Axcalibar's page

61 posts (77 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I sidestep this incredibly divisive issue entirely in my campaign. Goblins don't have babies. There are no goblins (or other monstrous races) that are not adults. How does that work? Monsters are people who have become what they are on the inside. The god of monsters - who cannot create, but only corrupt - chooses people who have abominable qualities and, in exchange for their service, transforms them. Of course not all evil people become monsters... at least not superficially.

The dilemma is eliminated. All goblins are irredeemably evil, so the PCs can feel free to put them asunder without pesky alignment concerns. No finding and raising a goblin baby that eventually grows up to hate humans anyway... no leaving them to die alone or without protection. Just slay and get on with the game, knowing that in eliminating an evil being, you have prevented future harm to innocents.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oddly enough, I was just catching up on OotS, and came across this.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0700.html


I use them interchangably. It's tough to break from calling our hobby the name it had been for over a decade. My players know what I mean anyway. They know better than to think I'd consider playing the game currently bearing the name of D&D.


Talynonyx wrote:
Mikaze wrote:

Toilets

17-20 Outhouse Mimic
Totally using that one!

I used that one, only it was in d20 Modern so it was a urinal in a public bathroom.


Artax! What has the swamp of sadness done to you!? Artax? Artaaaaaaaax!!!

GAME OVER


My call would be "No, Mark."
I interpret "full-fledged and free-willed", nonetheless, as an NPC.


I would definitely jump at the chance.


The Bestiary is out...
so...

Where is the agathions at?

I noticed they're not in the PRD monster list.


ONE THING 4E GAVE US... Human Papillomavirus.


Since Google has failed me, can someone please tell me where to find those glorious one panel comics that illustrate typos from gaming/fantasy?


I'd like to see Paizo do a modern [optionally supernatural] setting. Maybe they'd cut to the chase with the classes and just let players be what they want from the beginning (Soldier instead of Strong Hero).


kessukoofah wrote:


Ok, just because I don't want to have to create an entire new thread just to ask a question, and because, though this isn't the first time i've heard this, i finally have enough time to post this right after reading it: What is wrong with that movie? I watched it, enjoyed it, and it was one of the things that got me interested in DnD! Why does everyone dislike it so much? what was wrong? not enough magic? not enough sword swinging heroism? The plot was messed up? what? All i ever hear is that it was bad. no reasons why.

(as a side note, new coke is totally not the same as Coca-Cola. everyone knows that...)

Well, for one thing, the main character distracts a beholder with a friggin' rock, but you know what, if you REALLY want reasons, just refer to Spoony's rant. He pretty much covers it.

http://www.spoonyexperiment.com/rants/DungeonsAndDragons/

After you finish that, take a look at his other stuff.


If the game is disrupted by having most of the party in the inn (where something is going to happen) while the druid is out squatting in the woods outside of town, you could:

a) Explain to the druid player metagame the need to keep the party together.
b) Let the druid squat in the woods and miss out on the excitement at the inn.
c) Roll behind the screen and announce that the druid is attacked by ghouls (or whatever is appropriately punishing).

If where they stayed the night had no bearing on the plot, I'd just let it go. No rolling for random encounters or anything.


Sokka from Avatar: The Last Airbender was very Xander-like up until the third season when he received special training from a sword master.


Neithan wrote:

I looked it up and on earth, falling objects accelerate by 9,81m every second until they have reached terminal velocity, which for a skydiver is about 190-200 km/h. This seems to be 54 m/s, which would be attained after 5,5 seconds.

Let's say you fall 9,81 in the first second (which you don't, because you had less speed for most of this second), another 19,62 in the second second, and so on until 58,86 m in the sixth second. All added up, you end with about 200 m fall in these 6 seconds. Which is 690 feet. Not 200 feet.

Even if you say you fall 0 meter in the first second and 9,81 in the second, you still fall 140m/460'. Let's go for the middle and say 170m/560'. Which is not 200 feet.

I don't know if someone in armor and with a backpack has greater drag, which would lower treminal velocity speed but in any event, I think it's fairly save to set maximum falling damage at 40d6 for 400 feet.

Perhaps the designers at WotC didn't consider it from an "on Earth" persepective. Maybe 20d6 is the most six-siders they expected a group (or a dice collector) to have available. I prefer to run with the philosophy that a given D&D campaign world is not (similar to) Earth. That's why in my homebrew world, gravity turns cocky barbarians into "ground-pudding".

