Vendle's page

How many other people sold the armor of allies who were going to die in the next cutscene on their second playthrough in Origins?

Thanks to Black Dougal for mentioning the production schedule; this is a fantastic game considering the development time that went into it.

Thanks to my wife I have DA:2 on both PC and PS3, so I have been able to directly compare them.

My overall impressions are, in no particular order:

-The lack of customization for your allies in DA:2 is both good and bad. It means I don't have to worry about assembling 3 to 8 sets of amazing but obscure gear. It saves disk space for more of the other great stuff. But it's also a limit to your options, a change the typical RPG fan will not applaud.

-The environments get to the point of being recognizable/memorized in layout even in some cases where your character "hasn't been there before". This hasn't made the areas feel tedious (yet), and there are many new environments/layouts as you advance through the story. The element of discovering new places is still here.

-The appearance of the environments are well-rendered, especially in regard to space. Outdoor areas give a feel of vastness, though most of the explorable ground is narrow trail.

-The gameplay has been well-adapted to the console. Depending on your character build choices, you can have just three special attacks, or you can fill up six buttons and still need the radial menu to use potions and constant abilities (auras and battle stances).

-The questing, or fetching, part of the game is typical in length of time to complete to other RPGs. Where it tries to set itself apart are the plot twists. In more than half of the "bring me that box" quests, you can follow your orders or investigate deeper. Yes, this is used to set up chain quests, but that isn't all. In some cases you can choose to return to the quest-giver and explain the new circumstances, or you might choose to work for someone else midway through. You usually get rewarded in some fashion either way, so these are often bonus bits of lore to investigate. Sometimes it takes a bit of digging and negotiation to earn something special, like an item or new ally. Whatever decisions you make will change the game for your character in small and large ways, just as it did in Origins.

-The expanded dialogue options for your character are fantastic. To build on this, your character will change their wording based on which type of response you typically chose in the past. In many situations, a character with a history of kindness offers more soothing words than would a character who who usually responds bluntly or jokingly in exactly the same encounter. NPCs also change their reactions based on the personality you've constructed. If you're a bully and prone to violence, a smuggler might offer you some work. If you're more altrustic, a party member might find you approachable about a problem they're having.

-The reputation system is a little different. There aren't a pile of gifts to shower on whomever you're hoping to romance; you have to impress them by bringing them along with you and choosing words and actions that are compatible with their ideals. I like that the Friendship/Rivalry bar opens up more options for your characters too, instead of feeling like a tacked-on gimmick for story immersion. Overall, more effort involved if this is your focus, but not neccessary at all. I find this a very fun part of the game.

-For the more strategic player, I recommend the PC version. The mouse lends itself better to quickly changing camera angles than the thumbstick, and you can manage 10 hotkeys without resorting to the radial menu. For the action fan, DA:2 is a great fast-paced gore-fest on the console. I've been enjoying both styles on different difficuly settings.

-Definitely worth the money. I'm expecting a lot of replay value too, as I try characters of different classes/morals/motivations.

I agree on those issues as well LazarX. The Earthbenders were supposed to be held on an offshore metal platform, like an oil rig, but that sort of location would have cut into the nifty CGI budget.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Conquest.

Although I haven't seen this gem, it did get the #1 worst slot in an issue of Dragon magazine years back. That's got to count for something.

I actually liked the acting in The Last Airbender; I feel it was a very unfortunate script and director for them to be shackled with. Yes, it was far too much material to squeeze into a feature film, and I'm glad I didn't see it in 3D. I still enjoyed it more than any Matt Damon movie.

The level 20 capstone ability is cool but really useless. Games typically don't even get to level 20 let alone going past level 20. Most games tend to end around 17th from what I've seen.

Your arguement would seem to indicate that there's no reason for any class to have abilities at level 20.

I understand that most players will not reach level 20 with a character, or simply prefer a lower level range. There are some players that do play to 20 and beyond, however, which makes those capstones a really nice addition for those PCs.

We are very feat hungry, and I'm not wasting a feat for AC. My ac is already very high.

This is something I would never say when building a sword-n-board. Just my two cents.

I'm personally a fan of the rogue capstone ability at level 20. I just mention it because someone asked why a player would continue as a rogue instead of multiclassing.

I started playing 4E because I was curious about the mechanics, and frankly because it was definitely the easiest RPG to find a group for in my area. I always have the option of starting up a game myself, but I also like to be a PC some days.

