Batman has a batdog, a batcow, and a member of his rogue's gallery who calls himself Condiment King and commits robberies using hot sauce and mustard. Would you claim that that making a serious Batman movie is misinterpreting the source material? I'm guessing no.
Batman has evolved as a character in the 83ish years that he has been around. Earlier live-action adaptations of Batman leaned into the weird parts of his comics. More recent ones have done the opposite, because Batman is a dark character that makes sense to be adapted in a gritty way. There's a reason why people complain about the Man of Steel getting Superman wrong (trying to make him dark and gritty like Batman when Superman is all about hope).
Yes, there are silly things in D&D. That doesn't mean that D&D is some sort of wacky joke game. It can be played with any ratio of serious to silly that you want, there is no correct way to play D&D. Even the Lord of the Rings films had their silly stuff, largely at the hands of Gimli, Pippin, and Merry. A serious D&D movie would absolutely be real D&D. Unless you'd like to say that the War of the Lance or the Time of Troubles weren't real D&D?
But D&D sometimes is"some sort of wacky joke game." Spelljammer exists. Planescape is one of the most popular D&D settings. Thought Eaters exist. The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing exists. Flumphs exist and are in the 5th edition monster manual. While D&D isn't always a wacky, goofy joke game, it is often enough that I feel making a live action adaptation of the game (at least one that takes place in the Forgotten Realms) that takes itself seriously would be a bad interpretation of the source material.
And the War of the Lance has quite a few wacky/goofy things in it. Kender, Tinker Gnomes, and Gully Dwarves were played as jokes in the War of the Lance novels. So, if there were to be a War of the Lance TV show or movie, I would definitely expect it to have at least a slightly humorous tone.
This movie takes place in the same campaign setting where there's a beholder crime lord that has a pet goldfish that he loves more than anything in the world and would go on a murderous rampage if anyone killed/threatened his precious Sylgar. And this is one of the most iconic NPCs of the Forgotten Realms. Xanathar is so iconic he has appeared on the cover of more official D&D 5th edition books (the Monster Manual, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, and Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) than any other NPC in all of the hobby.
If people think that this movie is too "goofy" for a D&D/Forgotten Realms movie because it has a Marvel-vibe . . . I have to ask what version of the Forgotten Realms they've been playing in, because it certainly doesn't seem like the Forgotten Realms I know.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spell scrolls have only worked for the class the spell is for since forever, though in AD&D you actually had different scroll types so a wizard couldn't use a clerical scroll even if the spell was one the wizard could also cast. The point has always been "extra use" and "doesn't have to be a spell you actually have prepared".
Okay, sure. That's still f@#$ing stupid. Especially in 5e where scrolls take forever and three weeks to craft, require gadzooking hory sheet cash outlay, and has a generally 80% or better chance to fail. At no point is that ever worth it unless you're creating a spell that casts itself when the scroll's invoker needs it to, as something you can hand off to a minion or the like for a specific job.
Anyways. Not really relevant to the movie, but god damn does the way D&D handle spell scrolls bother the absolute ass off of me.
This is why as a DM I allow any spell caster to use any spell scroll (with an Arcana DC check if the spell is not one of there own, a failure means the scroll cant be used until after a long rest, not that it is lost) I also allow non spell casters to use a spell scroll but it is a much higher spell DC and the spell is lost if it is failed by a certain amount.
So long as the movie knows how to balance its lighter and heavier moments it should be good. D&D has silly elements but it also has serious elements. So long as they let the actual emotional/heavy moments have actual weight to them it should be good. If they play everything for laughs and make it into a farce that would be a step too far imo. It doesn't have to be all serious or all silly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Batman has evolved as a character in the 83ish years that he has been around. Earlier live-action adaptations of Batman leaned into the weird parts of his comics. More recent ones have done the opposite, because Batman is a dark character that makes sense to be adapted in a gritty way. There's a reason why people complain about the Man of Steel getting Superman wrong (trying to make him dark and gritty like Batman when Superman is all about hope).
But D&D sometimes is "some sort of wacky joke game." Spelljammer exists. Planescape is one of the most popular D&D settings. Thought Eaters exist. The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing exists. Flumphs exist and are in the 5th edition monster manual. While D&D isn't always a wacky, goofy joke game, it is often enough that I feel making a live action adaptation of the game (at least one that takes place in the Forgotten Realms) that takes itself seriously would be a bad interpretation of the source material.
And the War of the Lance has quite a few wacky/goofy things in it. Kender, Tinker Gnomes, and Gully Dwarves were played as jokes in the War of the Lance novels. So, if there were to be a War of the Lance TV show or movie, I would definitely expect it to have at least a slightly humorous tone.
This movie takes place in the same campaign setting where there's a beholder crime lord that has a pet goldfish that he loves more than anything in the world and would go on a murderous rampage if anyone killed/threatened his precious Sylgar. And this is one of the most iconic NPCs of the Forgotten Realms. Xanathar is so iconic he has appeared on the cover of more official D&D 5th edition books (the Monster Manual, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, and Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) than any other NPC in all of the hobby.
If people think that this movie is too "goofy" for a D&D/Forgotten Realms movie because it has a Marvel-vibe . . . I have to ask what version of the Forgotten Realms they've been playing in, because it certainly doesn't seem like the Forgotten Realms I know.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
This is why as a DM I allow any spell caster to use any spell scroll (with an Arcana DC check if the spell is not one of there own, a failure means the scroll cant be used until after a long rest, not that it is lost) I also allow non spell casters to use a spell scroll but it is a much higher spell DC and the spell is lost if it is failed by a certain amount.
So long as the movie knows how to balance its lighter and heavier moments it should be good. D&D has silly elements but it also has serious elements. So long as they let the actual emotional/heavy moments have actual weight to them it should be good. If they play everything for laughs and make it into a farce that would be a step too far imo. It doesn't have to be all serious or all silly.