It is useful information for a d20 Modern campaign. Knowing that humans fall nearly 700' per round could come in handy if players had to abandon an aircraft, at least to determine the number of rounds their allies had to effect a rescue effort. Then again, we're talking action movie cinematics, so need not be married to accurately modeling physics.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Throwing a grappling hook sounds like an excellent use for CMB.

Agreed. Size, and therefore reach, should be a factor.


Supposedly the cap is there to represent terminal velocity. However, considering what HPs are supposed to represent (see below), I'd say the 1d6/10' is way too low. I don't care how lucky "the heroes" think they are... no one is going to survive a fall of 450' in my game (since it is my game I can say how gravity works). Can you say "grease spot"? I think it's incontrovertible that a fall from that height would be substantially physically damaging.

Gary Gygax wrote in the old 1E DMG (page 61):
"Damage scored to characters or certain monsters is actually not substantially physical -- a mere nick or scratch until the last handful of hit points are considered -- it is a matter for wearing away the endurance, the luck, the magical protections. With respect to most monsters such damage is, in fact, more physically substantial, although as with adjustments in armor class rating for speed and agility, there are also similar additions in hit points."

A good essay on this can be found here:
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/explaining-hit-points.html


Wait a minute... I thought Use Rope was gone and now it shows up in the Pathfinder RPG Beta Preview #4 under Grappling Hook. Is it in or out?


I am 28, married with three children. We have an okay income but a large amount of debt. Contrast with my players. They are all close to my age, but none are married or have kids. A few live with parents. Their incomes support only themselves and they are largely debt free.

Of course, they're psyched about playing 4e. Even if I liked the new system I wouldn't prioritize it over food and diapers. I've made it clear that my campaign will continue under 3.5, at least until the PFRPG comes out.

Well, on June 7th only two people showed up. No one answered when called. I found out Monday that a friend from out of town had been visiting to play 4e on Friday. Since my game is on Saturday, I take it they played until the wee hours and then sacked out the rest of the day. Well great.

So since the three of us was enough to play, we generated 3rd level Pathfinder characters and ran them through a simple dungeon. The party was: a dwarven cleric (of a fire and strength god), a elven wizard NPC, and a halfling bard. Not a very heavy hitting party, but they did alright until they got sloppy.

They entered the final chamber where they confronted a necromancer and four ghouls. While the bard hung back and performed and the wizard lobbed spells, the cleric went forward and was jumped by all four ghouls. Despite his high AC, he was eventually paralyzed for the full 5 rounds. By the time he became unparalyzed, his step backwards to heal was moot and the ghouls soon brought him down. In the meantime, the necromancer blinded the bard and menaced him with a spectral hand delivering chilling touches. He drew his sword and charged blindly into melee. Obviously, a blind bard can't hit anything. When the bard was brought down I called the battle over.

Here's what gets me. They expected some Deus Ex Machina to come in and make them not dead and eaten by ghouls. Honestly, in a regular game maybe, but in a one-off? I asked him why he didn't turn and he replied that he "wasn't a turning cleric" due to his low charisma (of 8). This is a lame excuse even under 3.5 turning rules, but in PF it's unforgivable. That would've been 2d6 positive energy, enough to potentially bring them down to nubbins. They may not have fled, but it could've reduced them significantly in HP.

I'm burned out, obviously. The game hasn't provided the enjoyment it once did. I honestly don't know how I can expect my players to understand when we have such massively different references. Honestly, I've enjoyed my time off. I've been building stuff, gardening, reading, playing the pile of unfinished PS2 games, and doing various things with the family. My players can get their 4e ya-yas out and, if they don't suck, they can rejoin my game when I feel like running it again.


Considering that I give a perplexed stare when someone uses sports metaphors to explain things to me, I consider it an act of courtesy to refrain from doing the same with my own hobby. So around coworkers and strangers no. Also I don't see that not volunteering information = hiding or being ashamed.


Neithan wrote:
Now that video games are slowly becoming out, what will the next big thing be. You know, the one that most of us will condemn and that will lead us to form protests against it. ^^

Generation 1> Wireless devices

Generation 2> Nanotechnology
Generation 3> Personal Tactical Nukes
Generation 4> Pointy Sticks


Gray wrote:
...I'd be curious if you are running a homebrew, or prewritten modules.