I have kept playing 4E because I have grown to like the style of the mechanics. Most of the classes are comparable in ability to perform their roles, which I credit for fewer instances of PCs declaring something "unfair" or "broken". I also like powerful characters, and 4E seems to balance the high end better than 3.0 and 3.5.

I still see cases where min/maxing results in a character 2x more combat-effective than another, but the possibility for such will always remain in some degree until DMs are handing out pre-made PCs (and who wants that?).

The only thing I feel 4E lacks (and I can understand why) is a good rules set for creating unique items and constructs. One of my favorite 3.5 characters had the Craft Golem feat. This feat requires the DM to trust the PC not to abuse its use; that trust factor is removed in 4E, imo.

I'm going to have to go with Master Chief on this one, although I'm not a raving fanboy.
Instead of salvaged armor, he has a custom suit with regenerating shields that absorb laser fire. Apart from that, his suit is 'powered', granting above-human potential strength and speed. Apart from that, he was given genetic/bionic enhancements to increase his reflexes. Apart from that, he's damn lucky.

But then, Boba Fett wouldn't choose a stand-up fight, either. He probably already sabotaged the Chief's ship.

The only character of mine that was actually statted up and rejected that I can recall was a wood element goblin ("I'm a real boy!")

I'm usually pretty permitting but I've rejected vampires (would add needless environmental complications), Awakened dinosaurs (thematic concerns), and characters named Bob.

Except for that last one, I'm pretty sure I would allow even these ideas on a case-by-case basis.

eh I would let him as long as he knows I would strip his powers as to me that's a violation of his code. I rather not deal with drama over b!*@~ing so he could play his fallen paladin, use a different PC or leave the table as that kind of thing is disruptive and unfair to the other players. But I would be upfront and clear about it.

And I would hold up the article and ask if you could read, and then I would play fallen and if we wound up with a TPK because my paladin was dead weight I would say, "what can I say, the DM fell me without letting me actually try to play my character sorry guys". Hopefully I'd survive and at the very next table seek a redemption and play with a DM who's actually willing to go with what the setting says instead of his own personal hang ups.

TPKs are often the result of a restrictive DM and a stubborn, uncooperative player. But that's not really as fun for the group, in my experience. This is a cooperative game, yes?

I have a Facebook page and use it frequently, but not under my real name. It is sometimes a small hassle to connect with actual people I know when they can't just type in my name, but overall it works for me.

They put out some character stats on the kids when they released the DVD box; I think they decided to write them as 6th level characters. Venger was supposedly a 16th level sorcerer, and with Tiamat showing up now and then it's not so bad that Dungeon Master gave them artifacts.

Uni is still the second most useless PC I have seen.

Irresistable Spell

Just sayin'

Dragonhide was expanded on a little in the Draconomicon 3.5, along with some other weapons and gear. I like when my players are inventive, so I wouldn't make it too difficult to make bulette armor. Alas, I don't have any rules sources on this beyond the above.

As a DM, I am frequently trying to come up with backup plans for my villains. After all, they like living, right? If they know some powerful group is going to come charging in with holy smites, they'd reasonably try to tilt the odds.

Unfortunately, I often underestimate my group as well. Whether it be a very fast monk that runs down the BBEG or a sorcerer who just happens to know how to Copy Teleport, the PCs are very good at finishing their tasks.

I have used these options before because they are mostly rational and even available to the PCs:
1. The villain plays dead. Using a high Bluff, a sneaky/shadowy BBEG can take a hit and make it appear fatal. Best when the PCs are on a timetable to stop something else going on (boat leaving the dock, magic ritual charging up, etc.).
2. The villain gets turned undead, or gets Raised. An evil cleric might be able to handle this option best, and undead brutes are typically nastier the second time around.

Anyway, not strictly what you were looking for but hopefully useful backup-backup plans.

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you TOZ. (And those are some excellent plot hooks I'd be interested in!) It's just that I prefer to use the term 'epic' when describing an adventure involving levels and powers above what level 20 PCs have access to. It could certainly be applied to a style of play as well, although this is harder to come to a consensus on for, say, the purpose of categorizing a printed product or a sanctioned event. Example: Is it an epic game if you bring about the fall of an empire solely through combat? At level 6, or level 18?

Applying the term 'epic' to merely reflect the level range is a choice of convenience. I've had lots of fun in games that actually changed the campaign world in significant ways, but I can't say I haven't had as much fun with a richly-described tavern brawl. Depending on how much fun was had, my group and I might call both of these "epic".

I hope this clarifies how I choose to use the term. YMMV.

