Search Posts
While I would love to take up my ongoing case subscription again, the additional cost is simply prohibitive for European customers. When I have to pay roughly fourty per cent of the case price on top due to customs and duties, it is cheaper to go hunting for collector's figures on eBay, unfortunately. I am wondering if Paizo has any numbers on how large its European client base actually is, and whether that would not justify having a warehouse in the EU to avoid this sort of problem.
Lou, I registered with a new e-mail address, since the old one I used for the preorder is long gone and buried. I therefore can't look up my paypal confirmation number (if indeed I ever received one ...) If I input the old e-mail address into the site, it knows that I preordered however. What should I do to be all set before the Kickstarter begins? Cheers and merry christmas,
For me, the age of lugging lots of books around to a game is over. I have the Core Rulebook with me, everything else is just PDFs or lists/information compiled from PFSRD. As I think more and more gamers are playing this way, the market for a soon-to-be out-of-date spell compendium would be rather small, I imagine.
I received my full case today. Random thoughts after unboxing: Distribution worked for me. I have a complete set plus some spares. Would have loved a second Lamia Harridan, but instead got two of what I perceive to be the weakest figure in the set, the chocolate, err, storm giant. Sigh. I'm very happy with how they reduced the packaging to what is really necessary. Still a lot of stuff to throw in the trash, but better that then having half of my minis bent and broken on arrival. That being said: Several minis had come unglued from their bases (easily fixable, but still). This was largely the case with several Dire Bears (i.e., one of the heaviest Larges in the set). One Alu-fiend had their wings broken off by another Medium miniature that had come loose inside the packaging. Several bent swords, but those can be fixed. I wonder why the two plastic trays inside the boosters were not put in NOT facing each other. That would surely reduce the risk of one figure damaging the others? Paint jobs are superb for the most part, with some notable exceptions (Storm Giant, Ameiko). I would rate this set 4.5 out of 5 stars. It's as expensive as no previous mini set I ever bought, but it really is worth the price of admission. Having to pay for shipping as well as an additional EUR 120 for taxes and customs, however, sucks ... I really want to continue supporting Paizo directly and therefore keep my submission going, but not having any way to order the cases on the other side of the atlantic while keeping a subscription is hardly ideal.
The scorpion whip works like any other melee weapon. It just is a weapon of the 'whip' type, which means that if you are proficient with a whip, you also are proficient with a scorpion whip. The sentence you are referring to only relates to the issue of proficiency, but nothing else.
Vic, thanks for the reply. While it does not really help me solve my problem, I understand that Paizo of course wants to use the most (cost-)effective method of applying customs labels and will not change this for a few (fringe) cases. From my experience, a lot of work at the Customs office indeed still seems to be done with pencil & paper ... but the core issue here seems to be one of incompatible customs regulations. I guess I will just have to see how it goes with future shipments, but I'm not keeping my hopes up.
This is not relevant to the OP, but since it is connected to 'PF Miniatures shipping to Europe', I am posting it here in the hopes that the Powers That Be (tm) notice. Paizo, pretty please, change your shipping labels for international shipments so that they consist of a plastic envelope containing the shipping note and an invoice proving that the shipment was paid for. Long story/explanation to follow. The reason for this is that European customs regulations (I don't know if it is true for every single country, but at least mine) require international shipments to include (a) a shipping note and (b) an invoice detailing the amount paid. Most of the time, especially insofar as smaller shipments are concerned, customs officers tend to turn a blind eye to this requirement and just accept the current Paizo standard shipping label (= shipping note) as being accurate. Customs and taxes, if any, are then calculated using the amount printed on the shipping label. However, with increasing frequency, they have stopped accepting 'just' the plain shipping label. Which leads to the following happening: (a) Package is delayed at customs for about 5-10 days.
Long story short, getting my hands on my first PF Battles subscription shipment took about two weeks, several phone calls and some lost sleep. I am sure this is not an isolated case, and something that could easily be remedied. If you could look into this matter, it would be greatly appreciated. Because, honestly, I want to keep supporting Paizo directly any way I can. But sometimes you are making it hard ... (Sorry if any of this is not making sense - I am not a native speaker.)
Thanks a ton! I just got into HeroLab, and now this. You made my day.
