|
|
|
Recent posts by
HELLFINGER:
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rambling Scribe wrote:
Franz Lunzer wrote:
Rhothaerill wrote:
Rambling Scribe wrote:
Armour making characters hard to hit instead of absorbing damage. Makes no sense.
As to armor making people harder to hit, I just look at it as they are still hit if the attack roll is close to the armor class number, but the weapon just clangs off the armor or shield instead of causing damage.
... just as it is meant to be.
Sure, explain that when the storm giant's club 'just clangs off the armour.' I don't buy it.
Also, to me it removes and interesting aspect from play; right now, if your DEX is high, it is never worth it to take heavy armour. If armour would count as DR, you would have to weigh whether it was better to get hit less often or take the max dex penalty but take less damage per hit. Cool game effect lost due to unrealistic rule.
Yeah, thats the main problem...maybe develop a set of new rules that makes heroes without armor and with good DEX be capable of dodging hits(and therefore avoiding the whole attack, maybe with a percentage dice). I haven't figured it out yet so....
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rambling Scribe wrote:
Armour making characters hard to hit instead of absorbing damage. Makes no sense.
SOOO0000ooo true, but then if armors gave DR, what would happen to the Dr given by magic or natural armor? Would they stack? WHy not? An that would be the next problem.
I even created a chrat for dr from armor(since I didn't like the ones in the Iron Heroes' book). Here it is :
ARMOR
LIGHT ARMOR / D.R.
Padded /1
Leather /1d2
Studded leather /1d3
Chainshirt / 1d4
MEDIUM ARMOR
Hide /1+1d2
Scale mail /1+1d3
Chainmail /1+1d4
Breastplate /1+1d4
HEAVY ARMOR
Splint mail /2+1d4
Banded mail /2+1d4
Half plate /2+1d5
Full plate /2+1d6
*****************************************************************
I remember I had a chart for magic and masterwork armor, but don't where i put it... I hope this helps, bro.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rambling Scribe wrote:
I've done a couple of things in my current campaign:
1) I use spell points. I've modified the number of points per day to not require a chart and played around with a few other things. I don't use psionics, but wherever a spell has a boostable psionic equivelant, I use that as the spell description. I made cantrips free, so that they can cast them endlessly, meaning a wizard always can cast acid splash or ray of frost. (I ditched cure minor wounds and replaced it with 'stabilize' which brings a dying charcter to zero hit points and stable).
2) I let wizards cast any spell they know. They still have to study their book or they start losing access to spells over time, but they don't have to prepare. I let them use metamagic with no increase to casting time.
Now that's pretty cool. I was thinking of doing the same thing. The wizards from d&d are kinda lame. A wizards should be feared because of his knowledge of magic and that stuff but it seems they can only be cool in books( Raistlin!!).
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bloody Root wrote:
I did not like it.
The effects were awesome but the fights were played out like a video game. Didn't like em.
The story was too big and seemed rushed. The acting from the two mains (Peter and Mary) sucked for the most part. I think they are tired of the characters, and to me at least, it showed.
The few stand outs were J. Jonah Jameson..hilarious as always...Bruce Campbell (Spelling??)...and the scene with the EMO Peter was hilarious..best part of the film by far.
I wouldn't watch it again. Once was plenty.
TRUE THAT. SPIDEY COULDN'T CRAWL HIS WAY OUT OF A PAPER BAG!!!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
windnight wrote:
HELLFINGER wrote:
SO what was meant by "you are eating the ullolok?" That was weird.
the ritual to become the god of gaming consists, at least in part, of cooking and eating the Ulok.
Hmm. apparently downer is unintentionally joining the apotheosis. It's an interesting bluff thats being run...
but hey, I could be wrong. =D
I thought the ullolok was some kind of a statue-not a living thing(although he certainly likes to bite people's fingers}
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fizzban wrote:
EMO is When referring to a person's personality and attitude, most definitions of emo hold that an "emo person" is candid about their emotions, sensitive, shy, introverted, broken-hearted, glum, and often quiet. Emo personality is also often connected with writing poetry, which addresses confusion, depression, loneliness, and anger, all resulting from the world's inability to understand the author.
Humn...interesting...it makes me wonder if Shake-spear(that's the coolest way to spell it) and the other famous poets were kinda depressed too. And why the heck do we study poems anyways...
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gurubabaramalamaswami wrote:
Everywhere I go on this board (and EZBoards and ENWorld) people are talking about their rouge characters and rouge NPCs.
Rouge is something sold by Mary Kay/Revlon/Covergirl that the ladies put on their face (i.e; makeup).
A rogue is the latest incarnation of the D&D thief and is a playable character.
ARGH!!! WHAT THE HELL IS A ROUGE CHARACTER?!?! I hate when I've know idea of what people are talking about... ):
MOulin Rouge?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|