to the business". He's not even the most recognizable, unique IP monster -- that would probably be a beholder
If Vecna never existed, D&D would be exactly the same, and the kids on Stranger Things would be fighting Acerarak or something
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Because they haven't been severed yet.
Yep. Because they haven't been severed yet.
It's not a character change. It's encountering a character earlier in their timestream. Like River Song and the Doctor.
And I guarantee this version of Vecna was conceived and constructed before the art was commissioned.
Vecna is not a "core character" to 5e. Aside from the items severed from his body, this is the first time he's actually appeared in 5th edition. And I know old-schoolers hate hearing this, but...every edition is its own thing. He hasn't been truly relevant since 3.5e, barely getting more than a mention in 4e.
Basically, a lot of the premise you're operating from beginning with your first post is pretty flawed. The answers are very simple, you just don't like htem.
Yes, I get your point. What I'm saying is that this will be the only version of Vecna from now on. The old version may only appear in some other supplement outside of core D&D publishing, like Ravenloft was and is. As you pointed out earlier. That's a big change, right?
Or I'm wrong. I'm just speculating on what's to come and how things will look. But if I'm right... how do you feel about that?
Edit - Oh yea, and after Stranger Things, Vecna is now the most well known monster in all of D&D. And that makes any change to him a sign of fundamental change to the core game. Maybe.
To take one piece of art and claim it's a "trend" for D&D ... well there's a certain type of "YouTuber logic" where they know antagonistic takes and trend buck takes earn the clicks. If you're going to consume media like that, you gotta be aware that that's the game.
Anycase, this Vecna is fine. What you want him only dripping gore and oozing parasites or something? Now there are other YouTubers and Dicebreaker and BoLS writers out there thinking this Vecna content is not _only_ a way to capitalize on Stranger Things but part of a "long con" lore back story tied into the obelisks through 5e adventures. Crawford and whoever's been planning this all along for the transition to 5.5. etc. I mean, could happen, but I digress let's get back to the "trajectory" Vecna art "indicates" (or actually doesn't).
For every Wild Beyond the Witchlight (which isn't as Disney G cartoon as its detractors proclaim) or Strixhaven (ditto, that fractal and quantum magic is kinda spooky) you got a Van Richten's Guide to Ravensloft and a Netherdeep book. There's quite a bit of what horror fans back in the day would call splatter and gristle in them books. It just seems there's a sort of internet logic where a consumer sees something, doesn't care for the art in that instance and therefore creates a vision of systemic problems with the thing they're consuming. And then they really lock down into their imagined one directional trajectory. The truth is D&D is trying to do a lot of things at this point in the 5e lifecycle.
If you're going to make a totalizing claim about a game with the breadth of content and stakeholders as D&D, it's probably best to be able to speak to more than one piece of art, and also be aware of the content that refutes your totalizing claim. There isn't a map to D&D's destiny. There's a product development pipeline which will adapt to audience demand and creator interest as it has for 5e's lifecycle to date.
I mean Acerak is still there lording over the cover of the DMG. It's not like they're putting out "nerfed of grit" products and also saying "and please, avert your eyes from the DMG, that's not us."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I would just like to say: Before Stranger Things, there wasn't a single character in all of D&D that was important to the business. You could maybe make an argument for Drizzt, but being "important to the business" would constitute a profitable IP that that could continue to bring in new customers all on its own. D&D has never had an Iron Man or a Batman or a Mickey Mouse. It has never been high-profile enough for that, and even today, with its much more public/mainstream standing, the closest thing you'll get to characters "important to the business" are the cast of Critical Role, like it or not.
Vecna is probably quite important to the business as things currently stand (though I agree that historically he was not, and further agree with SemanticAvenger that no single character was important prior to D&D becoming more mainstream). In addition to Stranger Things, he also was a major character in Critical Role’s first season (and maybe the subject of the worst DMed fight in D&D history) which, love it or hate it, has been a major factor in getting people into the game. Now that they have a show on Amazon that was watched by folks who were not interested in D&D, Vecna (or their IP sanitised version thereof) likely will only be a more notable name.
That said, nothing about the current iteration actually harms Vecna’s image, as OP suggests. But it also is incorrect to say he is not a useful business asset.
You really need to see the vid I posted, I think you'll love it. :)
Ooh man, I wanna read that thread. Please make one. lol
Oh yes, certainly. I keep referring to Vecna as an "important IP" and so on, but I agree this way of viewing how important he and other characters, settings, etc. in the core game is recent. And likely a big part of what may or may not be happening. So, like Drizzt, as you point out, the importance of these characters has become a big part of how D&D is going to be sold in the future. Maybe?
