Recent Posts
Well can I just please, please, PLEASE get a bloody rust monster??
I'm so tired of using these POS rust monster minis from Grendier's Creature Catalog and TSR's line of lead miniatures from, like, 1784.
Rust monster! Now!
Grrr
Yeah, I'm SOL on owlbears, and I wholeheartedly hurrah! the rust monster.
And the rhagodessa, I *really* want both sizes of those beasties.
Well can I just please, please, PLEASE get a bloody rust monster??
I'm so tired of using these POS rust monster minis from Grendier's Creature Catalog and TSR's line of lead miniatures from, like, 1784.
Rust monster! Now!
Grrr
Yeah, I'm SOL on owlbears, and I wholeheartedly hurrah! the rust monster.
And the rhagodessa, I *really* want both sizes of those beasties.
ebay
Well can I just please, please, PLEASE get a bloody rust monster??
Rust monster! Now!
Grrr
You'll notice the number of terrific rust monster encounters in published adventures in the last 15 years or so.
Hmmm.
You'll remember, that Mike Mearls did an article on how rust monster encounters, and their aftermath, stopped game play and were, therefore, not much fun.
Introducing a rust monster figure would be seen as encouraging the ferrophagial little biggers, and I don't think the current development team wants to do that.
Aside from that, there are basic problems with the rust monster as a DDM product: it does no hit-point damage. Against almost all opponents, it's useless. It affects some creatures, and not others, based on how much metal they have. So we try to adjudicate whether it affects that bugbear figures's shileld, which looks like it's made mostly of wood, and what it does to the medusa archer, whether it can even reach the frost giant's sword, and what the new stats for the frost giant will be if it does disintegrate his weapon, and so forth.
You'll notice the number of terrific rust monster encounters in published adventures in the last 15 years or so.You'll remember, that Mike Mearls did an article on how rust monster encounters, and their aftermath, stopped game play and were, therefore, not much fun.
Introducing a rust monster figure would be seen as encouraging the ferrophagial little biggers, and I don't think the current development team wants to do that.
well, in the last year and a half there has been Bullywog Gambit and also a decent free article on Wizards (RIP free articles) on how they would change the rust monster after having hindsight.
Aside from that, there are basic problems with the rust monster as a DDM product: it does no hit-point damage. Against almost all opponents, it's useless. It affects some creatures, and not others, based on how much metal they have.
It would most likly have some sort of 'effects all humanoids and constructs within 5 feet' minus to AC and attack
I was hoping the bad pictures on the website were just bad photography... so the sculpts and paint jobs are really as bad as the website shows?
From what I hear, the uncommons and rares are sculpted well, the uncommons and commons are painted well...
so
I have almost the entire set So i have taken a good look at Everything other than the Eye of Flame beholder, and the Rakshasa baraon (however i have seen them in person)
Almost all of the skulpts are great, i can think of 3-4 skulpts that i don't like (out of 60 that's not bad). Most of the paint jobs are well done as well (i don't like 8 or 9 of them). So over all i give the set a B, There are some great U\commons and some great old school figs that have been re-done. The uncommon Hookhorror, Bullett, direwolf and Hag are wonderful examples of figs in this set.
HOwever i feel said for figs like the mindflair Who look like a 3 year old painted it.
Let me also say that Most of the figs that look bad here http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mg/dxd
Look a lot better inperson...
Also the starter figures look very good as well (as long as you can get over the green dragon's horn)
I purchased the starter set and one booster pack. I liked the ones from the starter set (especially the yuan-ti), but the ones from the booster pack were kind of "blah". The rare was a Balhannoth, the others were a Bulette, a cleric of Cleric of Pelor, a Deathjump Spider, a Drow Wand Mage, a Grick (terrible), a Kobold Archer, and a Troglodyte Bonecrusher. Ultimately, I think I'll keep the Cleric, the Spider, the Drow, and the Kobold. The others I'll either trade or sell.
Unsatisfied with all that, I went to the Miniatures Market site and order the ones from this set that I actually want. I think that'll be my route from now on. I ordered a Death Knight, a Giant Centipede, 6 Gargoyles (actually that one was an accident), 12 Gnoll Marauders, a Griffon, a Rakshasa Baron, 6 Shade Knights, 6 Shadow Demons, and 6 Warrior Wights.
Averil
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
Well can I just please, please, PLEASE get a bloody rust monster??
Rust monster! Now!
Grrr
You'll notice the number of terrific rust monster encounters in published adventures in the last 15 years or so.
Hmmm.
You'll remember, that Mike Mearls did an article on how rust monster encounters, and their aftermath, stopped game play and were, therefore, not much fun.
Introducing a rust monster figure would be seen as encouraging the ferrophagial little biggers, and I don't think the current development team wants to do that.
Aside from that, there are basic problems with the rust monster as a DDM product: it does no hit-point damage. Against almost all opponents, it's useless. It affects some creatures, and not others, based on how much metal they have. So we try to adjudicate whether it affects that bugbear figures's shileld, which looks like it's made mostly of wood, and what it does to the medusa archer, whether it can even reach the frost giant's sword, and what the new stats for the frost giant will be if it does disintegrate his weapon, and so forth.
To me this is some of the problem with the style of D&D they appear to be developing with 4th edition. As both a player and DM I find these little buggers are something you have to approach differently than much of the other traditional fare. You can't just wade in and attack without preparing for them, or the DM can use the encounter as an adventure hook, which is what Mearls suggests for the current 3.5 monster. My question is, what is wrong with that? Unless the DM is lousy, he or she should be able to use these sorts of encounters to make further, more interesting encounters. To me that is a large part of what D&D is about. It is also one reason why I will be steering clear of 4th ed until it proves itself.
Brannon Branduin Brighthammer
(Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
