TigerDave's page

I like the d20 systems (3e/4e) but it seems a slippery slope of "add more detail to combat" that bloats combat encounters to time frame that no longer suit my aging body or my reduced free time. My 2 cents on why this has happened - three words "Hit Point Bloat". The caps of yesteryear (i.e. 9th or 10th level) for actually rolling HP's should never have been removed.

My personal opinion, with no facts, pictures or even amusing anecdotes to support it, is "organized play" had a significant impact on easing the game's development in this direction as well. In other words, it's easier to write rules about combat than it is about character development, so the combat accidentally became the focus.

Again, just my opinion. Not trying to rag on anyone or call organized play wrongbadfun, but I think it brought with it some unforseen side effects that may well have led us to this point.

My friends want me to run a Gamma World (4E) adventure for them. I have some old classic adventures (GW1-4, GW7). I'm thinking of running the older modules with the newer rules. I know there are 4E releases of the first two, but I want to keep some of the old school feel of the original modules. Or at the very least use the best of both versions.

So first question is, which original module do people think is better, Famine in Far-Go or Legion of Gold? How true to the originals are the remakes? Has anyone else on the internet worked on this sort of conversion?

I'll take a look when I get home.

Gamma World was my first RPG experience back in 1978, so I am rather fond of it. 4E's theme/tone is radically different, with much oddity. At first I was quite put off about this, but decided to embrace the zany and run with it. We had a great time. So, from my perspective, you're probably better off ditching the 'old-school' feel. The new system just has too much work (in my mind) to make it worth your while to convert it to the more serious tone of the original.

Again, however, I'll do a quick preview when I get home later tonight with my older modules and let you know.

TigerDave wrote:

What I think you're missing, however, is that the feat Melee Training: X effectively doubles an ability score. It's not that you're focusing on STR, its that you're focusing on STR AND CON at the same time with no penalty.

I believe it noted it before, but I just wanted to reiterate it here that the penalty in this case (beyond the expenditure of a feat) is losing out on some damage. With the Melee Training feat you would be dealing half your Constitution modifier in damage as opposed to your full Strength modifier.

Right - I mentioned it myself but didn't have the specifics.

So, I place 18 in Con, and +2 racial bonus. This gives me max To-Hit benefit, Max Con benefit, but only a +2 to Damage rolls. That's pretty big to me. Brutal weapon and Vicious Stance (if I'm thinking rightly - again, no book) and I can overcome that -2 pts pretty fast.

One thing is certain: You can definitely optimize. It doesn't matter the source, optimization is there. Always has, been, always will be. I'm just thinking Essentials Optimized gets much more for it than non-Essentials. I also think that, even not optimized, Essentials characters by and large have more oomph than PHB characters.

I guess the best illustration for this is the golf course. PHB characters have to tee off at the men's tee line, while Essentials characters are teeing off at the ladies' line. A shorter distance to the cup, and an easier go of it. Importantly, we're all playing golf, and the game isn't ruined by any means. I just don't like seeing fellow dudes teeing off at the ladie's line when I'm all the way back here ...

Many classes can get away with focus on a single ability score, or two at most. We already have classes which can be based around Con directly!

Okay - I'm going to agree that you CAN base a character off of one stat. That being said, PHB characters tend to stress three abilities, with the third usually appearing as an odd buff from time to time, in the power stats. So, while I most certainly CAN base my paladin purely off Str, it does limit my abilities to add CHA temp HP, or WIS bonus to damage, etc.

What I think you're missing, however, is that the feat Melee Training: X effectively doubles an ability score. It's not that you're focusing on STR, its that you're focusing on STR AND CON at the same time with no penalty.

Also, direct experience says that Essentials characters remain "preferred" until well into Paragon tier, and almost into Epic.

I certainly don't mind your not agreeing, but my own direct experience with the VT and these characters (which completely took me by shock) says something different.

