Joshua Randall's page

I use standard hit points as per the DMG

I do this also.

As the DMG points out, below average HP hurt more than above average HP help, so giving out average HP is actually quite beneficial to the players.

Plus, it lets me plan ahead several levels (if necessary) to check CRs and the potential lethality of fights. E.g., if I know how many HP each PC will have at 3rd level, then I can also figure out how badly they'd be wounded by a 5d6 fireball (on average).

The binder's a really interesting class with some great ties to mythology and a cool new mechanic.

Do you find the class effective in play? On paper it seems to suffer from jack-of-all-trades syndrome (okay at doing a lot of different things, but not great at doing any particular thing).

(I suppose in Tyralandi's case, because she is permanently bound to the Green Lady, the jack-of-all-trades-ness evaporates. But the general question remains.)

I can't believe I'm only the second person to vote for Eli Tomorast. I've liked this guy as a villain since WG5: Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, and the new Eli in Maure Castle is just as good. Bad. Whatever.

What I like about Eli is that he's not twirling-his-mustache evil; he's not out to get the PCs (nor even particularly aware they exist) until they intrude upon his domain and (presumably) start messing up his plans. Mostly what Eli wants to do is study the lore of Maure Castle.

I also like Eli because he has allies who care about him, or at least are loyal to him. His familiar Rel carried Eli's tongue (? I think) around in a jar until Rel could find someone to resurrect his master. His freakin' tongue in a freakin' jar. Yuck! Would you do that for your friends?

And once Yug-Anark res'd Eli, she has remained loyal to him... at least thus far... giving Eli a very powerful spellcasting ally of precisely the right type (divine caster) to complement his arcane mastery. Now the DM doesn't have to feel bad about having Eli return to life every time the PCs kills him, because that's really what Yug-Anark would do.

To this point, I haven't even mentioned the inherent coolness of Eli's demon hands. I mean, they kind of make the Hand (singular) of Vecna look lame, right? "I'll see your Hand (singular) of Vecna... *thunk*... and raise you this other... *thunk*... hand." (*thunk* = sound of Eli cutting off his own hands to get the demon ones grafted on)

In summary, Eli Tomorast is a bad, bad man. He's the kind of wizard whose handy haversack has the phrase "Bad Mother F---er" printed on it.

Probably in blood.

I think for a monk, druid, or sorcerer the real question becomes, "Why should I not take Vow of Poverty?"

Equipment-less bonuses can't be sundered. Or stolen. Or rendered inoperative by dispel magic. Or used as a tracking device with 'locate object'.

And don't forget that VoP grants a bunch of other bonus feats, so the VoP'd PC is going to be dripping with Exalted goodness -- some of those feats are pretty nice in and of themselves.

Does anyone else thing a dispelling trap is overly heavy handed?

Yes, but do it anyway.

Remember that the purpose of encounters is to force the PCs to use resources -- you're not really trying to kill them (well, you shouldn't be), but you are trying to make them sweat.

The dispelling trap will (partially) de-buff the PCs, forcing them to re-cast spells, which == using up resources.

Eventually we'll cover all of the core classes, but the majority of our iconics are going to be human.

That extra feat at 1st level is hard to pass up, isn't it? :)

Archivist is here.

Favored Soul is quite a nice class, but it doesn't get to the core of the "ghost hunter" idea.

Have you checked out the Hunter of the Dead prestige class from Complete Warrior? That would seem tailor made for this character concept. I believe you can enter the class with no (or minimal) spellcasting ability, making it feasible to use a fighter or other full-BAB, full-armor class as the base to build upon.

"Balabar Smenk" is my favorite D&D name in campaigns or in print

And rightly so, because you have a great knack for inventing names.

Here are some of my other favorites from the "Age of Worms Overload":

* Dietrik Cicaeda -- just THINKING about his last name conjured up an annoying buzzing noise in my head... make it stop... MAKE IT STOP!
* Gelch Tilgast -- sounds vaguely Lovecraftian to me
* Luzane Perrin -- it could be a real world name, but it's perfectly D&D-ish at the same time
* Rontabont Mur -- I know nothing about him, but I still don't trust him
* Zalamandra -- the similarity to 'salamander' fits her personality quite well, doncha think?

