|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bocklin wrote:
I have to agree. I thought the same thing when I saw the map of the town. The only recourse would be to have most of those lumberjacks living outside of town. Matthew Morris wrote:
They could easily set up the "Betatest" PDFs with the same personalization structure that they do for their PDFs now. If anything did end up on the black market it would be easily traceable. So Paizoians, do you think it's doable, or even something you could look into for the future? I think the idea has been bandied about before somewhere, but perhaps its time to suggest that there be a "limited pdf release" before the adventures go to print. Perhaps this could be handled similar to how video game Betas are run, with people signing up to test the adventure out for a day or two and give feedback. Video game manufacturerers require NDAs so that wouldn't be a big deal either. I don't know how that would work with your deadlines, but it's something to think about. I feel safe in giving out a guarantee that you would have lots of people sign up for the test runs (including me), so perhaps you could have a revolving, limited number of people for each adventure, so that everyone who wants to would eventually get a turn in the queue. In return for the free editing that you receive from it, the test run people would get a look at the new adventures before everyone else, and that's a pretty cool thing too. Oh, and Paizoians please don't get the idea that this is a slam against your editing skills because it's not. I think you guys do a great job, but with the deadlines you have, things like the errata already posted sometimes slip by. I've noticed several small items in the past few Dragon and Dungeon mags too. I just bought Midnight Syndicate's D&D CD and used it for my last gaming session. It was a hit. While I intend to pick up some other CDs for more variety (LOTR, etc.), does anyone have any commentary on the rest of Midnight Syndicate's CDs? Are they good for fantasy gaming background music too, or are they better for horror-type games? After reading this thread I feel blessed that my group is a generally agreeable bunch. They have plenty of arguments in-game, but they're all in character arguments. They play their characters as a fairly tight bunch in-game, but with arguments like a family would. It just so happens that my group is pretty much all related to each other either by blood or marriage so that's no surprise. They also don't feel the need to disrupt the general flow of the game, but I also put extra work into designing elements that focus on each of the characters. I have an overarching plot line, but it's malleable not rigid. The party can go off and do their own thing that isn't necessarily related to the plot line (though I often try to integrate the new stuff to make it more powerful), but I also frequently ask them what they intend to do in the future so that I have an idea of how to go about designing the next adventure or integrating something from Dungeon. I'm not great at off-the-cuff design work if they go off the beaten path so I need to have enough of an idea in advance of what they want. It works out well for my group. It sounds like the OP is not quite as fortunate. That's a cool miniature Talion. I might have to pick that one up for myself. :) It'll be a while before I could use it as a character though. I'm in the middle of DMing a campaign right now. As to the Critical Hit Deck, it finally made its appearance for the first time yesterday. The fighter in my group scored a critical against the giant crab they were fighting and pulled the card that causes recurrent bleeding damage from a slashing weapon. My whole party enjoyed that, though they liked it more when they set the crab on fire for cooked crab meat...one of the party members comes from an underwater race, and the fighter is a voraciously hungry goblin. :) This is one of my favorite pictures of me and my son at the pumpkin patch last Halloween. My wife and son eating some popcorn And my son helping with the laundry. As to my gaming group, we don't have any group shots of us while gaming, but my wife is one of my group. I'd have to find some pictures of the rest of our group but it consists of my sister-in-law and her boyfriend. Elmore. I was also a fan of Clyde Caldwell back in the day, but I haven't seen anything of his around lately. I also enjoyed the artwork of Brom and Tony DiTerlizzi as their art just screamed the campaign settings they were known for (Dark Sun and Planescape respectively). I haven't paid as much attention to which artist is which since getting back into D&D 5 years ago, but I have to say I'm starting to like Wayne Reynolds a lot, and before long I'll probably associate him with a single campaign setting (Golarion, still not quite sure of that name) like I did with Brom and DiTerlizzi. Back