My issue in this regards stems mainly from my feeling that the overpowered build is also a very basic build.

And let me give an example along this line.

I choose to make a Fighter (Slayer). The entire build is based off of the basic attack with stances that modify it. Now here is where I get to break the build, just on that fact alone.

Contrary to initial thoughts, Strength is now a fighter’s dump stat. Taking Melee Training: Ability, I can substitute another ability for Strength when doing basic attacks. Want to maximize STR and HP? Put a 20 (18 plus +2 bonus) in Con, take Melee Training: Con, and I get the bonuses to my attacks, to my HP, and to my FORT save! Wow! A gaming Trifecta! Now, understand there are limitations to the Melee Training feat (I believe you only get half the stat bonus for your damage roll – I’m not home to check it right off the bat), but that sure is a sweet way to go, and completely bypasses the At-Will/Encounter/Daily system that usually requires you to be balanced in two or three of your abilities (IE Str attack +Con Bonus Damage or something like that).

I also want to address the “It’s not overpowering” comments with the following observations: There are three classes I routinely see while working the VT that way overshadow the rest of the party routinely – those are the Essentials Fighter (Slayer), Druid (Sentinel), and the PHB Paladin-Warlock hybrid. I’ve also had a person comment that I’m playing my PHB cleric all wrong, and I can get twice the amount of healing if I convert to the War Priest (and he sent me a build to prove it).

Again, nothing here is doom and gloom. I'm still going to play 4E and have fun, just as Deinol is going to adjust the rules and play his way and have fun. In the end, that's what's important. But I do want to say that I'm not sure Mr. Mearls and I are on the same sheet of paper when it comes to the game, and I'm not all that happy about the change in direction.

I am not sure if it is available in the US, but the brand of superglue I use, has "gel control"...it is fantastic, no more superglue slopping everywhere.

Totally agreed. I prefer the gel to the runny type. Problem was, I did them at 10pm. Now the box says PLASTIC miniatures, but they're really a type of resin that does not glue together with plastic model glue, so I was caught unawares. Had to use what was at hand.

*sigh* I hate miniatures.

I actually had a good time, but I was a bit miffed that the figures were resin. I've gotten so used to doing GW plastics, and I really prefer the forgiveness that is in plastic model glue. I'd not worked in super glue in a while, and the brand I am using is very "wet". Once I remembered all my old tricks, like paper towels to wick away excess glue, etc., things went pretty well. I did pretty much ruin the Commander Stryker miniature though with the initial glue errors, but he's easy enough to replace - I'd already decided to get the alternate figure before I goofed anyways. Right now I have the three warjacks primed and curing (I always 'cure' the primer at least 24 hours before painting over it.)

Thinking about a scenario to get paladins on both sides of a war. Goodness knows TRW is full of conflicts with decent people on both sides; it shouldn't be impossible to do in D&D.

I don't ever recall a "paladins cannot fight other paladins" stricture. As you said, the real world has plenty of examples of wars that weren't necessarily bad-guy vs. good-guy. Shoot, you could do paladin-vs-paladin in the same religious sect if there was a schism over doctrine, per se.

Hmm. I haven't messed with Warmachine in a long time, and the local store has a league! Yay! A nice relaxing night enjoying minitures! I love miniatures.

(opens new Cygnar Battlegroup box)

Holy crap! They're not metal any more, they're plastic! WTH! Oh my goodness, just look at all the little parts. Don't they know I'm old? WTH? Oh crap - these aren't plastic - they're RESIN. I HATE RESIN! OMG - did I just stab my finger .... great - now there's blood everywhere. Where's the head at? Is that what the cat is gnawing on? OMG! I HATE SUPERGLUE! It's all over my hands - how did I get ... WTF? Why is my eye glued shut? When did I rub my .... AUGH Not another stab wound! NOOOO! I just glued a thumb print all over this guy's cloak - I hate superglue ... Noooo! Not another finger? How does such a little cut bleed so much. Cat! Get away, you mongrel - I just glued ... OMG!

