Can I complain about a 33 year old cartoon series?
I think we all know the answer to that question - of course I can!
Dungeons & Dragons, the cartoon series, came out when I was 13. I had already been playing D&D / AD&D by that time, of course, so while it wasn't exactly an advertisement to me, it certainly was one more item in the collection of my childhood that helped me complete the set. I've occasionally made the mistake of going back and watching shows from my childhood. Sometimes I end up cringing a lot, other times I'm honestly surprised at how well a show holds up to my adult mature more recent examinations. This one? Well ... it's honestly somewhere in between, and at least some of what I view as idiotic behavior on the part of the characters comes with an explanation from the restrictions placed on the writers by CBS. The show's not available on Hulu or Netflix, but I did manage to find complete episodes on YouTube. (Just don't look at them too closely, least they get hit with a take-down notice from the copy-write holders who apparently aren't going to actually release them for viewing otherwise.)
The Wikipedia article (linked above) notes that "The level of violence was controversial for American children's television at the time ...," and perhaps it was. Certainly the Smurfs didn't go around with weapons or tossing fireballs, yet this is one of the points with which I have problems. For a D&D group, these characters are entirely too lightly armed. Seriously, between six characters, they only have two actual weapons: an "energy bow" and a club. One other character has a staff, which could be a weapon, but which she usually only uses as an aid to her acrobatics. The other three characters have potentially good magic items, but despite the show's dialog, they're not weapons. Hell, even the actual weapons aren't used as such anyway, so I'm not sure what the violence complaint was all about. OK, fine, the characters are teenagers (and one pre-teen) who probably aren't quite up to hitting human(oids), but these kids can't even manage to directly attack unliving animated statues. (Seriously, even when attacked by a huge iron golem, the kid with the club doesn't actually hit the damned thing, but instead waves his club around a lot and sometimes hits the ground. Yes, they eventually defeat it, but try aiming at the target next time and it'll go a lot faster.)
Then again, I guess if the characters acted like a real D&D group, they'd either spend the entire series standing around arguing about some obscure rule or go on a direct attack against Venger in the first five minutes. They'd either roll right over him or end up with everyone dead, either way ending the show before the first commercial break.
ETA: The video I linked in the previous paragraph contains some language usage of which I do not endorse and that I actively find offensive. I'll grant that within context it's probably realistic, but consider this a borderline trigger warning.
Dungeons & Dragons, the cartoon series, came out when I was 13. I had already been playing D&D / AD&D by that time, of course, so while it wasn't exactly an advertisement to me, it certainly was one more item in the collection of my childhood that helped me complete the set. I've occasionally made the mistake of going back and watching shows from my childhood. Sometimes I end up cringing a lot, other times I'm honestly surprised at how well a show holds up to my adult mature more recent examinations. This one? Well ... it's honestly somewhere in between, and at least some of what I view as idiotic behavior on the part of the characters comes with an explanation from the restrictions placed on the writers by CBS. The show's not available on Hulu or Netflix, but I did manage to find complete episodes on YouTube. (Just don't look at them too closely, least they get hit with a take-down notice from the copy-write holders who apparently aren't going to actually release them for viewing otherwise.)
The Wikipedia article (linked above) notes that "The level of violence was controversial for American children's television at the time ...," and perhaps it was. Certainly the Smurfs didn't go around with weapons or tossing fireballs, yet this is one of the points with which I have problems. For a D&D group, these characters are entirely too lightly armed. Seriously, between six characters, they only have two actual weapons: an "energy bow" and a club. One other character has a staff, which could be a weapon, but which she usually only uses as an aid to her acrobatics. The other three characters have potentially good magic items, but despite the show's dialog, they're not weapons. Hell, even the actual weapons aren't used as such anyway, so I'm not sure what the violence complaint was all about. OK, fine, the characters are teenagers (and one pre-teen) who probably aren't quite up to hitting human(oids), but these kids can't even manage to directly attack unliving animated statues. (Seriously, even when attacked by a huge iron golem, the kid with the club doesn't actually hit the damned thing, but instead waves his club around a lot and sometimes hits the ground. Yes, they eventually defeat it, but try aiming at the target next time and it'll go a lot faster.)
Then again, I guess if the characters acted like a real D&D group, they'd either spend the entire series standing around arguing about some obscure rule or go on a direct attack against Venger in the first five minutes. They'd either roll right over him or end up with everyone dead, either way ending the show before the first commercial break.
ETA: The video I linked in the previous paragraph contains some language usage of which I do not endorse and that I actively find offensive. I'll grant that within context it's probably realistic, but consider this a borderline trigger warning.