Just to point that out, taxes in Germany are much higher than the examples mentioned earlier in this thread, ranging from around 14 per cent (entry level) to circa 43 per cent for households earning more than ~ 52500 EUR per year. The 'rich' (being careful with that word here), meaning households earning more than ~ 250 0000 EUR p.a., come in at a whopping 48 per cent tax burden. Welcome to every German's #1 complaint ;). [edit] Also, Kortz: you win this thread :).
Wow, Gailbraithe, what's with the ad hominem? Really. Roleplaying among PCs really has nothing to do with what gigglestick talked about: taking workload off the GM by featuring interesting situations in the AP as written. Situations that immediately get your creativity going, that scream for a roleplaying encounter. A GM with enough time on his hands that also has a group which is into roleplaying (as opposed to rollplaying/lighthearted campaigns) can easily turn the most hack&slash adventure into a good roleplaying session with some effort. So what? Not everyone is that GM, not everyone has a group like that, not everyone has time to prepare. Thus, every little bit of work that the adventure's authors do for the GM is appreciated.
If done right, I would absolutely dig it, as would my players. In my experience, most adventures advertised as 'mega-dungeons' break down somewhere around 12th to 13th level if they make the mistake to set the whole shebang in one single location (e.g., stairs leading down from level 1 to level 20, a la Diablo). A megadungeon-style adventure that wants to remain believable throughout and make sure it doesn't lose the players' interest on the way should fulfil the following prerequisites IMO: - Provide a starting base for players that undergoes changes during the length of the AP. Cauldron in the SCAP was a good example for this. This provides a convenient location for roleplaying, different 'types' of encounters than merely combat, shopping opportunities, and a change of scenery in between the dungeon parts.
I realize that this is probably a niche's niche ;), but if Paizo ever were to publish this, I'd be all over it.
@ wraithstrike: Basically, they were an early (and failed) form of copy protection. You had to line up certain symbols on the paper disks and the game asked you for the next symbol in line before you could play. Or something along these lines. This picture (Link) might give you an idea. edit: slightly ninja'ed by the xaositect.
Browsed through the PDF today, and boy, this book looks great as far as first impressions go. Can't wait to get my hands on the dead tree version for some, ahem ... friendly competition for my PCs. That being said, please listen, ye Paizo gods: Pretty please (with sugar on top) ease up on the stupid NPC names containing double Xs, Ys and Zs? Yes, Mr Telaxxis, I'm looking at you. Pity that you actually seem a decent guy, as far as Chelaxians go - I refuse to pronounce a name that sounds like it escaped from Blizzard's dragon random name generator ('Hey, I've got it - how does YYxxxzzyyyzxxxx sound? No? Ah, another one for the reject bin. *sigh*').
As much as I would like a copy of this, please please please do not make it part of an existing subscription. +1. I really hope that Paizo will throw international subscribers a bone here, as the situation Antony described is even worse in other EU countries (because of higher import taxes). If this were to become part of my subscription, I would easily have to pay something between 150 and 200% of the original purchase price. Apart from that, while I know Paizo's business model relies heavily on subscriptions, I wonder where the idea came from to include 'beginner' product into existing subscription lines (i.e., sell the beginner set to customers who - in many cases - will own the vast majority of sourcebooks Paizo has published for PF)? This (forgive me for saying so) seems somewhat counterintuitive to me.
Keep in mind that - the Inquisitor needs several rounds to buff himself to maximum (as Caineach already stated), and
Once you exceed the mark of 3-4 encounters per adventuring day, the Inquisitor rapidly changes from high DPR to lagging behind all other classes massively.
So... there are good rules on how to copy spells from a book.But I don't want to copy the spells. I killed the wizard. His book is mine.Do I have to still pay to copy the spells? Why? Why can't I just take "ownership" of his book or some such? Don't take this the wrong way, but: in my view, that's just another point where the abstract nature of the rules asserts itself. The wizard's spell book is a factor in balancing the class with all others. Acquiring new resources for your class is always associated with a cost. Therefore, it would be highly irregular if you could 'just' take ownership while avoiding the cost the rules normally stipulate. That doesn't keep you from implementing any rules for doing so anyway, but it's something to keep in mind when designing them, IMO.
Not to complain overmuch, as I'm very much looking forward to this book, but ... haven't we seen that scene depicted a half dozen times already? Where's the Iomedae love? ;)
Thank you, Paizo, for publishing this masterwork. It is, in my honest opinion, at the very top of everything you have done so far, and it has rekindled my PF love after some of the recent books were just ho-hum. Now, please do the right thing. It's easy. Get people to work on 'Lost Cities' II, III and IV - at the very least! :D You can never have enough ruined cities. Kidding aside, I would love to see more volumes in this vein.
