Will this new print edition be identical to the one that originally saw print for convention-goers and contributors? Or will it be an expanded edition?
If I can get a print with my article added, I'll get this and pass my other on.
Apologies if this has been asked, but I can't find a matching thread.
Given that the pdf of the PF Core Rulebook, and Guide to the RIver Kingdoms, are products I already own, would it be possible for me to gift them to another member of the boards, who hasn't subscribed to those product lines?
The option exists when purchasing pdfs via the normal online store, and I wondered if the same option were available for the duplicates.
If this were available for any of the third-party contents of the pdf pack from the Goblinworks Kickstarter, I would be grateful, as there are a couple of items I recognise as already owning.
This isn't a complaint at all, since they are bonus materials after all, and intended as an advertisement for the publishers.
There's a long thread kicking off about 'should the crafter charge for what he makes for others', which I don't expect to be resolved any time soon.
Rather than lose myself in that thread, I thought I'd ask a question which usually gets drowned out by the income question, or not asked in the first place.
Should a crafter have any right to insist on what items he prioritises, or even refuse to craft some items altogether?
I'm not just talking about profane items, which violate their core beliefs (though that is a good example), but where the crafter believes the commissioning PC doesn't have a clue what they or the party actually want or need.
A prime example would be, a martial PC requesting an upgrade to his weapon, and the crafter responding with "No, because you always get yourself dominated, and come after my blood. I waste half of every fight trying to avoid you, instead of focussing on the enemy."
"I am spending this weekend crafting wands of protection from chaos, and evil, to be used on you, and you can like it or lump it."
"If you insist on still scouting ahead, I will start work on a headband of owls wisdom, which will count toward your share of the next treasure."
"You will not receive any increase in your killing power, unless and until you have proven that power will no longer be used against the rest of us."
(Where the rest of the party are in agreement, I can anticipate the following being added...)
So; is this unbearable influence on another character? Cramping another player's style? Responsible resource management? Tactical genius by an expert in his field?
Take it away, everyone.
Apologies for being away. In the UK, there's been a big change to the tax rules, and it's caught a lot of people unawares. I've been pulling a lot of late nights, fielding the inevitable calls, and not wanting to do much when I get home. I've been able to get the odd post on here, but most of the free time I've grabbed has been to write up a pair of articles for Wayfinder 7.
Thanks to everyone who looks in. Let's keep this game alive.
I joined a pbp some months ago, for which the GM disappeared.
Since we were enjoying ourselves (and I was using the opportunity to playtest one of the APG classes), I asked the others if they wanted to carry on, with me stepping into the GM shoes, and they said yes.
We've been going several months, and the players have remained stable throughout. We now have more posts under me GMing than the previous GM.
I feel rather odd posting in a thread named after someone else, and wonder, is it possible to alter the original title, once you're 30 pages in? Are there any practical reasons why this wouldn't work? Would the change be reflected in the current players' post history?
The thread in question is the one under my 'GM Snorter' alias.
I've picked some items from the sale, and I want to use my store credit to cover the cost, but when I request the credit value and 'apply', nothing happens.
Is this because I asked for the items to ship with my Dec subscription?
Also, does delaying the shipping, to match the subscription, still allow me to buy at the current sale price? Or would the prices revert back to their normal level, mid December?
I also don't appear to have benefitted from PF Advantage, or if I have, it's not apparent in the checkout.
I'm happy to pay for the items in my cart early, to secure their availability, and sale price. I'm just trying to reduce the total no of parcels, and resultant shipping.
I sent a reply to customer services on 21:41 Friday evening GMT (so roughly lunchtime, PST).
I wanted to cancel my rules subscription for the duration of the Beginners Box.
Content of message as follows;
Please may I unsubscribe from the Rules subcription, for this order, and the remainder of the month?
Like several other posters, I am wary of being hit with import taxes for the Beginners Box, which would likely double the cost of the shipping.
I do think it looks a great product, and I may well buy a copy from my local games store at some point, but I can't justify that cost right now.
I still look forward to the other contents in the order.
Robert Feather ('Snorter')
I haven't received a reply to that mail, and today, I've had a further mail, telling me the same products are being shipped.
Please can that order be intercepted? Every other product is still fine, just not the Beginners Box.
I do think it's a worthwhile product, and I may get it from my games shop in the future, but I can't face the increased shipping and possible duties.