I mean, you are wrong now. Vecna the God is still very much part of the present lore. He is mentioned a number of times in the DMG, and references to his godly self are found in multiple adventures. He does not have a stat block as a god, but you do not need a stat block to be part of the game. Asmodeus doesn’t have a stat block either, but he is still a major character.
I do not normally like dealing with hypotheticals - especially ones that are all-but-guaranteed to never come to pass as the one you present - but I would probably react with indifference.
They have not brought back my favourite element of Vecna for 5e (the Lawful Good cults dedicated to him, and other Good uses for Vecna), but that doesn’t mean I cannot include those elements in my game. Would it be nice to see them in 5e? Yes. Am I going to be upset if they don’t? No - I can just keep using the earlier lore and teach others about it if they are curious.
Actually, if anything, I think WotC is actively moving away from a character-centric direction. The players should be the important characters. I know I mentioned Iron Man earlier, but in Avengers movies, the characters are the draw. In D&D, being the characters is the draw. Having major IP-type characters that recur in that way actively takes away from the entire fantasy of the game. D&D is not a movie, and marketing it that way and steering the entire ship that direction would likely be detrimental in the long run.
Yes, I'm wrong now. lol
But we will get a new DMG in 2024. A new set of core books. There will be all that comes after too. And yea, I'm hypothetical boy here. :)
Well, why stop with “Wizards could decide to fundamentally change a character that was consistently the same and is an important part of their brand on a whim, even though basic logic and business acumen would say ‘that’s obviously baseless speculation.’”
I mean, we could speculate that the DMG will make Wildemount the main campaign setting - that was the setting for the most recent adventure published (until next week), could that mean that they are going to set everything in Wildemount moving forward?
Obviously that is not going to happen. Their other settings are too popular and it would not make business sense to license someone else’s world for your main campaign setting. But, hey, if we are wildly speculating from one piece of data and ignoring all the other evidence pointing in the other direction, it could happen!
All very good points, I can't not agree.
Well yes, I'm literally speculating on the future publications of D&D based on this one piece of art. Guilty as charged. But what I'm saying is, is this a sign that Acererak will not appear on the cover of the DMG again? He's an important IP now too, I reckon.
Pretty much the "multiversal" model that 5e explicitly embraced starting this past winter, that model's challenge to anything like canonical integrity (which I think is not a bad thing from a keeping a product alive standpoint) makes stable IP brand characters difficult since there isn't a set MCU, rather a multiverse of "What If's?" (please see what I did there, folks).
I think this Vecna thread is a much milder form of the Drow threads from about this time last summer. Anyone remember the devastation prophecized in those? Yeah. The game's fine.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Why would he? He was not on the DMG in 4e, 3e, AD&D. Frankly, having him be on the cover of the new version would be a silly choice - if you are selling a new version, you want to use sufficiently new art so folks know it is new and that they should spend money on the newest iteration of the DMG as well.
That, of course, would literally have no effect on Acererak as a character. It would just be a simple, sensible graphical design choice.
I think it's obvious that it's not a sign of anything. I mean you're free to tea leaves it, but like I implied above, it doesn't make for sound analysis. You pick one rendering of online art, not really acknowledging the artwork that's appeared on actual books in the past couple of years, and with no notion of what the art will look like on the next two years of cover art (where I'm thinking we'll be seeing at least 6-10 more books). So it becomes a game of self amusement or click gathering.
My take: I think folks should look at the most recent "retailers incentive" binding for the rules expansion box set. One illustrated figure on a plane white book. I believe, at least on the retailer incentive front, given the 50th anniversary of the game, we may seem a design homage to the "white box." Maybe white box for the incentive, and red box for general retail. Merger of origins with contemporary art direction (whatever that will look like in two years, but one picture is not a trajectory). Crap. A Hasbro advance product integrity enforcement chopper just flew over my house, and it's dropping rappelling lines. Gotta go.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
(ngl i have actually speculated the possibility of exandria becoming the default setting for a 6e before the 5.5e "evolution" in 2024 was announced)
Right, and I've actively argued in the past that any sense of "canon," in the sense of "specific events and characters that definitely existed and occurred in a specific way in any given setting" is detrimental to the core idea of what D&D currently is. If Drizzt is out there drizzting around, then how is your character ever going to compare? There's a little extra leeway with antagonists, but proscribing too much history and lore just guarantees that more and more players and DMs throw it all out to homebrew their own shit so they can be a big deal. Because that is the core appeal of the game as more than just a set of arbitrary math problems and statistical probabilities.