<<1) Is there anything you'd like to see more of or less of from the novels or web fiction?>> What I would like to see is a periodical (say 1/year) print publishing that collects all the short stories from paizo.com. Maybe with some added art. I just don't like reading on a screen that much (besides, I have to do it all day, so I'm glad if my downtime lets me enjoy some dead tree). <<2) What do you think would help new readers unfamiliar with Pathfinder pick up the novels if they ran across them randomly in a bookstore? >> This may be counterintuitive, but: Don't aim too close to the RPG. I know a lot of readers that love fantasy books but are hesitant to pick up anything that is 'branded' too strongly, meaning that they are afraid that if they pick up a novel they would also have to buy the RPG book to understand some of the background. What I think might help in this regard is testimonials from authors that are known beyond the WotC/Paizo novel circle, such as Miéville. <<3) Which cover art do you like the best? Why?>> No preference - but it should always be clear, crisp, not too distracting considering that there's also the title and branding on the cover. I rather liked the style you chose so far - please keep it that way, no Elmore for me. <<4) Are there any fantasy-related book blogs or online communities that you think might enjoy Pathfinder Tales, if only we were to advertise/send review copies/etc?>> I don't know if you are in contact with Fantasy Book Critic (http://fantasybookcritic.blogspot.com/)? They're my go-to guys for lots of good, fresh authors. <<5) Any other ideas for how we can get more books into readers' hands?>> Indulge your readers and cooperate with Subterranean Press to create limited-edition cloth-bound volumes :P. On a more serious note: It would be great if, say, the first three Dave Gross volumes are released, to then collect them as a hardcover. Unless that is too prohibitive from a financial standpoint. I just hate paperbacks, they look so ugly on my shelf compared to shiny hardcovers ;) ...
I agree with Elias Alexander. While I get that there are many types of gamers with varied tastes out there, I was put off by some of the monsters in Bestiary 2 because they just didn't feel like the quality I've come to expect from Paizo. Please, stop doing 'filler' monsters, especially: - the n-th variant of dragons, golems or elementals. I understand that this is somewhat following tradition, but even in my Planescape days, I never found any use for salt mephits, dust elementals and (insert weird element or location here) dragons. What's next, the carrot elemental? Hematite dragon? Slightly-dented-metal golem? If I want to do any of these, I can take a standard dragon, golem or mephit, adjust its description and special abilities on the fly, and done. - centaur monsters. Even in Bestiary 2, there were way too many monsters that felt just like two creatures slapped together: plant+spider, plant+beetle, various animal mixes ... it just doesn't do anything for me. Instead, please take a cue from the excellent design work regularly displayed in Pathfinder. All the monsters in there feel 'fresh', and even if I don't feel like I will ever use some of them, I can still appreciate them for what they are. I don't really want to see a Bestiary 3 appear in Paizo's product catalogue if one third of it is 'filler' material again.
Well, I played a character like that once in a Forgotten Realms game. His justification was that he would channel the spirits of unspecified :D ancestors which would then inhabit undead bodies in order to redeem themselves. While I liked the idea, I quickly noticed that it was a pain to actually play the character. While my initial idea of creating intra-party discussion about the subject 'is necromancy necessarily evil?' worked out, it was still difficult, because everywhere we interacted with NPCs the character was naturally met with distrust and suspicion. Also, the intra-party discussion never really went anywhere, to the point where everyone just tended to handwave everything my character was doing as 'oh, okay, he's helping the party out, so I guess the whole undead shtick is all right. Hey, can you summon a bigger skeleton?'. At this point, I abandoned the character. While I don't think the rules themselves would be too much of a problem, I'd advise you to only allow the character if a) you either have a campaign planned out that revolves around a 'spirit-ual' theme no matter what, or b) you are very sure that the party interaction revolving around this character will actually lead somewhere.
You know, back in the Dragon days I wrote an article called like "iDragon" or something, that was a big using music in RPGs article...I bet they're still up there. Yeah, I remember getting that Dragon issue, being all excited ... and then finding out that said playlists were only available in the US iTunes store, and I couldn't access them :(. Just mentioning it in case you decide to do something like that again :D.