The only prewritten module I've ever run is "Escape from Zanzer Tem's Dungeon", converted to 3rd edition. In fact my first D&D campaign sprang forth from it. Since then everything has been homebrew.

Of course, my idea of game preparation is to remember what happened the previous session, then make things up as I go. I rarely take notes, but keep an overarching storyline in mind. I put more thought into my campaign world than the game itself. Recently I've been reimagining Heroshi as a fantasy setting set apart from D&D.


4e TV Commercial

Beholder goes unnoticed by oblivious bystanders... much like gaming itself!


from FF Compendium:
The CUARL is almost surely based on the COEURL from A.E. Van Vogt's short story "Black Destroyer". In it, there's an alien creature resembling a panther with tentacles and psionic powers. The Displacer Beast (from Dungeons and Dragons) was also likely based on this monster.

For my campaign world I'm developing creatures to fill the niches of the Mind Flayers, Gith, and Beholder among others. It's just a good idea at least for the sake of setting ones campaign apart. I also intend to make my own dragon types so that players can't rely on their color coding metagame knowledge.


The Jade wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:

For some reason I saw this thread title as

Grognards: Experience with Quilting

ooooo a quilting Thread ..;-)

I read it that way a couple times after reading it correctly the first time.

Perhaps that should be a thread. Any old gamers here want to admit to quilting?

Maybe in the interim I'll get my wife to teach me. With my wife's embroidery machine (and its digitizing software) I could make an awesome D&D themed quilt! Seriously... I'll post pictures when it's done.


Pax Veritas wrote:

...the doctor is in.

1) How do you feel toward 4th edition?
2) How long was your current campaign running before the break?
3) Were your players good players? Did they bring the story to life, or bring you down?
4) For every hour of game, how many hours of prep time were you putting in?
5) Overall, how long have you been playing dnd?
6) Is dnd your primary rpg?

For some of the questions above, have a look at my campaign page. My position on 4th is explained in the news posts (esp. June 11 and May 14).

I've been playing for 16 years (started at 12 ducking "D&D-is-of-the Devil" Dad) and have DMd for 8 (started with 3e) The current campaign has been going for about two years, starting at 12th level and has gotten to 21. My players are generally pretty good in game, but some of my concerns seem to be out of game.

Y'see, I am married and have 3 squirts (1,3&5). My daughter plays the best thief I've ever seen! My players are all single and half live with parents. They have a lot of disposable income. So maybe part of my frustration with them is that I can't think of a way to tell them I have other responsibilities (than buying more games) that won't sound condescending.

Also, the last time we were supposed to play... was June 7. Only half my group showed. The others were uncontactable. So the three of us made 3rd level PFRPG characters and I ran a few encounters. The final encounter ended in a TPK because (for starters) the cleric refused to channel energy "because he wasn't a turning cleric". That player also wanted a deus ex machina to make them not dead and eaten by ghouls... in a one-off. Oh, and the EL was only 1 higher than their modified party level.

So part of the problem is metagame stuff intruding and clash of playing styles. Thanks for the advice, all, but do continue to share your stories of your breaks from gaming as well.


This sounds like a great solution. I'll definitely be devising something like this for my campaign. Actually, the augments thing sounds like one of my ideas. Geists: spirits that inhabit a certain type of object. It's sort of like an intelligent weapon, only it has its own will and carries certain weapon properties with it. So a schwertgeist (sword spirit) with keen and flaming properties can bind with any blade and confers those properties to it.


I've put my game on hiatus. Seems I can't bring myself to come off it. As much as I'd love to complete my current campaign (in part out of defiance to WotC), I'm just not feeling the motivation to pick it up again. I figure I'm stuck until I figure out what exactly is keeping me from it.

I invite the great old ones* to share some of their experiences with falling out of gaming. What was the cause? How long did it last? What brought you back?

*:No, not THOSE Old Ones!


I've simply been using opposed CMB checks. It seems to work pretty well, but we haven't play tested it for very long. Can anyone posit a reason not to do it this way?


At our last game (the same weekend 4th came out) only half my group showed up, so we made 3rd level PF characters and I sent them through a short adventure. One PC was a dwarven cleric (of a fire and strength god). Not a very heavy hitting party, but they did well until they got sloppy.