I sent a reply via e-mail rather than create a thread on the boards, as I didn't want to add to the (IMO) frankly silly negativity I was seeing.
An issue cropped up in game, regarding Life Link.
As written, it takes a free action to siphon damage from the eidolon to the summoner, at the precise moment that damage occurs.
First; I present the text for free actions;
The GM's Position:The write-up for free actions implies (but does not explicitly state) they can only be performed on your own turn. 'Speaking' being specifically called out (as being a free action that can be done during other's turns), implies that is not the case for free actions in general.
Given the above, it was ruled that my life link could not be used to protect the eidolon, unless I had a standard action readied for that specific purpose.
I maintain that requiring a readied action goes against the intent of the ability, which is to be an interrupt, and that a designation of a free action was chosen, so as not to limit the uses per round (as would be the case for an immediate action).
Making it an action, only usable on the owner's turn, would force the summoner to spend all his actions readying, or else only allow it to affect such damage as 'falling during one's own move', or
So the question is in two parts;
Is it the intent of the designers, that Life Link should work as an interrupt, versus damage dealt, regardless of whether it is the Summoner or Eidolon's turn? (in which case, a clause to that effect is required in the ability write-up).
Is it the intent that free actions are generally only performed during the active character's turn (except in explicit specific cases, such as speech)? Or is it left vague to allow individual GM interpretation on a case by case basis?
Please refrain from any sarcastic remarks regarding the GM or player. The purpose of this thread is not to point fingers, or overturn a ruling.
While reading more deeply in the Bestiary, and building some creatures in my head, I came across something I thought was strange.
The Zombie template assigns a natural armor bonus based on the creature's size. Fair enough, for soft-skinned humanoids like the typical PC race. But what about those races that start with natural armor?
I find it hard to believe the intent is to have Large, or larger creatures, become less tough via zombification.
I admit, the CR calculation could be skewed, where the base creature already had high AC, but there will always be more viable base creatures, such as those that made one attack/round, vs those that had multiple attacks that they lose when staggered.
As is the case with any template, the CR has to be eyeballed.
Should the template read 'a zombie gains an increase in natural armor, as listed in the following table...'?
Is it really the intent that a human zombie, a zombie riding dog, or a troglodyte zombie have the same AC?
While statting up a creature of my own, I came to the part where I check the DC for the various special abilities.
One of those abilities involved tightly wrapping its helpless victims in webs, and I was soon aware of the vast difference in DC between the rules for bindings and those for webs.
As can be seen, the first case has a DC that scales with BAB and Strength. The second case has a DC that scales with half Hit Dice and Con.
As BAB is always at least half HD, it is clear that the first half of each equation will scale faster in the first instance than the second, and will continue to improve as the attacker gains class levels, whereas the second situation would (I assume) be capped at the racial HD, ignoring further HD from classes.
Strength also appears to rise further and more often than Con, according to the size advancement chart, giving a further advantage to formula number one.
The specific creature I was working on was an 8HD outsider, with Str 16 and Con 14. That results in DCs of 31 for the first formula, and 16 for the second (20 if using Strength).
Those DCs vary considerably, so my question is in several parts;
Typing all that has served to focus my thoughts somewhat, but I'd still like to hear what others think.
OK, I'm toying with converting some of these beasties to the current ruleset.
The following is the weaker of the five subspecies, first introduced in the 2nd-Edition boxed set TROSP.
Can anyone see any issues with the statblock below?
Obviously, any of my players keep out.
KAKKUU CR 4?
CE Medium outsider (chaotic, evil, extraplanar, qlippoth)
Init +8, Senses Perception +5, darkvision 60’
Languages Abyssal, telepathy (touch)
AC 15 (+4 Dex, +1 natural) touch 14, flat-footed 11
hp 24 (4d10+4)
DR 5/cold iron or lawful
Immune cold, mind-affecting, poison
Resist acid 10, electric 10, fire 10
Fort +2, Ref +8, Will +4
Spd 30 ft. climb 30 ft.