Heck, the only printed epic adventure I've played has little to do with gods.

The Quicksilver Hourglass

682: You have a habit of biting things: chewing your claws/fingernails, testing the hardness of gold coins or other small objects, etc. This goes nicely with traits of unusual teeth or mouths.

683: Wounds you inflict on others sometimes appear on your own skin and fade after a short while, but you do not feel the pain of them and rarely notice the occurance anymore unless someone points it out to you. If you inflicted cuts or stab wounds, your marks may resemble intense bruising or fresh or old scars.

With a sales tax attached, it's probably a better idea to make it legal.

The people I know who are already into this were already the sort of people who act as if the world owes them a living. I doubt that any of them would turn to alcohol if marijuana weren't available. At least one of them has gone on to trying more dangerous substances instead.

What I'm basically saying is recreational marijuana use, in my experience, is a symptom of an unmotivated selfish leech, not a cause and not ironclad truth in every instance. It certainly doesn't help those people to make its use legal, but it does take a huge burden off of our legal system. I'm against its use and for taxing it, which is the same as my stand on cigarettes.

I am admittedly strongly biased against habitual use of substances that alter brain chemistry... except caffeine. That's a wonder-drug!

I'd like to cast my vote against this with the arguement that I know too many people who smoke it and are nonproductive drains on society...

but it might be unfair to blame that on the drugs. I remain undecided.

People, in a general sense, tend not to make full use of a little power, so aside from a few Superman-types I don't think the world would be greatly different. Those motivated individuals with great power could indeed change the world in significant ways, making crops grow in deserts, wiping out diseases, etc. With them around, it might be a cleaner, happier world. Or WWIII.

If I had a small power, I think I would like to be a true polyglot. It would be nice to be able to share two-way communication with my tech support, the teller at the bank, and my buddy from the UK who calls us all "cheeky tossers".

I enjoyed my first week of DnD Encounters. The first encounter was quite challenging for my group, but we did make it through. I used the pre-gen cleric and revived party members 7 times. Seven. Times.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to make it to the second week's adventure, but I heard it was a romp that lasted all of 25 minutes. I guess the DM rolled pretty poorly.

I'd like to take the pre-gen cleric and tweak her to have a different race and a better feat, but I'm not sure if it would be considered a "new" character or not.

In my group's epic game that ran quite a few sessions, it started to get very difficult to challenge the PCs. This was largely due to three characters:

1.) Epic Sorcerer/Eldritch Knight with Epic Spellcasting. A twin-Intensified (maximize it, then double it) Enervation (target loses 16 levels) usually started the fight. He also had a permanent Divination that dealt 10d6 lightning damage to any creature attempting to hide from him within 200 feet. And since lightning was his specialty, he also had an Intensified version of Chain Lightning.

2.) Epic Cleric with Epic Spellcasting, Automatic Quicken Spells (up to 9th), and most item creation feats including Craft Construct. He wound up studying a gargantuan statue Guardian of Waterdeep and copied it, meaning he had a gargantuan stone golem following him around ethereally.

3.) Half-red dragon minotaur barbarian/frenzied berzerker with Intimidating Rage meant that most enemies could not even stand and fight him. The cleric graciously gave him an item to make him immune to mental influence, too.

It took some time, but I did put together some encounters that tested their limits. My favorite was the Balor Assassin hiding (immune electricity) with full cover on the ceiling of a smoke-filled room, the floor of which was nearly filled with obstacles, glyph traps set for living targets, and mindless undead.

My first thought would be that, were I the DM, I would have most of the players agreeing if I judged that elephants and horses could not climb ladders. I have the advantage of playing with an experienced group that is comfortable with minor rules changes for the sake of "realism", or what should be possible within limits in the game.

If we're just wanting to see the numbers, there are RPGA games. Apologies if I've offended a 4E fan; this is not a dig on 4th Ed. but rather at the way some local games are run. That's just my two cents.

More taxes and gov't involvement/road-blocking of our daily lives. Perhaps conservatives (actual conservatives) will have a stronger voter turnout for the Senate and House seats next time.

My take on the issue is not that universal healthcare is undesirable, because obviously we want all Americans happy and healthy. The problems result from who pays, who's accountable, and who makes the choices when it comes to life and welfare of patients. I for one do not want hospitals to be another arm of the government.

