BrotherD's page

If you all could perhaps rank these books from best to worst and add any comments thoughts, I would really appreciate it!

Races of Stone
Races of Destiny
Races of the Wild
Cityscape
Stormwrack
Complete Adventurer
Weapons of Legacy

Races of Stone - I found this one to be a bit boring. I don't see a lot of dwarf PCs in my game as a DM, and as a player, I've never had the interest to play one. I just can't take them seriously; they end up being walking cliches (in my gaming experiences, anyway), so a book that devotes one-third of its material to the race didn't appeal to me. I didn't like the goliaths for much of the same reason - they don't seem like something I'd ever use DM- or player-wise. The monsters seem a bit overpowered, and overall, I was bored with the material.

Races of Destiny - This one, I liked a lot, however. I seem to be in the minority when it comes to the players in my group, but I REALLY like the illumians, and some of the human-specific feats have made their way to a finding a near-permanent place in my games. I like that this book helps in making humans a bit more special without having to resort to things like Regional Feats ala Forgotten Realms.

Races of the Wild - This is my favorite of the three original Races of... books. I'm eager to play a raptoran in SOMETHING, and the elf material is inspiring. My only complaint about this book is the somehow repitlian artistic rendition of the cooshee.

Cityscape - I was excited about this book, but I've flipped through it at the game shop more than once, and it just seems like something I'd never use. It feels like WotC was desperate to come up with something that players or DMs might be able to use with the Ptolus setting.

Stormwrack - Of the first three environmental series books, this is my second favorite (Frostburn being the best of the batch). I've been able to use elements from this book as both a player and DM, and find they work quite well. The writing is solid and top notch. (I reviewed this book here - http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11618.phtml - and, yes, I know there's a typo with one of the authors' names - it's Richard Baker, not Richard Barker.) I really enjoy this book (and not just for the flying, okay gliding, monkeys!)

Complete Adventurer - Truthfully, I don't use this book much. I think it's great that there's a ninja core class, but I alreadyhad that when it was printed in Dragon magazine months before. I think it's great there's a scout core class, but there have a handful of classes called "scout" in a number of non-WotC products prior to this publication. I was a bit bored.

Weapons of Legacy - Didn't find it useful at all, and don't own the book any more.

Thanks!

You're welcome!

Ok, I think we all have been hearing various rumors regarding a 4th edition of D&D, many of them contradictory to say the least.

What has everyone heard, what if anything do we know to be a fact and what do we all think about the situation?
Thanks!

I'm just a customer, consumer, player and reviewer of D&D gaming material, and to bring this thread back around to its original subject, this is what I've noticed and observed. I could be way off on some of this, of course . . .

In August 2006, Kevin Wilson, D&D Brand Manager, stated that Wizards is not working on a 4th Edition that will force players to use miniatures, and that there will be no 4th Edition products released in 2007. What's interesting here is what could be read into what's being denied - no miniatures-specific new edition of D&D (thankfully), but that a 4th Edition could show up as early as 2008. (This information taken from ENWorld.org.)

Amazon.com lists a release date of June 2007 for 'Complete Champion' and July 2007 for 'Monster Manual V,' and it can be assumed that this will be for the current edition of the game. There is no cover art shown for MM5, but 'Complete Champion' has a similar dressing as the other (3.5 ed.) 'Complete...' books, so this seems to confirm the "no-4th-Edition-until-2008" train of thought.

The .pdf industry, which relies a great deal on the OGL as perpetuated by the current edition of the game, is going through some significant changes. Monte Cook (who, admittedly, also enjoyed success in the print market as well) is no longer "in the game," having moved away from putting out new RPG product, and the three main .pdf distributors - RPGNow, DriveThruRPG and the ENWorld Shop, are merging into one storefront (which will become finalized in the beginning of 2007). This is all speculation, of course, but Mr. Cook has definite ties to a number of folk at WotC, as would a number of .pdf publishers (but not to the degree that Mr. Cook enjoys, obviously). It could be hypothesized/assumed that Mr. Cook had/has some sort of inside information re: the future of the game and the Open Game License. (Also consider that Malhavoc's once contraversial decision to only sell .pdf product exclusively through DriveThruRPG because DriveThruRPG offered piracy protecting unavailable at other online retailers, but not publicly mentioning that DriveThruRPG was also owned by White Wolf, who happened to be the print publisher of Malhavoc product.) The same MIGHT also be said of the .pdf market consolidating.