Just downloaded the PDF. Just scrolled through, so far, but I love what I'm seeing. Just one big gripe: The Krenshar art does not feature a 'OH HAI!' speech bubble. I blame the artist. ;) In all seriousness: Great work. Can't wait to get my hands on the print copy.
Some ideas can be found in my 'Padding out' SD thread here: Link. I think the general consensus was to pad out the Drow City episode, making the players experience more of the surroundings and the relationships/politics between the different houses and races.
Bakka, I've been in your shoes before, and actually tried the recording bit. The result was totally different from what I'd intended: players were actually torn OUT of the game's simulated reality by the fact that suddenly there was a 'unknown' voice in the room, and were wondering more about 'how did he manage that' than pay attention to what the recording was saying and feel MORE immersed that way. I think it really is the best solution - even if you can't do accents - to describe the way the voice is supposed to sound, and then read out the text normally (maybe change up inflections slightly). In most cases, this is all that's needed.
Wow, nice work! :) I wish I had had access to these when I ran Shadow in the Sky. I ended up magnifying and printing the pictures from the PDF and then gluing them to foamboard (result: workable, but of course extremely pixelated). This will surely be a big help for prospective GMs. (edit) Are you planning on creating more SD battlemaps in this style? E.g. for each adventure's bossfight location? That would be handy.
Apparently, only Nick can do that ... and he should be advised of the situation by now, since this BS has been going on for a few weeks now. Now, I can still (somewhat) deal with all the product delays, as I feel that they are in good hands now with Lou's involvement. But what I can't understand is how any webmaster could let his website decay like this ... I mean, it's not even an issue of Nick personally finding the time, he could just put someone in charge to a) clean up the forums, b) delete spam accounts, and c) improve registration security so that new spambots don't gain access to the site as easy as they did in the past.
It more or less depends on if your GM is running the follow-up adventures as written or if he/she has deviated from that and included their own original content. If the former, your player will not cause you overmuch trouble, because after #2, Riddleport and the Gold Goblin are not going to come up too often. If the latter, it depends on your GM. However, as a general point of advice, I would talk to said player and ask him if he wants to run an economic simulation or roleplay his character ... because, if sitting in Riddleport and waiting for his weekly cash payoff is all he wants to do, that is not exactly what the AP is about. Either your GM will have changed the Adventure path already and included more Riddleport playtime, or the player will need to either reorient himself or create a new character that is more likely to go on adventures. I admit that this situation is deeply unsatisfying. It is a classic case of raising expectations about the rest of the AP in the first issue, and then not living up to them (sadly). BUT: it falls into the GM's domain to rectify this, if possible. I know my players would have rebelled if I hadn't completely altered the storyline from that point onward ;).
I would love to see a book like this. However, I am unsure if there is a market for a relatively 'niche' product such as this. I guess it would appeal to those gamers interested in the inner workings of Golarion, so to speak ... but if that would be enough to make a book such as this viable? Highly doubtful. Maybe if all the subjects of interest to the 'simulationist' (for lack of a better word) gamers out there were gathered in one book? E.g. things like trade and trade routes, weather patterns, politics, crime and punishment, and so on. (Still, I don't think this will ever see the light of day ;-) seeing how Paizo's schedule has already been filled for the next few years in advance.)
I have to say I was pretty disappointed with this one. The production values live up to the usual Paizo standard, but for a Monte Cook adventure, this was a bit of a letdown. Doesn't make me want to run it, doesn't make me want to play it - YMMV. To me, the background story is contrived, the encounters feel tacked on to the 'visuals' and the story hook is a weak one at best. I know my players would not have jumped through hoops to experience this story, and I suspect I am not alone in this. I'd rate this one 0.5 out of 5, which in my opinion would make it the worst Paizo product to have come out so far. This may sound harsh, but it really does not hold a candle to several other PF modules already published.
Don't let yourself be limited by canon. Simply create another, similar cavern, minus the Shraen Drow, give it a different name, and fit it to your liking. Thus you will neither contradict canon - in case any of your players are familiar with the Darklands book - nor have to deal with any annoyances resulting from it.
Yeah, I tried that for about 100 times. The 101st time, it worked. *shrugs* :)
Same problem here: I've tried, unsuccessfully so far, to access my PDFs for almost a week now. It might not even be related to traffic. Once I click on 'personalize...', the site asks me to check back in a few moments as usual ... but then, nothing happens, even if I wait for five minutes. When I refresh manually, I'm redirected to the My Downloads start page, where I can click on 'personalize' again. And so on. Could you look into this, Gary? Thank you very much.