What are some of the general thoughts or feelings have about choosing a Paladin as opposed to a fighter. Or is it opposite, and people would rather choose a fighter over a Paladin?

I like the Paladin class; it is my favorite class to play.

When I think of D&D, I think of the heroic knight in shining armor slaying the dragon to save the kingdom, or smiting the demon before it can spread its corrupt influence. In other words, I think of the paladin.

= = = = =

Mechanically, the fighter has more combat versitility (thanks to his many bonus feats) and, with the addition of some of the powerful "fighter only" feats from PH2 (Melee Weapon Mastery, etc.), more pure combat punch.

However, a paladin can be a very effective combatant, either through the Mounted Combat - Ride By Attack - Spirited Charge* feat chain or through Power Attack - Divine Might - [other Divine feats].

* Spirited Charge is at the core of some of the "most damage in a single attack" builds.

But a paladin is not just a fighter with fewer feats and a free horse. A paladin can fill the role of self-buffing warrior, much like a melee-oriented cleric or like a Duskblade or Bladesinger or any of the other countless "Fighter/Magic-User" combos.

There are some excellent paladin spells in Spell Compendium that help with this self-buffing warrior concept, things like Rhino's Charge and Zeal. The [Divine] feats Divine Might and Divine Vigor are good as well, and thanks to his high Cha, the paladin gets plenty of Turn Undead uses to power those feats -- moreso than clerics, who need to maximize Wis instead of Cha.

(Speaking of Turn Undead, at mid levels and up, the paladin is a better Turn-er than the cleric. That -3 level thing is irrelevant when your Cha bonus is +8 or more... the turning damage you do as a paladin is immense.)

One drawback that the paladin faces, along with all self-buffing warriors, is the long ramp-up time to get combat ready. Swift action spells (Rhino's Charge) help with this. And I think there's a feat in the upcoming Complete Champion to allow you to activate [Divine] feats as a swift action, so that will help too.

Regarding the mount, it can be an essential delivery system for Spirited Charges; but it can also be a hindrance. There are some decent replacements for it, one in PH2 (Charging Smite) and one in Dungeonscape (a "spirit" that aids you in battle). I assume there will more in Complete Champion.

= = = = =

Of course there's more to the game than combat, and the paladin has much to contribute there as well. His high Cha makes him a natural face-man for the party, especially if he puts ample skill points into Diplomacy.

If the campaign supports it, the paladin's ties to his church can be highly beneficial for the party, providing them an allied organization with (likely) vast resources to draw upon. Of course this isn't a one-way street -- the church may assign tasks for the paladin -- but you were going to kill that demon anyway, right? :-)

While the paladin's healing skills are no match for a cleric *in combat*, outside of combat he can help the party recover from setbacks quickly -- Lesser Restoration is a 1st-level Pal spell (meaning it's available at Pal4, plenty early enough to be useful), Remove Blindness/Deafness and Remove Curse are 3rd-level, and both Break Enchantment and Restoration are 4th-level.

= = = = =

Paladins are a fun class. I always enjoy playing one.

If you wouldn't mind, I would love the link to that particular section of WotC

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/ag

I was just reading the thread but thought I would pop in to help out.

Greater Dispell probably won't cut it here, since it only removes one spell from the target area, and dispelling each PC in turn takes much too long

What you want is Chain Dispelling, and 8th level Sor/Wiz spell from Spell Compendium. It does just what it says: a greater dispel magic affect against multiple targets at range.

And yes, it is extremely nasty.

For example; I’ll make sure that rogues have something to do in the final battle this time around (Kyuss was indeed a bit unfair to them, I suppose).

Also, don't forget to give flying ability to the end-stage bad guys. ;)

1. Kizarvexius

Old school. Big time.

did anyone else have a problem with the ulgurstasta sorcerer in Into the Wormcrawl Fissure having a 21 CR? [...] with 6 rounds spent buffing himself and travelling, he didn't make it to the fight with the centipedes and scorpions until there was only 1 centipede left.

I haven't DM'd nor played that adventure, although funnily enough I did just re-read it today at lunch. And I was thinking that N'Vesh-N'Kar is doomed if he spends 6 rounds buffing, because all his minions will be dead by then.

He (it?) might have a chance if you strictly count rounds from when the PCs trigger his alarm spells -- he could probably buff up and hit the PCs when they first engage the vermin, or shortly thereafter.