*sigh* I hate miniatures.

So, my GM is running a game this weekend. we're starting at level 2 and only going to 5 in this game. or so he thinks anyway. he can never make up his mind. I have decided to do a Kukri wielding TWF fighter, taking heirloom weapon, so he's allowing both weapons to be considered heirlooms. As such, I wish to name my Kukris but can't come up with a good name. Eventually I want to enchant them with Frost and Shock properties, if that helps.

For a more option of names, I encourage you to do a little research.

Kukris are Nepalese in origin, and may have ties to Hinduism. A kukri will have a small notch at the base of the blade called the cho, kaudi or kaura. This is believed by some to be representative of Shiva (either her trident or her female parts.)

A quick answer would be:
Dharma - righteousness
Artha - Livelihood, wealth
Kama - Sensual pleasure
Moksa - Liberation, freedom

The long answer would be to study some Hinduism, and see if there is something meaningful in there that makes sense to you.

The article acknowledges that those were the rules as presented, however. Creating characters above 1st level didn't even exist in the rules until the 1e DMG, and even those were aimed at convention rather than home play. In this sense, pointing out the "new characters start at 1st" policy is no more a generalization than saying that most DMs force characters that roll a natural 1 on an attack to miss automatically.

Sure.

Remember however, that I was playing during this era; D&D in the 1970s isn't an abstract for me (I was in my late teens, and continued to play 1st Edition until 1995). While we started with the White boxed set (and spent a lot of time scratching our heads), and then transitioned into the Basic game, as soon as Advanced hit the shelves we dropped everything and played that for many years. My experiences during that entire timeframe, however, are largely limited to a massive audience of 30ish, which means that my following comments are no less a generalization than Mearls'.

Traditionally, every Halloween we'd play a game in costume, and those were always one-offs (disposable characters) at high levels. Also, when a character fell to the wayside during a long-running campaign and the Raise and Ressurect spells failed, we'd have them roll characters and bump them up to the level we were playing at the time. You will probably find comments by many members of that era who "willed all their worldly belongings" (ie. magic items and gear) so that their new characters (vengeful sons and daughters) could pretty much jump back in the game without having to start back at zero.

As a quick aside, boy, that Holy Avenger sword of mine sure got passed down to an awful lot of siblings when we played Tomb of Horrors. I'm just saying ...

In other words, it's fine to call it so in general, but to state it as fact that every table is doing it is no more factual or real than saying 4E is a failed system because all the people in my area are still playing 3.5. It's just a generalization based upon the evidence available to the person making the statement, and one which I assume Mr. Mearls himself understands when he prefaces it with "Most ...".

But that goes back to the core argument of does the player base really understand the direction WOTC is headed, or more importantly do they know?

Bingo.

I guess in the end the only thing we've ever had is "wait and see." As I've said before I'm not doing the "ooooh - the sky is falling!", but I think it isn't necessarily wrong to draw conclusions from the direction the material is taking me. As always, I have the CHOICE of including Essentials-based materisl or not, and I don't worry about Chris Perkins and Mike Mearls busting in my door at any time (though how cool would that be?). I just hope that Essentials isn't going to be the only design frame supported, but I'm pretty sure evidence points that way, and truly DID make Essentials the ".5" of this edition.

Wrath wrote:

- DM's making players roll up first level characters after death. Not with any DM I've ever had nor heard of. Especially in campaigns.

This was, as far as I can tell, fairly common in the olden days. I've heard from plenty of 1e DMs who made their players roll up brand new 1st level characters after any death.

But it is still a generalization. Lack of Conventions, organized game play, the internet etc. from that time frame makes any such broad statement questionable at best, and in regards to how my friends and I played, flat out wrong.