Dragon magazine itself has publicly stated that the magazine is steering away from printing/producing new class material, and there seems to be a definite push to flesh out material already available in the game rather than releasing new material. Why bother creating new material/rules when it might be deemed null and void with a new edition? And there has been no word on a follow-up to the successful 'Dragon Compedium' from on-high outside of making it plainly known that Wizards would have to sign off on such a venture. Could their reluctance, made evident by their silence, somehow indicate that there are plans for a 4th Edition whose new rules and system would need to be used for future releases of "new" D&D material, even if it's just updated material?

Wizards decided not to renew Code Monkey's license to the WotC material made available for their e-Tools/PCGen/etc. software. This could mean that Wizards has plans to produce their own software (which may very well be what happened when Wizards did not renew Sword & Sorcery's license to the Ravenloft material) or that the data in question will become outdated . . . when a 4th Edition hits the shelves.

Back to Amazon - At one point, a 'Fiendish Codex III' was listed, much as the 'Monster Manual V' is now listed, but it is no longer present in the listings. Because the book is no longer scheduled? It's too soon to pull the title based on lack of interested since FC II hasn't been released yet, so perhaps it's because 4th Edition rules may not be supported by an FC III.

Just some observations . . .

I'll be visiting family this weekend in Chandler and Mesa, AZ, this weekend, and was wondering if anyone can recommend any decent game shops in the area . . .

They don't really sleep, do they? If that's the case, how can I, as a DM, mess w/ their dreams? I could just wave my hand and say, "It's DM-MAGIC," but I'd love to have some rules to back that up . . .

IIRC, the Amethyst Dragon is about the same power level as the Silver or Blue dragon, thus making use of their racial classes could be a great jumping off point.

Good luck and good gaming!
/d

Well, the player in question decided to go with a silver dragon, so I can pretty much just take the material as is from the magazine . . .

Thanks for input . . . !

I was pretty confident that feats and ability adjustments were based on hit die (both Savage Species and the Monster Manual support this), but the player in question was quoting the Planar Handbook. There was something in there for the higher-level races (the chain devils, etc.) that gave him cause to believe that feats and ability adjustments were based on ECL . . .

Thanks for the info . . .

I'm launching a game in which some of the players are playing non-standard races. Questions re: feats and ability adjustments have come up, so I thought I'd turn here to see what everyone else thinks.

One player is playing a lumi (from the Monster Manual III). The lumi has two hit die and an LA of 2, making it's ECL 4. The player believes that the total ECL of the character determines when the character gains a bonus feat and ability adjustment (meaning that the lumi straight from the book would get the ability adjustment as well as have the ability adjustment). He's using the Player's Handbook to back up his arguement.

My thought is that this is based on total hit die, so the lumi straight out of the book only has one feat (outside of the bonus Improved Initiative feat the lumi has a racial trait), and would not get the ability adjustment until it takes its first actual class level, gaining that third hit die (using the material presented in Savage Species)

What does everyone here think? And what material backs this up?

I did run a copper dragon from level one in a campaign I ran using the magazine rules.

Thanks for the input . . . I'm definitely leaning toward using the rules from the magazine as it seems a bit more streamlined. I'll need to address the "rapid growth/aging problem" you indentified (and, of course, the player is talking about preferring an amethyst dragger vs. any of the dragons actually presented in the magazine!).

...but I still think that the Draconomicon is an awesome book (and one of the few that makes my list of "good purchases").

It is an incredible book! It's such a great resource - it's definitely one of my favorites!