My (completely unqualified) opinion: It works the way it is. For me, it has never been an issue of not buying a book in favor of using PFSRD (or PFwiki, or anything else, for that matter). They just serve completely different purposes. When I'm at my computer and want to look something up really quick? PFSRD. When one of my players surprises me with an obscure reference to PF canon that his character is built on, I look it up at the wiki. However, when I'm running a game (or playing in one), I would never dream of leaving my trusty books at home. Fan sites, in that regard, fulfill a 'support' role: they provide additional, enhanced 'functionality', if you will, to the game books. Paizo could very well do the same thing, but they don't want to / won't because of the limited amount of enslaved work monkeys they received on the last shipment (or something). Imagine all the fan sites didn't exist. Now someone wants to try out Pathfinder. What is he or she going to prefer: a game where all the rulebooks are properly indexed somewhere, or a game without that option? The fans take a load of work off Paizo's shoulders. This, in my opinion, is why fan sites are (and will ever be) beneficial to Paizo, as long as the fans play by the rules. In that vein: rock on, Paizo, and rock on, PFSRD/PFwiki :).
My 2 cents: - 'Magic with consequences' doesn't really work in any of the default D20/3.5E fantasy settings. It can be approximated through rules such as exhaustion etc., but they just discourage people from playing casters. - It works fine in books. - It works fine in settings with the default assumption '95% of the world's population are unable to cast spells'. It works in Conan, it works in Midnight, it works in Iron Heroes, it works in Dark Legacies, and to a lesser degree, in Iron Kingdoms. It's fine if used for NPCs only (if the PCs all play non-magical characters). For magic-using PCs, you cannot integrate a system of consequences into the current D20/PFRPG classes. Instead, you'd have to rework them from the ground up, so that magic has always worked a certain way from the beginning. - The real difficulty is one of game balance. Take a 3.5/PFRPG wizard. If you just tell him that he's going to take nonlethal damage for each spell cast, he will (of course) refrain from casting all spells that he could 'normally' cast. This will impact game balance with regard to melee classes. The viable solution would be to give casters less spells per day as a default, but increase their individual potency. The result: glass jaw syndrome. Spells either work and wipe out everything, or they don't and the character is relatively worthless and certainly not fun to play. Leave 'magic & consequences' to fiction, or use a setting with a meta-reason (such as Midnight). Otherwise, it's too much trouble to be worth it. YMMV :).
Use New Monsters - Seasoned players tend to recognize the traditional tropes used in horror settings, so change them up. This. The best way to put a mood of suspense and fear into the characters is to make the players sweat :). Use the monster stats right out of the book, but completely change around the physical description. Don't give them the ability to act on any kind of metagame information. Make them work hard to discover any and kind of vulnerability; use IC rumors and half-truths so they can never be quite sure that the tactics they chose will actually work when they confront the monster. The main thing that separates 'standard' adventures from 'horror' adventures is one thing: powerlessness. Knowledge, in D&D as well as anywhere else, is power. Take away as much knowledge as you can without making the game unfair, and your players will feel as their characters are 'supposed' to.
If I'm not mistaken, Paizo said that they *couldn't* do more than three books a year, but not that they *would* always do three books a year. I'm wondering if the market saturation with regard to rule books doesn't outweigh the fans' clamor for 'more!'. I know that I already have more Pathfinder (and PF-compatible) rulebooks to last me a lifetime. I am not looking forward to 'more of the same, just with changed rules', but things that haven't been done before. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Paizo is going to do Bestiary 3, because it will be a guaranteed seller. Then, one 'new' type of book that we haven't been speculating about. And no third.
I thought that pic was was the gag ! Ditto that ... I love Hou's art, but this just looks like it came straight out of some japanese cartoon. Please, not Paizo too. It's bad enough as it is with Blizzard japano-fying everything.
I am not interested in the AP itself, it has poor reviews. Just curious: Are you not interested in SD 'because' of the reviews, or do you have another reason? Because if it's only the reviews, I strongly suggest browsing these forums for a more balanced opinion. If you're planning a Dark Elf campaign, there's some very good ideas in SD.
I'd buy it in a heartbeat. There must be tons of real-world 'customs'/theories as well as a huge load of fantasy literature to serve as inspiration. Take that, compile it all in a RPG-friendly format - I'd love it.