In the final chamber where they confronted a necromancer and four ghouls. The cleric went forward and was promptly jumped by all four ghouls. Despite his high AC, he was eventually paralyzed for the full 5 rounds. By the time he became unparalyzed, his step backwards to heal was moot and the ghouls soon brought him down. The encounter ended in a TPK.

I asked him why he didn't turn and he replied that he "wasn't a turning cleric" due to his low charisma (of 8). This is a lame excuse even under 3.5 turning rules. They may not have been forced to flee, but it could've reduced them significantly in HP. Also, I was perplexed by his decision to close with the enemy considering that his prior tactic in battle had been using the flame burst power of the Fire domain.

I think the unlimited use domain/school powers are great. A casters fall back attack should be magical as well. My wizard NPC was a diviner. I never thought I'd have a good reason to play one of those. As far as the channeling thing goes, it was player ineptitude rather than a rules flaw. In my regular campaign another PC cleric (a troll) has also never used turning for the same reason. I thought the PF channeling rule would be incentive enough to utilize it, but there seems to be a sort of mental block surrounding it.


I have two to choose from, the NSLGS (not so) and the OFLGS (overly). Hence, why I'm loving the Paizo store. Clerks that try too hard are as bad as the rude ones sometimes.

aegrist13 wrote:
We used to have 2 or 3 more stores, but they've since gone under. There isn't a very cohesive gamer community in the metro Atlanta area and frankly a good portion of it is frightening.

What about the Sword of the Chicken [Phoenix]? Is that still around? When I was there we were playing 2nd edition, and yes, the group I played with was pretty scary.


In my campaign world I have a LN deity in the "judge of the dead" niche. His clerics run undead prisons. If a person gets a 40 year sentence and dies 25 years into it, they get to spend the next 15 years as a zombie. This prevents resurrection, so no cheating by dying and having ones minions dig them up for a res.


My recent conclusion is that it's an issue of trading freedom for safety. In this case, safety from difficult mechanics that either slow down or unbalance play. They lost me when I found out their method of simplifying was to drastically reduce player's options.

I'm thinking of classes and races especially. It's like they looked at a class and decided that since they couldn't settle on the perfect way to fit the class into their perfect order, he'll just have to wait until they can beat him into line. "Too bad, upstart! Maybe next year!"

I am so pleased that Paizo has showed up WotC by the mere fact that they at least have new ideas for all of the classes.


Those who are simply altering the existing sheet remember to correct Spellcraft to INT, Swim to STR, and others that might've come up on the errata board.


Carl Cramér wrote:

#4. Read the core books, I like it.

Having a hard time getting my friends interested in even a playtest, but fact is I flatly refuse to actually stat anything up for 3.5 anymore, so in the end they'll have to.

We'll see which way it goes.

Looks like for your players, it's time to find a new GM.

I'm a #9.


On the character sheet, Spellcraft is listed as a DEX skill.


For a while I took down the poll results regularly, wondering if any trends would become perceptible. After about a month I stopped because I saw the direction it was going. I came across these notes nearly two months later and have decided to post my findings. I'm not here to prove anything... just draw your own conclusions... or don't.

Friday, March 7
3->4: 4%
4->3: 8%
4: 20%
3: 50%
?: 16%
459 votes

Friday, March 14
3->4: 4%
4->3: 9%
4: 20%
3: 48%
?: 17%
567 votes

Thursday, March 20
3->4: 4%
4->3: 11%
4: 19%
3: 46%
?: 17%
684 votes

Friday, March 28
3->4: 4%
4->3: 13%
4: 18%
3: 45%
?: 18%
872 votes

Monday, April 7
3->4: 4%
4->3: 13%
4: 16%
3: 46%
?: 18%
1015 votes

Thursday, May 29
3->4: 4%
4->3: 15%
4: 16%
3: 46%
?: 17%
1189 votes


Seldriss wrote:

I printed both versions at work.

For free.
:D

Me too. Hooray for an isolated office with an expensive printer in it!


Taliesin Hoyle wrote:

AFGNCAAP? WTF? LMAOROFLCOPTER. OMGWTFBBQ. OOAQIC,I82QB4IP.

Obnoxious, isn't it?