You could, ah.... just ignore the alignment restrictions and do whatever you want. I've never felt the great need to stick 100% with the rules and if something doesn't fit a specific flavor or the idea of your character then change it. Obviously the alignment requirement is there for fluff (how can a Domination Blackguard be good?) but fluff can be easily re-written.

About the issue of minimal choices, there's more to a character than just power selection that separates one from another. First, take in the account of Backrounds and those choices are numerous. Then play-style and "feel" as I'm sure two Blackguards aren't going to be Role-played exactly the same way. Then you add in weapons differences and trained skills, and maybe one picks up Rituals.... See, the differences are there you just have to flesh out the character more is all.

You're pretty much preaching to the choir at this point - we all know this. This is more a design methodology discussion about the values and constraints between the two styles (PHB or Essentials) than it is a "WotC ruined my game" discussion.

As to the alignments on Paladins - basically for decades a good portion of the gaming population has been lambasting the failure of the lawful good paladin, and how horrid that concept is, etc etc etc. With 4E, the class finally went to wide open, and was generally heralded as a thing of magnificence, even if the grognards (self included) muttered in our corners that we were still gonna make ours LG. The fact that we're backpeddaling is curious.

In fact, the more I observe the Essentials line, the more it feels like an "Ooops. We're sorry. Here, let's reset everything back as close to the 3.5 design as we can. Ignore the 4.0 materials we've printed so far - in fact, once the books are sold you won't even see them any more."

There is a difference between a class and a build. A build changes some of the initial class features, but still selects from the pool of powers available to the class.

Are you saying that the blackguard can't choose Martyr's Blessing or Sacred Circle for their level 2 Utility power? Or do they not even get a level 2 Utility power?

Correct. At Level 2 you get, regardless of which Vice (re: build) you select, you get Vice's Reward.

Here's your level 1 powers/options:
Dark Menace (BG only)
Dread Smite (BG only)
Shroud of Shadow (BG only)
Spirit of Vice (BG only, determined by which vice you took)
Vengeance Strike
Vice at-will Power

You'll note that, out of all of that, nowhere do I have the option to select a level 1 Paladin at-will.

Here's another amusing aspect: Blackguards are alignment-restricted. I'm not saying that they SHOULDN'T BE, but after all the discussion that paladins should NOT be alignment-restricted and ... bang, right back where we started from, just on the other side.
Domination: Unaligned or Evil
Fury: Good, Unaligned, Evil, Chaotic Evil

I hope the rest of the session worked out.

We are so sorry you missed out. We fought the spiders, and then took on some undead with a Wraith (NASTY). I think it went well and everyone had fun, I was a little sloppy with my rules and I'll try to tighten that up significantly. I really appreciate having the opportunity of having some Paizo friends at my table! Good times!

This is very last minute, but it appears that my old passes are invalid/have already been used. Does anyone have a spare access pass I can use?

Matthew - Invited

Scott - T13e-V0uy-WCoq-E44W

Blackguard isn't a new class, it's a build for Paladin. Paladin already has a ton of powers to choose from at each level. I don't see the problem with a new build having a tight set of powers that match its theme to complement the pages of powers we already have for the class.

The Blackguard I quoted here is an example of the new character classes added, and is only intended to be representative of the new design direction. Regardless of "class" or "build" (a lesson in semantics), it follows the Essentials design philosophy. None of these builds really supplements a class as much as it rewrites the class to a new style. It's fine that you like that style. I however, have a preference for a more open design style, such as was presented in the Player Handbooks and Power books.

However, as noted, the new content - all the new classes and builds - are very limited in design.

Looks like MrMyth is my WotC username, so feel free to invite away!

I'm thinking of a Warforged Hunter to provide a good controller, so I'll see if I can get that in the system. :)

I haven't forgotten about you Matthew - unfortunately my work machine does NOT like Silverlight and won't open the scheduling page. I'll get you invited as soon as I get home, and you will be able to play right away.