Alternatively, he could mentally command all the vermin to his side while he buffs, and let the PCs get softened up by the deathraps and hidden pits.

I think what this type of fight illustrates is that no matter how high the CR of a monster, if it's pitted singly against a group of 4 PCs with APL = CR, it is doomed. (And if there are more than 4 PCs -- forget it!) Of course, a CR = APL monster is supposed to die to the PCs; but to make it more of a challenge, you've got to give it backup during the fight. If nothing else, additional bodies on the battlefield keep the PCs from surrounding the monster and full-attacking it to death.

Plus, with 4 PCs vs. 1 monster, the PCs get to act four times in between the monster's turns. That is a huge, huge advantage. The monster needs some allies to break up the initiative order and split the PCs' attentions.

Although as James says, sometimes the PCs ought to walk all over the monsters. That's what being high level is about -- kicking ass!

Seems like most of the time the posts on these boards are complaining about something. I'll buck the trend and say that Dragon issue # 338 / Dec 2005 is great.

I liked how all of the articles were tied into a unifying theme (Expanding the Magic of D&D). I especially liked that the Ecology of the Spellweaver tied into the Bazaar of the Bizarre article about a spellweaver spellbook.

As a side note, the Ecology of the Spellweaver is the second Ecology article in recent memory -- the other one being on the Shadar-Kai -- that has taken a seemingly lame monster and made it cool. Now I want to see an adventure featuring spellweavers and shadar-kai. :-)

Finally, kudos to Paizo on snagging Order of the Stick as one of its comics. Like a lot of other people, I've been reading OotS online for a while. But not everyone does that, so getting OotS in a print magazine is a win-win.

Looking forward to more great Dragon issues!

Yeesh. I start a thread about a particular article, I post specific, constructive criticisms, and Yamo takes it over and turns it into yet another FR vs. Eberron vs. Greyhawk debate.

Several Paizo staffers have posted in this thread, but none of them has specifically addressed any of the points about the article itself.

To reiterate the two issues for which I would like a response:

* the font used in the footnotes is too small to read comfortably
* the article introduces a new mechanic for no good reason (we already have two perfectly good mechanics for possession)

So I read Cities of the Realms, Ed Greenwood's new column in Dragon. And my initial thought is, "Woah. Do we really need a chart of twenty different penalties for breaking the law?"

My more considered thoughts are as follows:

1. The font used in the footnotes is waaaaaaay too small. Also, there is no good reason this information is footnoted instead of integrated into the article itself.

2. The extreme level of detail is overkill. To paraphrase a really old review from the pages of Dragon, what you want is not completeness, but the illusion of completeness.

3. The extreme level of detail crowds out other, more important, information. For example, we get tons of detail on the various taverns and inns, but little detail on the personalities, motivations, and plans of the city's notable NPCs.

(As DM, which are you more likely to need know when your PCs visit a city: stuff about the NPCs they might interact with, or stuff about exactly what foods and wines are served in the taverns?)

4. The ghostly lady who possesses people to make them search for her long lost lover is a neat idea, but making up a new rule to implement this is not good. This is a huge pet peeve of mine. We have at least two existing rules for possession: the ghost rules from Monster Manual (core), and the demonic possession rules from Book of Vile Darkness (non-core). There is no good reason for this article to invent its own rule.

I'd like to hear others' thoughts on this article.

About what week of the month would I be getting them?

I'll have to defer to the Paizo folks for a definitive answer, but where I live (Cleveland, OH), I generally get mine around the middle of the prior month. e.g. I got the July issues around June 15th.

I'm somewhat leery of reliability. Can anyone assauge my worries as to that?

I have never failed to receive an issue in almost one year of subscribing.

Well, I'm not going to get into a debate about hack'n'slash vs. psycho-drama, or whatnot. So I will retract that statement.

I will also stop picking on Amarantha, because I actually rather like her as a character. However, I wonder if the background info in that adventure really fit the "no more than 5% of your wordcount should be background" rule?

I do agree that Dragon and Dungeon are doing much better jobs lately (last year or so) of being useful. As long as we don't go back to the bad-old-days of half-dragons in every room with 500 word backgrounds for Guard #2, I'm happy.

