From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Ratings[edit]
|
Grape343 likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
|
| I really like the concept of lunacy and my DnD group and I use him in my campaigns almost as much as I do Torm and Orcus. Unfortunately the author didn't detail Lunacy as much as I would like and it would be interesting to see this character thoroughly explored.
|
|
DanielDraco dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.
|
| The background is much more thorough now. But it's still not great. This is an ascended mortal, so it would be nice to learn a little more about his motives, his background, his personality, etc. We know what he did, but not, ultimately, why. Good for good's sake is more tolerable in a character than evil for evil's sake, but it's still less than ideal.
|
|
|
Ghostwheel dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.
|
| In general, names should either be fairly intuitive or ironic, and this is neither. The name doesn't jive with the dogma, the portfolio, or anything else, which doesn't "feel" right to me at all.
|