I hope you find this useful

Thanks!

I'm running a game and I've got player wanting to play a dragon. Now I've NO problem letting a player play pretty much whatever they want in my game, as long as it follows the rules and "makes sense." I've been able to make the playing-a-dragon-PC-thing "make sense" in terms of the game, but I'm wondering about the rules aspect of this . . .

The Draconomicon covers Dragons-as-PCs for a few pages, but I'm also considering using the rules presented in issue 320 of 'Dragon.' Have any of you used either of these different sets of rules? I'm leaning toward the magazine's rules myself (the characters are starting out at 1st-level, and it seems easiest to go this route), but I'd like to anticipate any future problems that might pop up . . .

I'm running a game and I've got player wanting to play a dragon. Now I've NO problem letting a player play pretty much whatever they want in my game, as long as it follows the rules and "makes sense." I've been able to make the playing-a-dragon-PC-thing "make sense" in terms of the game, but I'm wondering about the rules aspect of this . . .

The Dragonomicon covers Dragons-as-PCs for a few pages, but I'm also considering using the rules presented in issue 320 of 'Dragon.' Have any of you used either of these different sets of rules? I'm leaning toward the magazine's rules myself (the characters are starting out at 1st-level, and it seems easiest to go this route), but I'd like to anticipate any future problems that might pop up . . .

Meetup.com seemed to work for me fairly well . . .

The Light domain is detailed in Monte Cook's {i]Book of Hallowed Might[/i].

I'll go check it out . . . Thanks!

Perhaps you're just looking under the wrong name? There's a Sun domain that seems thematically similar. The Moon domain also seems workable.

You could try and craft your own-- at low levels the spells are obvious, but what would you provide for high level casters?

It just seemed odd to me that there wasn't a Light domain. (Of course, I don't know that there's a Darkness domain, either.)

We'll end up creating our own, I'm sure. What would you recommend as the Granted Ability for such a domain?

One of my players and I are struggling with the fact that we can find no "official" listing for a Light domain. Are we just not looking in the right place? Is there one somewhere we've missed . . . ?

I'm pretty big on some of the new monsters too.

I liked a LOT of the Monster Manual III.

I've used, as a DM, the harssaf, the death giants, the witchknives, and the voidmind template. MMIII was also my first exposure to the changelings. I'm also building a campaign setting in which the lumi is a player race.

Good stuff . . .

What Mini's are people using for their characters?

I use mostly metal figs from Warhammer, Confrontation, and Warmachine. I get some at our store to paint them. WotC are good for cheap monsters.

As a DM, I'll pretty much use whatever I can for NPCs. I used to paint a few signature NPCs, but when my players started killing them in their first encounter, all that work modifying and painting the minis somehow felt cheapend.

As a player, though, I like to have a unique mini. A lot of times, I run into trouble because I almost never play anything "normal." I mean, what mini DO you use for the chronomancer or the ghost elf?

Right now, I'm playing an exiled-from-Evermeet sun elf erudite in a 'Realms game, and I just stumbled across a mini for it at the local game shop. It's a Reaper mini that you can see here: http://www.reapermini.com/gallery/2900s/2937_G

i know it's not very satisfying to hear that the problem isn't within our control, or that it's statistically insignificant, but we will do our best to ensure that you get what you've paid for.

I know, and I thank you you responding to me here. Please know that I appreciate your efforts to fulfill your subscriptions.

I've sent an email to customer.service@paizopublishing.com re: my so-far-not-here copy of the latest issue of Dragon.

(I hear there are some truenamer feats in this issue, and I can't wait to see them because my truenamer character is about to level up, and he gets a new feat this time . . . !)

My old (around this time last year) gaming group would meet usually-every-other-Saturday, starting around 1:00/2:00pm, and wrapping around 11:00pm. There was a definite meal break, and one of the players was a smoker, so we had a few breathers (no pun intended) in there, but it seemed to work out since we all had a handful of other commitments (family, work, other creative projects, etc.).