On an tangentially related note, I would like to say that almost all of the Dungeon adventures do a superb job of enforcing the "dungeon layout has to make sense". We almost always get logical room connections, storage areas, bedrooms, etc. No latrines, however. ;)

This is tangentially related, but one thing I am tired of seeing in adventures (not just Dungeon adventures, but let's pick on them for a minute) is elaborate background information that the PCs will never find out. Or worse yet, elaborate background information that has no effect on the adventure.

Take the dryad bonded to the fiendish tree adventure (Amarantha Agenda). From the PCs' point of view -- who cares how she got that way? Who cares about her personal history? The only reasons the PCs might care is if they can somehow use the background information to their advantage in dealing with Amarantha.

Yes, yes, I know there are some groups out there that delight in psycho-drama role-playing and would happily spend hours of real time playing out conversations between their PCs and Amarantha. But the majority (the vast majority, in my experience) of players just want to kill monsters and take their stuff -- so Amarantha's elaborate backstory is totally wasted.

Now, it's a great read for the DM, which may be part of the point. But there needs to be a better balance struck between enough backstory to be interesting, and too much that is a waste of word count.

Wow, we really need the "ignore poster" feature on these boards. When is that coming?

I think that, in general, the PCs need a theme to keep them focused and to prevent (or mitigate) intra-party conflict. In fact, when I DM, I insist that the players come up with a reason they are all together. I don't care what it is -- any of the examples mentioned in this thread would work -- and I don't care if it's silly ("We were all born with an extra finger."), serious ("We have all sworn vengeance against the Evil Overlord."), or whatever.

But I will not DM a group of bitter loner PCs who are only adventuring together because their players happen to sit at my table.

Incidentally, the DMG II has some useful advice on building party cohesion. One suggestion is that each new PC must have connections to at least two other PCs -- e.g., Tordek fought together with Regdar in the goblin wars, and Tordek is also a cousin of Eberk(*). I like this suggestion, but I don't think it goes far enough. I think in addition to personal relationships, the PCs also need a unifying purpose -- beyond just getting cool loot.

(*) Eberk is the sadly underutilized iconic dwarf cleric.

Cosmo is like a religious text for women who worship themselves.

This is SO going into my e-mail .signature.

To paraphrase H.P. Lovecraft,

The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear,
and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.

To scare your players, you must confront them with the unknown. Fortunately, you're the DM, so you can use your god-like powers to make up new stuff that is by definition unknown to the players (and thus their PCs). You can create new monsters, new spells, new locations, new demiplanes, new gods, new whatever. Then watch the players get scared (or maybe "nervous" is a better word) when their usual tactics don't work.

Another highly effective way to create fear (or at least unease) is to have creatures that are so utterly alien they don't interact with the players in ways the players can understand -- an idea obviously cribbed from Lovecraft. Imagine a huge, horrible-appearing monster that appears out of nowhere and then... just sits there. What is it doing? Scouting the area? Resting? Waiting for the PCs to make contact with it? How do you even communicate with it? Maybe it's just on its way from here to there and if the PCs leave it alone, it won't do them any harm.

Maybe the alien creature's way of sensing its environment is to extrude psuedopods and cover things (trees, buildings, adventurers) in ectoplasmic slime. Have the PCs make a bunch of Fort and Will saves, but don't tell them what the slime is doing to them. (Maybe the slime has on onset delay of a day, or three days, or even three months or three years. Then again, maybe there are no ill effects.)

Back to the Lovecraft quote, you can make things seem unknown by limiting sensory input. Many people are scared of the dark because it forces us to rely on hearing (and to a lesser extent, smell and touch) which tends to be not as developed. So, thrust the PCs into situations in darkness, or silence, or both. Or put them in an environment in which they get no tactile feedback -- like a frictionless ocean of proto-matter -- so they can't tell if they are moving or at rest. Change their sense of perspective/horizon so that what appears to be a huge blob rolling up to crush them may actually be the side of a pea.

Hope some of these ideas are useful.

It could be that the Dragons included in your table are skewing the results....

This is tangential to the topic (Maure Castle), but you could use the Draconomicon stat'd dragons to ease the pain of entering them into your CR-checker spreadsheet. Granted, the dragons in Draconomicon might not be super optimized, but at least they are already done, so you don't have to piece together a dragon at each CR by hand.