Best,
David

I like having more focused and easier to use classes. I like having the original ones with plenty of options and ability to customize characters.

I would like to see them both supported going forward. Heroes of Shadow... somewhat does that. It provides new powers that PHB1 Paladins, Wizards and Clerics can certainly use.

However, as noted, the new content - all the new classes and builds - are very limited in design. I'm fine with that for now, and that isn't to say I don't like those classes - but I'd hate to see that format become the only design approach used by WotC.

And of course Matt says in five words what I needed a hundred to do. That's the point for me as well - I'd just hate to see that format become the only one.

Perfectly summed up, sir. See you tonight!

I'm happy to see WotC taking this route. As Mike Mearls points out in this article, characters used to be defined in play, not on their character sheets.

I like optimization and character building as much as the next guy, but when we sit down at the table I want to see characters - not stats and options.

Just in case you might be thinking this way (and nothing says you are, I just want to make sure there's no confusion on this) I am the very last person who is a min-maxer. My recent experience with the Virtual Table proved this when I'm running what I think are regular encounters (IAW the DMG encounter building) and the online players (who are all Pala-Locks, Slayers or Druid Sentinels with a passive perception of 24, and somehow manage to have almost five dump stats) just mow through them in seconds.

I fail to see why my PHB1 paladin, who has options and choices I make for him based on his background and story fluff, can't ALSO be defined by how I play him. Especially when my selections support the way I play him (IE my paladin might be a very pacificistic paladin, with more of the healy-protecty stuff, and your paladin might be very smitey, with more of the crunchy-stompy stuff.)

The key of course is that both of us can play an Essentials paladin two different ways, as you prefer. I just feel that PHB-style characters lend greater lattitude to do so by having more options. In the above example, I don't have the option to choose healy-stuff most of the time. Most of the time I have to choose the stompy-stuff, because I have no options. Again, I do have an option at level 1, between A and B, and then at 5,6,9 and 10 I have other options that are wide open. I just prefer the opportunity to have options at levels 1-10 (minus 4 and 8, the non-power levels).

The most important thing in the end however is that I don't find my preferences the "right" way to play, nor your preferences the "wrong" way to play. It's just, to me, 4E represented a lot of freedoms. It forced me to accept the "everything is core" aspect, and forced me as a DM to become more like Eberron ("If it's in D&D, it's in Eberron"). I've enjoyed that imancipation. Now, I see someone putting the shackles back on and it makes me nervous.

Wow. That was rather stunning, and I felt the clear base took it over the top! Well done!

Everything I've seen of the fluff, flavor and background have impressed me.

I've been real happy with the fluff.

I have to admit that I am not as pleased with the classes.

Essentials has taken the wide-open of 4E and forced you down an optimization path. Here's what I mean:

The Blackguard:
- At level 1, you get one choice in your character, and that one choice is defined by your vice (fury or destruction). There's only one at-will available per vice, so you only get one choice.
- At level 5 you get a daily power. This is not limited to the Blackguard option and is, in my opinion, the first real choice you get that makes your blackguard different than mine.
- At level 6 you get a utility power. Again, wide open to all paladin utility powers, leve 6 and below.
- At level 9 you get another open daily power.
- At level 10 you get another open utility power.

Aside from the vice choice, you really don't get a difference to make your blackguard different from mine until level 5. While you do have the options of different abilities and feats, your blackguard and mine will be almost identical up to level 5. Then, you get some option, again at six, and then at 9 and 10. So basically, by the time you get to level 10, you've made 4 choice differences that could customize your blackguard. Compare that to a regular paladin, who gets options at almost every single level. At level 1, my paladin can be completely different from your paladin in abilities, feats and powers.

This is a trait of the Essentials line, where you are channeled down a very specific path. I don't hate it, but I will admit that I'm not happy with the direction. 4E opened up the horizons of gaming for me, and now it's busy trying to herd everything back up again.