My current situation is made up of two ongoing games. One group runs every Saturday from 1pm-6pm. Everyone's encouraged to eat beforehand, so we don't have the meal break, and we seem to make progress every week. Every other week, after the main game, we do have a second game (called the "Second Shift") that runs from 7-ish to around 11:00pm.

I'd love to get more game time in (especially as I keep working on my homebrew setting - gonna need to find a time to run that!), but there's the whole work-family-other-projects thing again . . . !

Please read the FAQ. Subscriptions are shipped directly from the printer; they go periodicals rate, which often takes up to two weeks within the US, and longer internationally.

For more information, search the messageboards for the words "periodicals rate."

I understand that the USPS could take it's time when it comes to shipping periodicals. Receiving an issue late is apparently something that's been happening quite a bit for other subscribers as well. I guess my biggest question, then, is why aren't the fine folks at Paizo trying to do more about consistent subscription fulfillment? After searching the messageboards for "periodicals rate," I find that I'm not alone is getting late issues.

I subscribe to a number of magazines, and I don't think I've ever had this much difficulty to getting my magazines in a timely fashion.

I realize that this isn't QUITE what happened, but passing the buck and saying it's the post office's fault isn't really making me feel like I'm being taken care of as a customer and subscriber.

I like subscribing to magazines. If there's a magazine that I like and want to support, I'll subscribe to them in a heartbeat. And, sure, sometimes I'll get a neat exclusive (like that dope dragon mini!), and a lower cost-per-isse price, but I do kind of expect the magazine that I subscribe to to ship their magazine to me in a timely fashion.

The Paizo website states that the latest 'Dragon' shipped 7/5. Tomorrow is 7/19. I know it can take awhile to ship things sometimes, but if I can order 'Monster Manual IV' from RPGShop.com and get the book in three days, I don't quite understand why it takes so long to get my 'Dragon' magazine sometimes.

I appreciate being able to get the magazine earlier than when I'd be able to get it if I'd rely on the newstand to get it, but it does seem excessive to have to wait this long.

Does anyone else have this issue with getting their magazine late/later than they'd like?

(As an aside, these forums are great . . . I appreciate all the help everyone's given me with the various questions I've posted lately . . . !)

My gaming group has experienced a sort of reboot. While I'm building my campaign setting, someone else is setting up shop behind the DM screen, and we're all making new characters.

I need to find a feat or some sort of special ability that would allow me to add the PC's Intelligence modifier to the attack bonus . . . Is there anything out there like that?

Thanks again . . . !

These are good bits of advice, and I really appreciate the input.

One major point I'm really struggling with now is religion. Because this is a homebrew game, I'm steering away from the "standard" D&D (Greyhawk) pantheon, as well as gods from the Forgotten Realms.

Creating a religion from the ground up just feels overwhelming.

I'm building a new homebrew world for a campaign I'd like to launch soon w/ my current gaming group. I've built 2 large homebrew worlds/campaign settings before, and I've moved on from them, but now that I look back on them for some sort of guidelines while creating my new world, I realize that there was a LOT of material that I created that NEVER got touched on by the players.

I created too much.

Now, it's certainly better to have too much material than not enough as it helps you prepare for the inevitable curveball the players are bound to throw your way, but when I think about the amount of time I could have saved (most of which could have been devoted to the actual gameplay itself!), I don't want to make the same mistake again.

When building a world, how much prep work do you do? How much should you do? What didn't you do that you wish you had done beforehand?

(Advance apology if this thread belongs in the Campaign Journals sections . . . )

I'm building a new homebrew world for a campaign I'd like to launch soon w/ my current gaming group. I've built 2 large homebrew worlds/campaign settings before, and I've moved on from them, but now that I look back on them for some sort of guidelines while creating my new world, I realize that there was a LOT of material that I created that NEVER got touched on by the players.

I created too much.