I'm very pleased that doctors in America can make a substantial living because they have a necessary and costly skillset. That is a good example of the American dream, IMO. Reforming should first be brought to all the medical malpractice suits that drive up costs for everybody. Next, people tend to forget that the system we have now allows nearly everyone to get emergency medical treatment whether they can afford it or not. I don't know the numbers, but my guess is that the current costs make this model unstustainable. It also doesn't address the many cases that require followup treatment or life-long medication. Perhaps another step is to analyze the profit margins of major pharmacutical companies. I get the impression (though I could be wrong) that the costs of some prescriptions are totally unjustified.

This reminds me of the old days when hospitals were run by the churches and provided free care for just about anyone who absolutely required it. Doctors and nurses were paid by charitable non-profit organizations, and it seemed that most people were happy with this system.

As far as I know, some clinics still provide free care through the courtesy of charities. What's really unfortunate are all the closings or reductions of Christian hospitals because they would not agree to provide abortions, and thus could no longer gain gov't support/tax exemptions.

Try switching to the Coffee Party?

Paladins: Holier than thou.

Wizards: Busy telling the laws of physics to shut up and sit down. -credit to OotS

Fighter: I hit it again!

#3: I played a stoic Brujah in a Vampire:TM game for quite a while. Stoic as in, he resisted blood frenzy every time, except one random occasion. He was a French American turned during WWII, and decided that the best way to quietly take power was to appear to be the strong-arm thug everyone assumed he was. He resisted frenzy from other player's mental manipulation, burning buildings, rooms painted in blood, and carrying other players away from fights while they were in frenzy. He now carries a CD player with a musical score recorded that paralyzes vampires, and strangely no one else in the group has asked him to use it or copy it.

#2: D&D 3.5, my character for a couple games was a lantern archon cleric. It was kind of hard for a little sphere of glowing vapor to wear items, but the abilities to fly and teleport at will certainly help when you're eaten by a T-rex.

#1: Another character in that same party was a wizard... large size tauric spider / anthropomorphic skunk. He was not terribly effective after losing so many caster levels for racial adjustment.

Addressing the Mislead spell, that spell states that the caster gains the benefit of invisibility. Displacement does not, so there isn't much benefit in comparing the scenarios, regardless of where the caster chooses to stand.

And now, a tangent for Mislead

That's my interpretation.

This has been an entertaining read!

It does follow logically (and scientifically, which is one of the most amusing angles of this issue) that Displacement does provide a mellow 'form' of concealment such that precision damage would be prevented. It has all the intent of a glamour obfuscating to the utmost of its ability; woe to the rogue enemy that relies on sight!

However, by my reading it seems pretty clear that concealment is not involved (although it is given a tip of the hat), and I think that most people would interpret "may target the subject normally" to include precision-based attacks.

That's my take on it until I see errata that says otherwise. Excellent post Amofus.

I'm half-gamer, half-GM.

I kill the monsters and save the villages, but I also create the monsters near the villages. It's somewhat self-defeating.

edit: For the sake of conforming to the thread, I'm half-human, half-dwarf with several of the wrong traits of each; short and stocky with no alcohol tolerance and a tendency to wander.

161. Malicious Late Hit - Cause damage to an enemy already damaged this round. Must be cast as a held action.

I am another player with the opinion that "this needs clarification" because the way I read the core rulebook now it seems to be specifically limiting the permanent enhancements and qualities on the weapon to +10, and not limiting temporary bonuses or temporary qualities. The parenthesies in the line mentioning +10 that are meant for clarification can be interpreted as a limiting factor.

As to whether the +10 limit SHOULD apply in all situations until epic levels, that's a horse of a different color. I'm not yet convinced either way because 1.) I don't like limitations in general and 2.) I know this could be one of the most easily exploited numbers for munchkins to go on parade with.

IMHO, my two cents.

Bad wish example:
PCs are looking for a dead king's tomb so they can get his sword. One player earns a wish.
Player: "I wish to be the posessor of the sword."
DM: You're now a dead king.

Good thing for him another party member had a wish, too.

Most people use the term "pro-choice" because it sounds less bloodthirsty and doesn't remind people as much that an inconvenient life is involved. But hey, if you're pro-abortion that's cool, too.

As for the Republican mentioned, yeah he sounds a little too... unbalanced. I'd vote for the other guy next time, unless they supported a public option.

Lemurion,

I would agree with you completely, except that I don't believe the GM and the player have equal consideration when it comes to the game's style and content. The majority of that responsibility, stated in most RPG rules books, lies with the GM. As the GM typically also invests more into the game (preparation, materials, personalities, setting, etc.) it is my opinion that the player should concede to the GM in most situations of conflict. This isn't done because the GM's enjoyment is more important, it is done for the total enjoyment of the gaming table.