What're obnoxious to me are "roleplayers" who are unfamiliar with Zork, and those who lack either curiosity or the ability to use a search engine. ROFLMAOZEDONG


My thought was that smiting could be an application of channeling energy, one that Paladins get at first level while the turning/rebuking option becomes available later. The same could go for the laying on hands ability.


The Black Bard wrote:
...a skill system that tickled my proverbial pickle!

You know, Black Bard? I don't think that's something one AFGNCAAP should say to another AFGNCAAP. Yeah. A little creepy. Mmhmm.


I'm not touching a Forgotten Realms that doesn't have Drizzt AND COMPANY, and honestly, I don't give a flying rats bum about anything FR except Drizzt & Co.


Erik Mona wrote:


You do not need to worry at all about changes of this magnitude. Whether or not an increase in starting hit points has a long-term effect on "portability" of stat blocks between systems is an interesting and useful discussion. Suggesting that we change the core classes or races or that we ditch Vancian spellcasting or what have you is not helpful, as it violates the spirit of the project.

Some of these suggestions are really cool, and I can already see an "add-on options" book forming in my head, but we are not going to reinvent the wheel into a square.

That is what impresses me about Paizo: respecting the spirit of the game.


I think that the smiting power and turning should have the same pool of energy, let's say Channeling. A paladin can use their Channeling to either turn or smite.


Jason Grubiak wrote:


Now as far as your hypothetical situation. If WotC decides to go back to 3.5 because 4th was a flop....I would re-buy the Core Rulebooks only if they had errata and other improvements. If they just reprinted the 3.5 Corebooks no way would I re-purchase them even if it meant supporting the hobby. I just dont have the money to spend $150 on something I already have.

I'd buy D&D Classic only because at the rate my core books disintegrate (about 4 years), it'd likely come along just in time. I plan on buying a new set of 3.5 in June.


David Marks wrote:
Cpt_kirstov wrote:


so in the aforementioned poison scenario, if you get poisoned in the first fight and just keep going you could go the entire dungeon without being able to use once per encounter abilities a second time?

BTW thanks for helping with our questions

Even in 3.5 poison only lasts for a minute, and I wouldn't expect poison to last any longer based on what we've heard so far. Still, good question! :)

from the D&D SRD:

When a character takes damage from an attack with a poisoned weapon, touches an item smeared with contact poison, consumes poisoned food or drink, or is otherwise poisoned, he must make a Fortitude saving throw. If he fails, he takes the poison’s initial damage (usually ability damage). Even if he succeeds, he typically faces more damage 1 minute later, which he can also avoid with a successful Fortitude saving throw.

It's not GONE a minute later. You have to recover those lost ability points the conventional way: one per night of rest or a Restoration spell.


Cylerist wrote:


Gee all of it?!!?

I guess it is just me but this is just a too simplistic way to do things - no matter the casters level (1st or 25th) once effected by a spell you have the same chance to break it?? Sorry I don'y like it.
No jogging or sprinting just +2 if you run? Again too simple for me I can handle more details then that without the game slowing down.

I agree completely. So the charm spell attacks the targets Will defense and the next round he has a base 55% chance of canceling it. Lame. I guess those mods mentioned in the last sentence could address that, but I don't see why they couldn't just keep the saves the way they are and avoid the issue entirely. I always thought they worked great.


New to me:
* Running is +2 squares flat
* Saving throws are no longer Fort/Ref/Will (those're defences) but a flat roll of 10 or higher to end an effect.
* Durations last until you save or the encounter ends. "That viper's poison would've had me if we hadn't killed it so fast!"
* Reach only counts on your turn.
* Charging is all good

*heavy sigh* So what parts changed your mind, Cy?


Tharen the Damned wrote:


#3 is weird and #4 is ass variants!

edit: ass as in donkey of course not as in backside!

They're doing a Shrek Campaign Setting?


CEBrown wrote:


I suspect it's more like:
70% will buy the rules within the first two months.
Another 20% will buy them eventually, unless the game is absolutely horrible.

About 1/3 of the first group will convert almost immediately.

IFF the game is any good, about half of the rest of that group AND half of the second group will convert over the next 6-12 months.
Half of whatever is left will "play occasionally" - say at tournaments, pick-up days and "D&D Days" only.

It'd end up around 50/50 by the end of a year, assuming those who "play [4e] occasionally" will play 3e regularly. I would agree to that.

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>