Now, it's certainly better to have too much material than not enough as it helps you prepare for the inevitable curveball the players are bound to throw your way, but when I think about the amount of time I could have saved (most of which could have been devoted to the actual gameplay itself!), I don't want to make the same mistake again.

When building a world, how much prep work do you do? How much should you do? What didn't you do that you wish you had done beforehand?

How do other DMs on the boards here decide to go about naming their campaigns?

I didn't start naming my campaigns until I started playing this current edition of the game. Before, it was just, "We're playing AD&D." But then, I was the only DM, and it was a homebrew campaign setting, and that's just what we did - there wasn't a need to name it.

With my recent gaming groups, however, there've been more than one DM. With different campaigns and such going, we've a reason to name the campaigns now.

We have two games going these days.

One of them we call the "Second Shift." Originally, this game was a bi-weekly game that took place every other week the evening after our regular weekly game. Not everyone from the earlier session could make it, so we wanted to come up with something that set this game apart from the "main" game.

Our main game used to be set in the Realms, so that's just what we called it - Forgotten Realms. Recently, however, we lost our DM, so we're not really sure what we're going to do now.

When I run a campaign, I like to run in a homebrew world, and I've typically just ended up calling my campaign by the name of the world's dominant ruling party. Not too long ago, with a group that no longer exists, I called my game "The Tryptling Kingdom."

I'm currently building a new homebrew world called "Harsch Kingdom" now.

I've found this seems to work, but after thinking about this too long, I'm thinking perhaps I need to start coming up with subtitles for various story arcs run within the overall Harsch Kingdom setting . . .

(A couple of DMs I've played under have taken to naming the individual gaming sessions . . . afterward. They'll send out emails to the group after the session, awarding experience points and such, and will often give the session a name in the subject heading of the email.)

as you can see, three people, three different postings, and all three of us have a valid point of view.

No kidding . . . :) I'll have to take a look at all the different programs mentioned. I've been leaning toward Campaign Cartographer lately, but the place I was planning on purchasing it from isn't selling it right now (I'm guessing it's because ProFantasy is transitioning from CC2 to CC3).

I think an entire adventure set inside of a dormant Tarrasque would be pretty good. Maybe not tremendously frightening, but it could be full of suspense; treading carefully would be advisable and one would have to keep a constant eye on the "walls" to make sure that mile long esophagus doesn't start constricting, pummelling all inside into a gooey digestive acid drenched paste. The dive through the stomach into the small intestine can also be really harrowing, especially when they see the undigestable remains of those that didn't make it. Getting out the "back door" has got to be the most HORRIFYING OF ALL.

That is both repulsive and giggly at the same time . . .

I'm looking to get my hands on a decent software or software package that will assist me in mapping my homebrew campaign world. I'm less concerned with an overland map, truth be told, as I typically hand draw my large world maps, then work on them w/ Photoshop (mostly because I haven't found a mapping program that I like), and more interested in finding a good city mapping program and dungeon mapping program.

A lot of what I've found online, both as free downloads and programs to purchase, seem either too clunky or not overly useful (I've found a lot of city mapping software that allows you to lay a city out only in a grid-vbased pattern, which doesn't seem overly realistic).

What programs do other people use? Any suggestions? Is Campaign Cartographer worth the expense?

That's all I can think of for now.

Hope this helps,
TK

It does help . . . Thanks for the input!

I'm also a big fan of playing Kuo-Toa, Lizardfolk, Githyanki...

I've never played a lizardfolk character as a PC. As a DM, I've run plenty of them, but as a PC, I'd think that could be pretty fun . . .

Just a thought, but what's evryone's favorite race?

Mine are the Thri-Kreen, because they're just so different and fun to play (plus they speak in clicks and whistles). The fact that they're almost always Chaotic doesn't hurt either.

Yay for the bug people!

There are so many races right now that I'd love to take a crack at . . . !

I have had the opportunity to play a few more unique character-types. I had a ghost elf ranger that was a LOT of fun to play (his favored enemy was other elves!). I've also gotten to play a githyanki . . . once (it was in a one-shot-style game, though - I'd like to try playing one a bit more long-term).