I plan to try out the VT tonight and figure out what my username is - if there is still room tomorrow, I'd be interested in joining in. :)

Either post here or PM Tiger_Dave over there and I'll invite you!

Just found out that my car will be in the shop tomorrow, so I wouldn't be going to the gym anyhow. If you've still got room, I'll be there. Account name is uciroleplayinggames.

Invitation sent. You should see a marker on your Current Campaigns page!

As an FYI, we currently have one striker and one defender. Could use a leader.

"... Emirikol sought Zahrimahn, his former mentor, and killed the man spectacularly in a public duel, declaring , "So it goes with any who dare mark Emirikol with their paltry shadow powers!" Then, Emirikol summoned a steed of shadow and began his legendary flight from the city, during which he killed all who opposed him with shadowy rays and fire."

They had me at Emirikol! Wow, if that didn't bring back memories of my favorite 1st ed DMG artwork (And the great and much-missed D.A. Trampier.)

I liked the fluff. I'm iffy about the class options (glanced, not read) and I am highly disappointed that the Vampire is a class, instead of a theme. I was also disappointed that they didn't go so far as to add the hybrid options and feats for it and the other classes.

The only casting issue I have from Snyder is Amy Adams for Lois Lane. Olivia Wilde would have been a better choice. I also have concerns with Snyder after seeing Sucker Punch - visually entertaining, horribly, horribly written story. The guy is great with visuals. Also, General Zod should have been saved for a sequel, perhaps start with Luthor who is the one entity that General Zod would view as something on par as he viewed Jor-El.

Meh. I am so tired of Luthor in the movies. Personally, I want to see "Superman Unleashed." It would be nice to see another fight where he really lets loose with his powers rather than being reactive to the whims of Luthor. I've never felt that they've managed to capture Luthor's capabilities in the films.

Two official bits of news:

Movie Title: Man of Steel

Villain: Zod, played by Michael Shannon.

Article

One hopes he can channel some Terrence Stamp, who was absolutely magnificent as Zod.

WotC community name is: P1NBACK. Send me an invite. ;)

Invited!

Now just seeing if Scott is willing to forgo a Weds of gym or not.

My DDI name is: PH_dungeon

PH - I have you invited. For the rest of you, still looking for a PM or a response back here so I can invite you.

The plan is to run Wednesday evening at 5pm Arizona time.
- 8pm Eastern, 7pm Central, 6pm Mountain, 5PM Pacific.

The event will run about 3 hours (don't want to keep the East Coast up too late).

Please bring a level 2 character, built to DMG 1, Page 143 standards:
- One level 1, 2 and 3 Magic Item
- 360gp (level 1 magic item's worth in gold)
Also set for the Eberron campaign:
- ALL races and classes
- Eberron deities, backgrounds, dragonmarks
- No Forgotten Realms-based or Dark Sun-specific backgrounds,
deities, themes, or equipment (in other words, no alternate realm
[u]flavor[/u] items)

The table will open at about 4:45pm. I will run it promptly at 5:00pm, regardless of who shows up. If you show up late, simply import your character and jump right in. I'd rather you had a chance to experience the table rather than get all froofy about 'game logic' for this first go-round.

Please let me know in advance if you will NOT be using the integrated voice chat during the game (IE don't have a mic, playing in baby's room and don't want to wake them, etc,.)

Well, let's try and get a definitive date going for an upcoming Wednesday. Who wants to DM?

I'll be happy to DM. For this one I will keep it restricted to invites only until I have all of you there, so either respond here with your DDI name, or PM Tiger_Dave over there so I know who to invite! I'll also like a ping on what your bestest times are. I won't be able to start prior to 8pm Eastern, 5PM Pacific.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:

A Wednesday evening would work pretty good for me. I don't have access to the beta test though. I do have access to D&D insider.

I wonder if I could just lend you one of my codes? I got into the Beta when I wasn't even subscribed and it seemed to work fine. Not sure how the actual integration of the CB and ATs might have changed that.