Melee bite+8 (d6+1+poison)
Ranged fishing lure +8 (60 ft ranged touch, pull 10 ft)
Base Atk +4; CMB +5 (+9 to pull), CMD 19 (23 vs bullrush or pull, 31 vs trip)
Special Atk Options horrific appearance (DC 12), poison (DC 15)
Spell-like abilities (CL 4) at will: darkness,
1/day: summon qlippoth
Abilities Str 13, Dex 18, Con 12, Int 5, Wis 10, Cha 11
Feats Improved Initiative, Weapon Finesse
Skills (12) Acrobatics (Dex) +16, Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str) +13, Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disable Device (Dex), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex) +8, Fly (Dex), Handle Animal (Cha), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha) +4, Knowledge (arcana), Knowledge (dung), Knowledge (eng), Knowledge (geog), Knowledge (hist), Knowledge (local), Knowledge (nature), Knowledge (nobility), Knowledge (planes) +1, Knowledge (religion), Linguistics (Int), Perception (Wis) +5, Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis) +4, Sleight of Hand (Dex), Spellcraft (Int), Stealth (Dex) +11, Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Use Magic Device (Cha).
The above stats include a +8 racial bonus to Acrobatics and Climb, plus a +2 racial bonus to the poison DC.
The fiends known as kakkuu (pronounced Kah-KOO) combine the worst aspects of a wolf and a spider. They have an arachnid body the size of a small pony, with a lupine head and neck growing from the front, where a spider’s eyes would be. The mouth is full of yellow, dog-like teeth, with an extra pair of spider fangs alongside the primary canines.
Fishing Lure (Ex): The kakkuu can also create a glob of silk and glue the size of a fist. It perches over a trail or passage, dropping this, and swinging it like a pendulum. It is unable to throw the lure horizontally. Any creature along the path of the lure (a vertical line up to 60 ft long) may be snared. Treat this as a ranged touch attack with no range increment. A creature struck is stuck to the sticky thread. Test for the closest creature first, and once one creature is snared, the lure has no effect on creatures lower down. The kakkuu will ready an action to begin pulling the target once it feels it has been caught. The lure has a breaking strain of 1000 lb, though the kakkuu can only lift 500lb.
Horrific Appearance (Su): A kakkuu may use a standard action to perform a threatening display. Creatures that succumb to a kakkuu’s horrific appearance become sickened for 1d4 rounds—a kakkuu’s horrific appearance only functions to a range of 10 feet. Once a creature makes a saving throw against a particular kakkuu’s horrific appearance, that creature is immune to the horrific appearance of other kakkuu for 24 hours.
Natural Coloring (Ex): A kakkuu in forest, jungle or undergrowth has a +4 bonus to Stealth checks.
Poison (Ex): Styxian Cramp bite-injury: save Fort DC 15, onset 1d4 rounds; frequency once per 2 hours; Initial Effect 2 Dex damage; Secondary Effect Unconsciousness for 2 hours. Cure 1 save.
Silk (Ex): A kakkuu’s abdomen is equipped with spinnerets that can produce strands of silk. They do not spin webs, but can use this in various ways. Most often, they use the silk to suspend themselves above their prey, or to lay a network of strands through an area to allow movement in three dimensions. A kakkuu may throw a line up to 90 feet to bridge a gap.
Slow Fall (Ex): A kakkuu suffers no damage from falling if there is a surface within 90 feet that could be used as an anchor for their silk line.
Stability (Ex): Due to its extra legs, a kakkuu gains a +4 to CMB when attempting to pull a target, a +4 bonus to CMD vs bull rush or pull attempts, and a +12 bonus vs being tripped.
Summon Qlippoth (Sp): Once per day, a kakkuu can attempt to summon 1d3 fellow kakkuu, with a 35% chance of success.
Telepathy (Su): Kakkuu may communicate via primitive symbolism with any creature it touches. A kakkuu has a limited knowledge of Abyssal, communicating mostly through snarls, barks and howls.
Designers Notes: To establish the baseline ability scores, I referenced a Medium Giant Spider, on the assumption the kakkuu would be at least as proficient as its nearest comparative creature.
Can anyone confirm if the phrase 'after using this spell' refers only to the caster of the spell, or to anyone else he brings along? Both could be said to have benefitted from the effects, thus 'using' the spell, no?
Our group (especially me) has certainly used it to deliver full-attacking melee-types to base contact with their target, but I've never been sure if we were abusing it.
A situation came up in last night's session; the PCs surprised by a Gargantuan Black Pudding. Needless to say, its attack bonus, damage, CMB and acid saves were considerable, and more than a match for them, causing them to make a fighting retreat, deeper into their destination.