Also played a medusa in quote-unquote evil game. That was interesting (but again, something I'd like to try to do more long-term).

The . . . uh . . . the exact name and spelling is escaping me now. From the Planar Handbook, the ones who've taken the vow of silence . . . Starts with a B . . . ? That was fun . . .

Did anyone here ever ran an evil campagin where PCs play goblinoids, giants, abberations, undead and other ill-begotten stuff like that?

I think it might be fun...

My old gaming group tried to do this once. It was around Halloween, and the DM who was running things at the time had us create characters for a one-shot style game. We had a doppleganger, some sort of undead (I think), and I played an entropic medusa.

While it certainly was fun to play that medusa, the game kind of devolved when the undead and the medusa couldn't trust each other, and we spent way too much game time arguing about who would take what position in the party's marching order.

I'd like to give it another shot someday, though . . .

I'm building a campaign and homebrew world in which I'm planning to have most forms of arcane magic either flat-out outlawed or at least STRONGLY discouraged (due to a MAJOR mistake made by a group of human wizards several centuries ago in the world's history). While divine magic will still be accepted, arcanists will be in the severe minority.

In its place, however, I've been planning on allowing psionics to help fill the gap (and I'd be playing with the idea that psionics and magic are definitely different).

Has anyone tried anything like this before? Success? Failure? Lousy idea?

I don't know, man. The groups I've gamed with have often heard me say, "Any DM worth his salt can run a game for any type of group," over and over again.

When I've DMed, I've always strived to let the players pretty much play what they want. A group of magic-users? Cool. Nothing but fighters? Okay. All rogues and one ninja? Let's do it. I could see how this might be a little more difficult when running a module, but I still feel that with a little tweaking and a bit more work, a DM could run a party of duskblades through the same adventure he or she planned to run for an "all psionics" game.

My own DM experiences are mostly of original adventures and homebrew campaign worlds. The first adventure or two is usaully designed to get a feel for the group make-up, so it may feel a bit "generic," but after the "getting-to-know-you" period is over, the adventures end up being a bit more specifically geared toward the character classes represented at the table.

Now, as a player, I have to say that I totally resent needing to fill certain roles at the table. I'm playing in a Forgotten Realms game right now as a cleric, and the first few sessions were absolutly miserable. The other players treated me as a walking MASH unit. I couldn't cast the spells I had chosen to cast that day because everyone kept running to my character for the handing-out-of-healing. It was made pretty clear by the other players and the DM that THAT'S what the character was there for.

Well how boring is that? I got to spend my gametime sitting around, not daring do anything that I wanted to do (cast any other spells) because someone might need a spontaneously-cast 'cure light wounds.'

It was fairly unfulfilling . . . because I was there to fill the "cleric" role in the party.

All this has done has reaffirmed for me how I will NEVER force a party to make sure they have certain "roles" filled ("Okay, make sure you have an arcane caster, a fighter-type, etc., etc."). Let everyone play what they want . . . it just means the DM and the players have to get more creative . . .

I'm working up a campaign and one of the players wants to play a Lumi (from Monster Manual III). The problem being that I intended to start the characters out at first level. The lumi has 2 HD and a +2 LA, so its ECL is 4.

I'm thinking about taking a page from Savage Species and work up a four-level progression for the character, but before I went and did that, I'd thought I'd check in here and see if any one here has already done this kind of work . . .

So, I did get my issue yesterday . . . ! YAY!

*waves back!

I'm impatient as well, and in Oregon, too...where you at, BrotherD? ;-)

Beaverton . . . :)

I don't know if I'm just being impatient, so I thought I'd throw this out to the message board.

When do you start getting your subscription copies in the mail?

I'm here in Oregon, and it seems like it takes quite some time for my subscription issue to get to me. Maybe I'm just being impatient, like I said, but I thought I'd check in w/ other folks here . . . Thanks . . . !