No. The codes are "tickets" that allow you access to a table. If you can't get past the doormen to even get to a table in the first place, the codes aren't going to do a diddle.

I agree that applying templates would be easier in 4e, but there may be some cross-game significance. It's a matter for finding the right way of implementing it. Anyways, thanks for the kind words.

I ran an introduction to Dark Sun for our local group, and we all felt that the Themes template really took the game to the next level. I'm kind of disappointed to see that mechanic languish for over a year.

TigerDave wrote:

right now I'm working on a conversion for Legacy of Fire

That seems to be the hot thing to do these days. ;p

Well. I certainly wouldn't want to be accused of following a trend. Poo. I just thought a nice desert romp would be fun. I wanted our home gamers to get a group going and just do one long campaign up to mid-paragon level - thought it would be nice.

This past Tuesday they added 1000 people signed up for the beta test and then another 3000 generic DDI members. This weekend looks to be a big stress test with an official event we're running (I have three tables set up) so I wouldn't expect to see another invite round until next week if you did not get one.

I'm part of the Beta and haven't had a chance to try it out. Any paizo forum goers wanna get a session going?

You guys can catch me over there as Tiger_Dave as well. I'd be happy to run anything for you - right now I'm working on a conversion for Legacy of Fire. During the days I hang out in the Beta group - and it has an integrated chat room. Hunt me up in there or PM me.

One of the things I found interesting is that the table system is designed for you to flag your game 1st Ed and on up. I thought that was interesting - the system doesn't hard-support prior editions of the game but really it takes just a little tweeking to input and play your non-4E campaign AND ADVERTISE IT AS SUCH.

Pretty cool, that.

Has anyone picked up this book? Does it require M&M to play, or is it self-contained?

I really enjoyed it too. I'm not too hot on memorizing mechanics and builds get my head all swirly, but for some reason putting it into "Batman does this ..." format really made sense to me. Yay!

Okay!

Ran my first go as DM tonight!

Got. Decimated.

One of the things I learned (yeah - its not DM vs Players - got that) is that you need to expect players who really know their stuff to show up at your table - LOL. I ran two encounters, one standard, one 'hard' and it was a complete joke. The group blazed through them like a hot knife through nothing but air! The most damage I got out was a poison save vs. end that the player couldn't save for the life of them.

Had a BLAST.

I can't say that this is any better than any other product out there, but I can say that it was pretty easy to build a map with pre-drawn drag-n-drop tiles, and importing characters and monsters from their persective builders.

If you're a 4E fan, and if you are an insider subscriber, I think you are going to have fun with this tool. If neither is your cup of tea, then have fun whatever you're gaming - I wish you nothing but the best!

Tah Dah!

TigerDave wrote:

Scott Betts wrote:

Darn tootin'.

Hey Scott - I'm the same ID over there as here - feel free to look me up.

I will, once they deliver my new links/passes. ;p Apparently I'm one of the accounts they have to enter manually, or something.

I had the same problem last night, but WotC_Josh took care of me right away. I recommend you PM him.

Darn tootin'.

Hey Scott - I'm the same ID over there as here - feel free to look me up.

As the title asks...

See if they'd like to join me at Denny's for a coffee and a chat.

Hey gang -

Round 2 of the Virtual Table beta test is out. I am not familiar with other applications, but I'd like to say that this looks GREAT! I am just now getting to applications and building my adventure, but the table looks beautiful, is rather intuitive to use, has built-in sound chat that sounds REAL CLEAN, and I can't wait to start playing games on this. I know most of you are in the "I'll believe it when I see it" and I am sure a lot of you are already entrenched in systems you already use and love, and all of this is absolutely perfectly okay, but I do think that you're going to like the VTT.