The point came, early on, when it was hit by slashing weapons, and split into two halves. After being freaked by this, and the discovery they now had an attack and an AoO each, one player stated what I thought was a valid point.
"At least they'll be weaker, and less able to grapple us."
Which caused me to double-check the Bestiary and see that, apart from hp, there is no mention of the mini-puddings' stats being affected at all.
...the creature splits into two identical puddings, each with half of the original's current hit points (round down). A pudding with 10 hit points or less cannot be further split and dies if reduced to 0 hit points.
When I relayed that information to them (via the mini puddings dealing the same hurt as before), I got a chorus of "No Way!", among some other responses I can't repeat on a public board (!).
I continued with the RAW for the remainder of the encounter, 2 more rounds, until the PCs regrouped and D-Doored out of reach, but I admitted I saw their point and would think it over before next session.
So, the question is:
No-one died, but some came close; several good spells were expended, and two shields and a very fine bow ended up as sludge.
If the consensus is that the smaller oozes should lose Str and slam dice size, I'll give the PCs some hp back at the beginning of next session as they catch their breath. I still don't think any of them will be rushing back for a rematch.
Is it the intent, that;
A) a level 1 gunslinger knows one, single deed? With a maximum of six known at level 19? or,
B) Do they know all deeds of their level or less?
If so, there should be extra text that states either;
A)"At level 1, the gunslinger chooses one deed from the list below to learn. At level 3, and each 4 levels thereafter, the gunslinger learns another deed from the list. Some deeds require a minimum class level to learn. Further deeds may be learned via feats." or,
B)"At level 1, the gunslinger learns all level 1 deeds from the list below. At level 3, and each 4 levels thereafter, the gunslinger learns all level-appropriate deeds from the list. Further deeds may be learned via feats."
At first reading of the original text, it looked as though the character could spend a grit point (groint?) and freely choose any effect from the list, of his level or lower.
Only the repeated listing of 'Deeds', in the table gives any hint of the designers' intent. Or does it? I can see it being argued either way, dependent on how amenable the speaker is to the concept of firearms in the game (ie; just another weapon, vs highly exotic, dangerous and difficult to use).
OK, in another thread, we got the following suggestion;
Just for fun i think i'd make a list of embarassing items to be pulled out if the halfling rolls a 1 on the check :)
Ooh! Ooh! I got one!
01.....Kender wedgies himself (1d3 non-lethal, plus 25% nauseated).
Help me get to 00!
Does anyone know of a feat, or trait, to allow a multi-classed cleric to improve his effective class level, re domain abilities?
I'm thinking in terms of Practiced Spellcaster, from 3.5 (Complete Arcane), which did the same for caster level.
Also, can someone confirm if the bonus domain spells/day, and domain spell list, are capped at cleric level, or if they increase with caster level from other sources?
Going through the class abilities, in order;
Earth Blood: (Sp) Once per day, as a standard action, the ability to heal 1d8+(class level) hit points.
I find this very underwhelming.
By level 4, five of the eleven core classes have this on their spell lists, and are able to trigger wands, or complete scrolls. Three of those classes are able to do so from level 1.
Add to this, the fact that it relies on a material component, which may not always be available (on ship, in flight, on flagged roads, in gelatinous-cube-swept dungeons), it has less utility than the equivalent spell.
Verdict: this needs work.
Perfect for Call of Cthulhu games; there's always someone who gets captured by the Mi-Go, and has to spend the rest of the adventure wheeled round on a trolley, communicating through a speaking tube.
No? Just me?
Any chance of some thumbnails of the tiles?
Make them low-res, and a watermark over them, if you like; I just want to see what the subject matter and shapes are like.
Very interesting concept, here.
The notion of 0-level PCs has rarely been done; there were rules in the 1st-Edition Greyhawk hardcover, where you were able to pick'n'mix from any class during your apprenticeship, but once a class was chosen, you had to drop any superfluous abilities unless you paid an xp tax (a foretaste of 3.0 multiclassing?).
During the '80s, I flirted with the rules from Imagine magazine (RIP), where the classes were reverse engineered, to give the abilities of a half-trained level 0 character, and further back, to the implied baseline abilities of the 0-level peasant (0LP).
This product write-up takes me back to that.
Anyone got this already?
Being Fantasy Flight, I expect high-quality physical components.