to the topic at hand... :) Right now we don't have anyone under the age of 13 gaming with my group. All of my group are in their 30's, and we're a fairly raunchy bunch at times (group consists of 2 men and 2 women...the women, my wife and her sister, are the raunchier ones :D). There are several "dark" and "adult" elements that are part of the campaign I'm running that are fine for all of us. For someone of a young age it would have to depend on the maturity factor. I have a 2 year old that I hope will start gaming in a few years, but I certainly won't be starting him out with the darker aspects. If down the road he proves that he can handle them then that's fine. I started gaming at age 11 and I was pretty mature for my age and able to handle dark and adult content. Not every kid is like that though. Dragonmann wrote: It is just the expectation created by the canon, and not the canon itself that hurts That's probably about the best explanation I've seen for the negative connotations FR seems to have at times. Personally I never ran into the expectation of canon during my FR games. The one I DMed about 18 years ago was when the Realms was still relatively new as a campaign setting so there wasn't a proliferation of canon beyond the boxed set and a half dozen novels. A few years ago I was a player in an FR game set in the Dalelands, but none of the other players knew much about the Realms, not having read any of the books, etc. Thoth-Amon the Mindflayerian wrote:
Exactly the same for me. FR is my least favorite of the 3. I'm liking my homebrew a lot, but it's not even 5% of what I eventually want it to be. Greyhawk is still my favorite. So much D&D history is wrapped up in that setting, and there is just...something...about it that appeals to me. Heh, I've actually been pronouncing Logue correctly then. As to the sequel to Chimes at Midnight...can't wait for it. At the risk of exploding Nick's beholder-like head, I thought Chimes at Midnight was very well done. Back when it came out my current party was just forming so I hadn't really thought about running it. But after reading this thread I just realized that in my current campaign I've been setting up a city watch inspector as a recurring NPC without even realizing it. It wouldn't be a stretch to bump him up into megalomania. And while the city my campaign is based in isn't nearly as large or cosmopolitan as Sharn I could probably massage it enough to fit. The level range is almost right on where my party will be during the time I could run it too. Sweet! Aberzombie wrote:
Ah, in that case Logue definitely wrote it. James Jacobs wrote:
Are you absolutely SURE you can't fire Bulmahn and hire me? ;) MaxSlasher26 wrote:
Yes there is. 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. Gurubabaramalamaswami wrote:
You don't want to know. ;) With regard to Erik's question...it is unlikely I or my group would switch, at least not for a while. I have a lot of money invested in v3.5, and as the DM I also tend to drive what the rest of my group does. They're happy with what we have now, and I have enough material for my current campaign that it could last years before it's finished (at the rate we're able to play). Down the road I might look into v4.0, but it would take a lot to get me to switch wholesale, and by extension my group wouldn't switch without me unless we had a DM change, and that's unlikely. I'd be even less likely to switch if v4.0 were not OGL and Paizo was unable to produce content for it. Sean, Minister of KtSP wrote:
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I dislike it when paladins are represented as one-note "slay all evil all the time" types. There are so many more ways to play a paladin, including those with shades of grey. The one-note type is not only boring for me, but if played as it usually seems to be played (based on what I've seen from WotC messageboards, etc.) it tends to create a strain on the rest of the party, or workarounds like playing the paladin as ignorant, etc. Probably the most enjoyable paladin I ever played was when I rejoined my old group after about a year off. Some of them were initially reluctant that I wanted to play a paladin, since not all of their characters played within the laws, but I created a paladin of Sune the love goddess of the Forgotten Realms. Instead of being your typical crusader against evil type, nor was he the "snitch on everyone who breaks the law" type; he was a crusader for Sune's ideals of love, beauty, etc. He still fought evil, especially ugly evil :), but it wasn't his passion. He got along very well with the rest of the party. Unfortunately that group broke up because of events beyond my control, but since then I've become a DM for another group that includes two of the players in the old group. We still talk about that paladin on occasion. :)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