Wow, Finger of Death is seriously powerful. Espically when certain spells and such give Players an actual idea of how many HP a creature has, what resistances it has, what it's bloodied value is....Soo looking forward to this supplement!!

Yeah - I have a feeling this next book is going to be scary-licious! Read with all the lights in the house ON, however ... O.O

Can't say enough good things about him.

I absolutely ADORE his writing!

You can definitely see how his stories change in regard to his personal life issues. I really loved the first books in the Jhereg series, but when he got to Orca and beyond it was hard to keep me attentive. That was then, however, and its probably time for me to go back and do some re-reads.

Nah, I'm messing. Obviously the plots and all that bs are fiction, although in my mind it's debatable whether or not the matches are scripted/fixed.

Whether they're scripted or not (they are - too many tell-alls out there, sorry), it takes an amazing amount of endurance and athleticism to pull of what they do!

And while I'm not here to changer that opinion, I certainly don't agree with it. 4E only plays like a video game because a group RUNS 4E like a video game. 4E can just as easily support heavy Role-Play aspect campaigns as well as Roll-Play heavy campaigns. The reason I think 4E's considered more "gamer-friendly" is due to the power/spell system in that people think those abilities can ONLY be used in combat. So heaven forbid any Thinking outside the box happens!!

Can I hug you?

<HUUUGGGGGGGG>

This is truth. In fact, I myself am guilty of helping inspire a "video game" aspect because, at first, it was the easiest method to play the game.

In other words ...

1) When I was first learning the rules ...
2) and was sloppy with running the game ...
3) and I allowed the rest of the players to follow my clumsy lead ...

... our games were more board-gamish than they were role-play-gamish.

Experience has taught me a lot, and we're right back to the way we've played all our previous versions of the game. For example, our barbarian no longer executes a Howling Strike, but rather grips her battleaxe and charges into the battle yelling her customary "MEL SMASH!" I've really been getting away from the raw mechanics of the system at face value and learning how to apply them to a richer role-play session. Our games are getting more immersive, and a lot more story depth is coming through in our sessions because of it.

Wow, I guess I need to check out L5R4 then. :)

I will have to as well, though I hate Shawn Carman. Nothing against the man personally, and perhaps I'm unjustly dumping my dislike of the inevitable shift from the kami-centric storyline (Clan Wars) to the people-driven storyline of today.

The final encounter of a dungeon is too much for the characters to handle.

I just did the exact same thing this weekend. Snuck in a surprise round, showed the characters that the enemies were able to almost drop them in one hit, and I'll be darned if they didn't choose to stand and fight.

Go figure.

Well, if you ever need UAV instructor pilot, imagery analyst, indirect fire infantryman and cat lover ...

I'm not holding my breath, however ...

Is it lame to play the same class twice in a row, because I am thinking of doing that, but I what to limit my lameness as much as possible?

I'll see your lame and raise it ... I'd been stuck in playing Paladins for ... 30 years. Right now I'm really enjoying playing (4e) a Wizard, a Warlord, and my current fave, a Rune Priest.

We the people, in order to fill our bellies, do hereby ordain and establish: FAT CAT SEASON! No quota, no limits! Shoot to maim, we don't care. Just eat them all!

Great. My cat's kinda scrawny. Why couldn't it be SKINNY CAT SEASON??? (Looks in mirror) Wait a sec ... O.O

Watch it buddy, I'm not sure how meaty tiger paws are, but I'm willing to give 'em a taste.

Just walked the dog. Considering what I just stepped in you may want to select a different slice of the ol' tiger to nom on.

I won't speak for anyone else, but I agree with (person whom I can't remember) who said with PHB3 that all the "low hanging fruit had already been picked". In other words, we're looking pretty good in regards to options, Essentials line not included.

Future expansion product may look more like the forthcoming Heroes of Shadow book, which provides options for Essentials and PHB-style characters both. (I'd grab the WotC link discussing this but I just walked the wild dog and am a bit huffy-puffy right now).