Enquiring Space Hulk nuts need to know!
Can anyone say if these come as separate sheets, one folded sheet, or rolled in a tube?
Ditto for the similar products. Could use that info in the description.
Can anyone say if these come as separate sheets, one folded sheet, or rolled in a tube?
Ditto for the similar products. Could use that info in the description.
I have a Paladin player, whose horse was killed several sessions ago, and is set on obtaining a flying mount (griffon or hippogriff) to replace it, even if it means finding a chick and raising it.
So, having a flying mount of some kind will not be a problem.
APL is 9, his character is Paladin 7/Pious Templar 2 (3.5 Complete Divine).
In the 3.5 rules, there was the option (for Druid and Ranger, at least) of taking a better base creature, but counting as lower class level for the purposes of improvements (Eg; a Druid 13 could take a black bear (mod -3) with 10 levels of improvements, a brown bear (mod -6) with 7 levels of improvements, a polar bear with 4 levels of improvements, or dire bear with only the base 1st level of abilities (link + share spells).
Would such a system be workable in PF?
Obviously there are fundamental differences to the way the two systems operate. 3.5 took the base stats from the Monster Manual, and added HD, stat boosts and special abilities from there.
I'd like to do this without reference to the Leadership feat, or treating the creature as a cohort. Partly as I simply don't like the Leadership rules anyway, and since this is supposed to fit an existing class feature.
However, none of the creatures on the base list are flyers large enough to carry a PC.
I've tried searching this section, but I can't find the thread I was looking for, even though I'm sure it exists.
1) Is there a way to purchase products (physical or pdf) for another person, and have them personalized with their details?
2) If that person is another poster, is it possible to pay for items that they (or, say, their spouse) puts in their own cart?
If this has been explained before, please link.
If we do find, or create a thread, please could it be stickied at the top of this sub-forum, since I'm sure I'm not the only one who'll wonder about this, and it will save having to answer the same question all the time.
I've a few queries re the evolutions, as I'm building several to test if certain concepts can be workable.
Can anyone confirm if it's been stated whether;
Of course, if any of the above have been addressed in the upcoming APG, feel free to let me know!
So, what format are we talking here?
Are these A4 size?
I could not find an answer to the following, except for a thread with one post, which got locked at the end of the playtest...I also have two related questions, which follow from the first.
Can you change the base form of the eidolon whenever you change the evolution points?
While it specifically says you can change small/medium size choices each time, it doesn't mention whether you can choose a different base form. I'd been assuming you could because of the very fluid nature of the other evolution choices, but if that isn't the case, I'd like to know.
Are all the forms ridable, assuming the eidolon is at least one size larger than the summoner?
If all forms are ridable, do quadrupeds gain any advantage in carrying capacity for their gait?
The reason I ask, is that I was aiming to make a Small summoner, mounted on his eidolon for speed, and sharing spells, and need to know if I have to pick quadruped base form or not.
In another thread (relating more specifically to whether a golem can volunteer to drop its immunity) the following point was made:
Abraham spalding wrote:
This brings up something that has bothered me for some time.I'll be using the flesh golem for the example, since this is the weakest of the core 4, probably encountered earlier and more often, and has been in the game since 1E onwards (not to mention being an iconic staple of horror fiction for centuries).
The fire/cold/electric spells have never really been listed as an exception to the spell immunity. Rather, a more vague phrasing suggests that certain effects are 'in addition', a phrasing which doesn't imply any sort of bypassing of the normal situation of immunity.
So, are all fire/cold/electric spells an exception to the blanket rule of 'if it allows SR, the golem is immune'?
The reason I ask, is that in 3.5, the SRD text was worded as follows:
The problem for me comes with the specific phrase 'in addition'.I have long suspected that what was really meant (and what should have been stated) was 'The exception to this rule are magical attacks that deal cold or fire damage, which, in addition to their normal effect, slow a flesh golem (as the slow spell) for 2d6 rounds, with no saving throw.'
(and a similar amendment is required to the text for electric spells)
Otherwise, the phrase 'in addition' simply means 'IF you can find some way round the immunity, to deal energy damage, THEN the following additional effects apply'.
The reason I suspect there was always a bad wording, is because otherwise, there's nothing that can deal magical fire/cold/elecricity damage, except weapon enhancements.