The way I interpret the RAW is: - Spells are not subject to DR unless they deal one of the 'physical' types of damage (piercing, bludgeoning, slashing).
(edit) As cwslyclgh says, it's just a matter of rules vs. exceptions.
Yeah looking at them I dont really see a regular Adventure Path Challenging encounter Thats what I love is ussually there is one fight that is a knock out drag out battle For my party of three, the only difficult encounter was with the Spoiler:
wererats, because they didn't have any silver weapons. My advice would be to add +1 warrior level to all thugs and thieves, and to add 2-3 class levels to each important 'named' enemy. In a pinch, you might want to slap one of the Simple Templates on them, which works very well for all non-casters.
Most of the encounters in 'A shadow in the sky' are pushovers, anyway. You might want to go for an extra +1 CR here and there, especially with boss/sub-boss monsters.
@ Arnwyn: Since this is somewhat OT, I'll put it in spoiler tags. Spoiler: You misunderstood me. I am not talking about the people who have any kind of valid or perceived criticism and who actually make clear *why* they dislike SD. If you check those threads, you will see that I specifically started a thread to adress weaknesses that were considered general consensus.
What I don't understand is the general negativity, the fact that as soon as someone asks for advice regarding which AP he should GM or play in, there are invariably going to be posts that basically say 'SD sucks' without going into detail *why* it sucks. Now, that may be because those posters think 'It's all been covered before, so I can just keep it short', but that totally ignores the fact that new Paizonians will be urged away from trying out SD from the outset by that kind of statement - and that's something I don't feel does proper justice to both the AP and the individual authors. I hope I'm making sense here. Its kind of hard around sensitive topics such as this when English isn't your first language.
I'm going to offer a different opinion here: 1) Curse of the Crimson Throne. The best AP so far, hands down.
Kingmaker is looking excellent so far, however, I'm a little bit wary of a possible disconnect between the later adventures ... Spoiler:
having only read the adventure summaries in KM 1, of course. The vibe I got from that was that the first 4-5 adventures have a common theme, while the last one pulls a rabbit (read: new external threat) out of the hat. However, that may just be due to the shortness of the summaries. If Kingmaker holds up to its promise, it will either become my new #1 or #2. We'll see :).
Well, I don't think anybody here thinks the Unofficial Exit Poll is laying any kind of claim to accuracy. What it does, though, is predict trends with some success (this year, we'll probably see a close head-to head finish with Groves/Goodall in the lead). It'll be interesting to see the results and compare them to the tally above.
Final (?) tally (includes updates/new posts since Quandary's post above): 70 voters
Matt Goodall - Cult of the Ebon Destroyers - 25 votes Matthew McGee - From Time's Depths - 7 votes Alexander MacLeod - Wreck of the Mastrien Slash - 5 votes Hope this adds up :-D.
Updating (counting onward from Quandary's post above): 44 voters
Matt Goodall - Cult of the Ebon Destroyers - 13 votes Matthew McGee - From Time's Depths - 6 votes Alexander MacLeod - Wreck of the Mastrien Slash - 4 votes
To which my current (rather mercenary) party might reply: 'Why don't you go and do it yourself, then? We're only going if the risk vs. reward factor is working out for us. Guaranteed danger vs. possible unspecified riches? No, thanks.' Of course, this is taking things to an extreme. But I think a good hook is one that works (almost) with no regard to the actual party composition. And I think that playing a mercenary type character is something that every gaming table sees now and then. If the players are into exploring, they will go. If they aren't, they won't, and the whole adventure hook falls flat. YMMV, of course :) just pointing out that a 'Superstar' adventure, to me, is characterized by keeping in mind that there are all kinds of PCs out there, and that the adventure should work for each and every one of them.
I voted for Mr. Groves's Doom of the Dream Thieves. It was a close call between that one and Mr. Goodall's Cult of the Ebon Destroyers. I couldn't have said it any better. There were two good submissions in this final round, and two rather ... 'meh' submissions. At first, I thought I would vote 'Ebon Destroyers', because it conformed to the rules of the contest best. After re-reading and re-re-reading the submissions, however, one thing became more important than that: Dream Thieves makes me WANT to run it. Ebon Destroyers is a solid piece of design work, but Dream Thieves just has more of that 'Superstar' factor. So, +1 for Watcher, it is. |