IMHO, a good GM will try to make clear what is allowed and expected in a particular game/campaign/their table. Time, caffeine, and other factors will not allow a full understanding, so some leeway is expected at both ends for courtesy's sake.

Let's play nice and have fun.

I just finished The Traveler's Gift by Andy Andrews. I don't typically pick out motivational books for myself (read: never) but since this was literally a gift I gave it a chance. The story is enjoyable and uplifting and puts together a decent list of "rules to live by". Perhaps because I'm used to fantasy stories, I gave a critical eye to his characters, which I felt were not very developed or even distinct from one another. Final grade: a surprising B.

Joggers don't taste good;
Too salty and stringy meat.
Wendy's is better.

I play the only human of an 8-character party in one campaign, and although it doesn't seem to be a popular choice I have no complaints of being "underpowered" or at a disadvantage. I think the versatility of humans shines just as well with a base class (my choice being human wizard) as it does with a hybrid. The bonuses to defenses have come in handy several times, but the extra at-will is great. As a wizard, I can have an area spell (Chilling Cloud), a direct damage spell with far range (Magic Missile) and the option of a battlefield control/obstacle spell (Storm Pillar). Having unlimited access to three different energy types has also been useful.

edit footnote: Dwarves have great racial abilities, but we don't have any at my table!

I read this one years ago, but it is still one of my favorites. A lot of science fiction tales will borrow a little splash from history books to give their story an extra grounding and verisimilitude. This book does far better, incorporating the Game of the far future with the legends of the past in a refreshingly believable spin. If you haven't read this yet, you should.

I'm a fan of Greater Curse. Ability to shut down the enemy's class features? Yes, please.

*zap* No spellcasting for you, Mr. Lich.

Thanks to Houstonderek and pres man for offering some interesting perspectives on the subject. Although I can't say I agree with everything said (by any other post here, in fact), it is good to be reminded of how many facets "gay marriage" and "civil unions" has.

The DD has been one of my favorite PrCs since it appeared in Sword and Fist 3.0. Nicely done conversion!

I'm also playing with a few people on Lumiel as Elyos. Our 'Legion' is Eternal Flame. Most of us are in the 20's now, but I tend to play a lot of alts so I don't advance as quickly as some can.

Personally, I don't like Drizzt for a combination of reasons pretty much covered already. First is my first-hand experience reading the novels. Yes, he did start out as an exciting heroic figure and then got fairly depressing, to put it bluntly.

I also have had more encounters with Drizzt clones than I care to count; all those poorly played copies kind of drag his name through the mud.
Lastly, I suppose the author's style was less appealing as I got older. Perhaps my tastes have changed; Drizzt novels just aren't my favorite use of leisure time.

The Tale of Krispos series by Harry Turtledove has one or two prominent gay characters. All the others I've read have already been mentioned.

This game is already being played in South Korea, and soon will be unveiled in the U.S. You can read more about it in Wikipedia.

I have seen this game played in Beta, and I am impressed. The graphics are exceptional, from armor and character models to beasts and monsters to water effects and buildings and landscape. I haven't yet seen the higher character levels and zones of the game world, so I can't say if the "end game" is robust.

Character creation allows for a huge variety in your avatar's appearance. I made a rather convincing halfling, while my friend created a tall muscled warrior and then a dwarf-like cleric.
I found the storyline's beginning to be mildly interesting, although a bit narrow as all characters begin as one of two races; this could be an issue for immersive roleplayers. I am pleased so far with the crafting system; later on, the crafting system should allow players to choose (within limits) the style and color of the items they create.

Well, now Jedit is an 80 warlock and Thetiefling is my latest 'main'. Man, I still have too many alts. Anyway, I encourage people to check out the latest patch content: the Argent Tournament and other raids and group instances. The Test of Champions, normal difficulty, can be done with a fairly fresh group of five level 80's and rewards gear that equals or exceeds most heroic instance rare drops, with a loot table that should allow for 3-5 gear pieces for each class-talent spec, allowing for multiple runs. It also has a heroic difficulty level for players who are experienced heroic-runners.

Even if you can't find a group, the grounds outside the instance provide new dailies that give nice gold rewards and faction; you can work through some preliminary quests to represent your home race and later your faction's other races as well. This has the late-game benefit of building faction with those 5 races, just in case you want the reputation without the runecloth farming, etc.