It also doesn't follow how one can affect the golem with electricity, since virtually all such spells (including the specific example of lightning bolt) would be ignored, leaving an allied caster to run behind it and jab it with a shock blade, if he wanted to heal it.
The fact that the 3.5 SRD specifically mentioned Lightning Bolt gave weight to the proposal that there was a sentence missing in the spell immunity ability, otherwise, why use that specifically-SR-vulnerable spell as an example?
But, in the PF srd, the specific reference to lightning bolt has been removed, and replaced with a more general reference to 'spells that deal electricity damage'.
Is this deliberate? IE, did someone spot that LB was an ineffectual spell, and had been a typo for the last 10 years?
Or is the intention, that all fire/cold/electrical spells actually bypass the golem's spell immunity, then, in addition,deal additional or alternate effects?
I picked up the above order from the mail depot today, and everything else is fine (Bestiary, Seekers of Secrets, and Book of the Damned), but no Map Pack: Extradimensional Spaces (PZO4022).
(I'm thinking my PCs might be needing their Rope Trick very soon!)
As the title says, one of my players has decided that a ghoul they fought four levels ago (though not too long in real time, maybe two weeks) might have had some useful info, and so has gone back into the hills to drag its body back to town, and get the clergy of the death goddess to Speak with Dead on his behalf.
I made him track the pieces, which I ruled had been dragged around by the crows, and he's got enough bits of it to satisfy the material focus.
Question is: the spell says it cannot be cast on remains that have been turned into an undead creature.
Fair enough, if the ghoul were active, the spell would do nothing. Not to mention, it would try to gnaw your arm of during the ten-minute casting time...
But what about a creature that was human, killed, rose as a corporeal undead, then got killed again?
Are these twice-killed bones considered viable remains for the spell?
Next game in three hours, don't know how long I can stall him!
What period will this be set in?
Ie, which issue was out when the book went to print?
Will Dredd be portrayed in his modern, post-90's 'pro-reform' stance, or the older 'do your job, don't ask questions' role? (Makes a difference if you're a mutant!).
every advert for this range wrote:
limited edition sleeves featuring some of Fantasy Flight Games' most beautiful art pieces.
I'm assuming all the sleeves in one pack are the same image, though?
Thank you for amending that; the order as it was would have wrecked my credit rating!
I have solved the problem of being away during the shipping; my parents have agreed to sign for any parcel that comes in the next two weeks. The Post Office will only hold parcels for a week, before sending them back.
Please could you amend the shipping address to:
[Edit: Address redacted]
PS: I'm going to be away from my email for two weeks.
I'd go for an electronic version of this, like their Counter Collection Gold. One that lets you create a sheet with the exact number and type of creatures you need (and scale up the size, for advanced critters).
First one in!
Been following your work on this site, and on deviantART for a while (thanks for the thousand faves, by the way!), and it's good to see some grass-roots support from the fans.
I got an e-mail from Cosmo, that my subscription payment hadn't gone through.
I've changed the credit card details anyway, to my other card, just so this doesn't happen again if the process drags on.
I don't know if this is the right place to post this (or even if there is a forum dedicated for this), but I just heard from Drew Pocza that he would be looking for a new job.
He says you'll be giving him a good reference, but can we customers help as well, by using this thread to give him a cheer, and hopefully prove, to potential employers, just how much people loved his stuff?
I'm ordering some of the Goodman pdfs, and when I get to checkout, there is a shipping and handling charge, which doesn't seem right.
I don't want to delay, since the sale ends today, so if I go ahead and pay now, please could this garge be refunded when you all get back to the office?
I have been unable to open the zip files for PF10 and PF11 (multi-file versions). The single file versions are OK.
I personalise the files in the Downloads page, and save the zip-files to my PC. But then, each time I go to extract from the zipfile, I am asked for a password, which has not happened with other product.
I don't know what password they want; I have tried my account password (used for logging on), but that does not satisfy them.
I've left it a few weeks, and tried again today, but no change.
We need a Tyralandi miniature!
In fact, it would be great to see all the Dungeon Iconics in miniature scale. Then I could spread them out in the garden, put on my baboon-suit, and act out the cover of Dungeon 150.
Can you confirm if these are the full, original series (i.e, not the version cut to bits, and with interruptory exposition by 7-Zark-7 and 1-Rover-1, that was shown in the UK)?