Are there any other gamers looking for a group in Portland? I'm still trying to either find a group or start one up . . .

Whoops - truncated my email address . . .

brother_d_73@yahoo.com

:)

My game group just dissolved, and I'm suddenly finding myself with a hole in my weekends with dice to throw. Are there any groups out there with any openings at the game table? Or any groups just now starting up looking for another player?

I'm 32-years-old and have been gaming for the past several years. While I've played all three major incarnations of D&D, I've become a huge fan of v.3.5. I'm also a fan of a lot of the third-party publishers in addition to the core rules, and I'd like to get involved with a new game or group.

My old group used to meet every-other-Saturday, so my schedule allows for this kind of a routine. I can't be overly flexible since I work M-F, and have to rely on TriMet to get around. I live in Beaverton, but right on a busline.

If anyone's interested, please drop me an email at brother_d_73@.... Thanks . . . !

"Flaws for Wizards" are in Dragon #333.

Thanks!

I don't have my issues immediately at hand, but I need to dig up some good flaws for magic users (especially wizards and other spellbook-using casters) . . . Can anyone remember which issues have included flaws (probably in the Class Acts column)? Thanks . . .

IIRC, that thing was even crazier back in the 2E days. ;)

BTW, its original first appearance was in the pages of Dragon. :)

That's even better news to me - I've been playing for a long time, but when I first came to the game, those I learned from were hardcore 1st edition fans, and I skipped most of what happened during the 2E days. I've gone back, now, and absorbed quite a bit more of what came before 1st and 3rd edition, but knowing the Spell Weaver had a history in 2nd edition somehow makes me even more excited (I especially liked how the Lupin were expanded upon when they were mentioned in a 'Winning Races' column awhile back - a sidebar touched on their history a bit, and the entire article brought the race up to speed)!

Did I read that correctly? The Ecology of the Spell Weaver? Oh, man - I canNOT WAIT! When I stumbled across this creature in the 'Monster Manual II,' I was drawn into its terrible mystique. As a DM, I've only had a chance to use it once, and it was GLORIOUS (99 points of magic missile damage on an unsuspecting player - oh, what a moment IN DEED) . . . I've long wanted to know more about the Spell Weaver, and it looks like I'll be getting my chance . . . !

What's most disappointing to me is that for awhile there, the magazine seemed to be a testing ground for material that would eventually see a "hardcover" release later from WotC. And now, Paizo proactically refuses to acknowledge any of the material from a lot of these releases (Mr. Mona's statement re: not seeing any of the Class Acts devoted to any of the twelve new core classes from the 'Complete...' books and so on). (I was surprised to see so much space devoted to the warlock in the latest issue's 'Sage' column, actually . . . )

Definitely Marvel Super-Heroes. Man, I loved that system.

And I'd have to second the Fasa Star Trek system. Although, we always had to fudge starship combat since we weren't ever able to track down the legit rules for starship combat for this system.

I'd also add West End's Star Wars system. I just can't seem to get into the latest incarnation of Star Wars, but the West End system has a place near and dear to my heart.

I just got my copy of 'Lords of Madness' in the mail today . . . And the defective binding is making it difficult to get wrapped up in the book . . .

Did anyone else have any issues with the binding not holding up? In my case, the front cover is flopping loose whenever I open the book. I MAY be able to add a drop or two of glue, but for a hardcover from Wizards', I'd expect a bit better, you know?

Does anyone know if Wizards has a customer return policy or anything like that?

I've used the Marshall class to good effect as an NPC.

I think that's probably the best way to introduce a class like the marshall. I'm considering bringing one in to the campaign I'm running right now.

I'm hopeful to incorporate either Swashbuckler or Scout in my next Eberron adventure.

The scout just leaves me feeling flat. It's a good class, but there have been other "scout" classes released by some of the other d20 publishers out there (Alderac and hasn't Mongoose put one out as well?), so it was really difficult for me to work up any excitement for a class that's already been kinda of covered by other publishers . . .