Danzig Darkheart's page

I would also appreciate the ability to show off my chops, at least, but Iagree that as good losers we should not start posting our hypothetical second round entries until voting for the 32 lucky writers who did make it have had their submissions voted on, preventing the possible scenario of "none of these guys are as good as (insert your name here)'s country"

well, so long as it isn't personal.. btw why the bias against travel items?

Hey, my last few posts aren't, well, they aren't being posted. Did I make someone mad? I wasn't being mean or inappropriate or anything so, what's up with that?

oops, meant to address that last comment to Jeremy, since you seem to be online at the moment.

ooh, I can't wait until you get to mine (the adventurers vest).

So, why exactly do we decide to hate on "travel" items? Of all the aspects of D&D, travel is the most glossed over in most adventures, home-brewed or published. I readily agree that being lost in the jungle, mountains, or desert can be a great adventure, worthy of an hour on the weather channel, but compared to slaying dragons? really?

Thanks for a quick reply, Dark, I'm glad to know I'm not the first DM to feel like backpacks are too easy to get into, and during a melee, no less. I think you are probably right about my item getting nixed because of the "swiss-army knife" factor, which I kind of think is unfair, because if I was going on an adventure, I'd probably want to include an actual swiss army knife!
DD

As close as I can remember, since I didn't save a copy, just entered straight into the post...
Adventurer's Vest
The Adventurer's Vest is of sturdy design, constructed of fine leather and canvas, it has two front pockets, one to a side. Although the pockets apear normal, they are in fact non-dimensional spaces capable of holding 15 pounds or 1.5 cubic feet of material without encumbering the wearer. These pockets have the special property when holding certain items. If a pocket contains only potions, any potion may be retrieved by the wearer as a move action, and if a pocket contains only ammuntion, it may be drawn out as a free action.
Additionally, after the vest has been worn for at least 24 hours, it grants the wearer the benefit of endure elements as well as providing nourishment and refreshment, so that the wearer does not need to eat, and requires only two hours of sleep per night.
Moderate varied; CL 9th; Craft Wonderous Item, create food and water, endure elements, secret chest, Price 4,500gp.

I guess it might not have the wow factor. I thought it was mechanically sound however, and also thought it was the sort of item that every character would want. It doesn't do much that other items don't do, but it's a vest, so it doesn't take up valuable finger space. Also its main function in the game is to allow players and DM's alike to ignore some of the more cumbersome aspects of wilderness adventure and get straight to delving.
I know 15 pounds of potions is a bunch, but the idea is drawing them out as a move action, allowing the character to pull and pound a potion in a single round. The Handy Haversack (another "must have" item) has a similar property, but as an avid hiker, I've always had a problem with charcters taking things out of a backpack while wearing it. Try it some time.

Like I said, this isn't word for word my submission, but its close enough for a losing entry.

I'd love anybody's comments, I can take it.
DD

I have been feeling like the second round would be less like American Idol and more like Iron Chef, with the 32 contestents finding out at the last minute what sort of kingdom they would be asked to describe.
"If its chicken, Chicken a la King, if its islands, Islands a la King, if its mountains, Chicken a la King"
To paraphrase the great Bender.
My main concern was that the second round requirements would advantage contestents with a good collection of Paizo content source material, and from what Mr. Peterson says, that worry can be allayed.
I like the idea of providing maps, but as long as no maps are required as part of the submission, I see no need to do so. After all, nothing is stopping the second round contestants from doodling up a map of their own to reference as they create. The ability to convey with text alone well enough to obviate the need for visuals is the essence of good writing. Just look at how half-@$$ed REH's maps of Hyboria were. No one would suggest that the kingdoms of the Conan saga weren't well realized. Not while I was in the room, anyway.
A real sticking point would be the word count requirements. Would there be a maximum, a minimum, or both? There's only so much you can say about a country in 1000 words. just look at how difficult it was for some people to describe a simple magic item with 20% of that. With no upper limit, however, the contest will heavily favor the unemployed contestent, I suspect, as people will find it hard to vote against the entry that includes detailed descriptions of every settlement of Small Town status or better and a run down of 50 NPC baddies with adventure hooks.
Keep in mind if I am one of "the 32" that I have lots of free time and would totally go "shock and awe" on an unlimited word count, so, I'm just sayin', is all.
Much love and good luck
DD

Prague should be fantastic inspiration, Dj! I know if I'm still in the contest while I'm in Italy, I'll be crawling through every ruin I can find converting them into D&D scenarios. Of course, if I'm not in the contest, I'll be doing the exact same thing. I mean, isn't that what vacations are for? As far my job? I quit that pain in the @$$, Bartending jobs are like boxers, they can and should be changed regularly.
How many others of us will be world travellers this holiday season, I wonder. The later stages of this contest could very well resemble dispatches from a bunch of foriegn correspondents. I like that imagery, especially if we're all wearing hats.
Until Wednesday, good luck and stay sane!
DD

Does anyone play core classes anymore? Are the expanded classes balanced? Are Elven wizards so hum-drum that we need half giant psionic ninjas? Does the AoW AP favor some expanded races/classes?

Don't forget that characters underwater take a -2 to attacks with slashing and blount weapons, and they do half damage. Characters also take a -2 to their grapple checks. Oh yeah, every round a character takes a standard or full round action underwater decreases the number of rounds that character can hold his or her breath without making a check by one round. Also don't forget that double armor penalty on swim checks and basically if your party doesn't do this just right get ready to cheat alot or see the PCs go down in the most ignomious fashion imaginable.

The map shows a hole in the floor of the room beyond the planks. Although the text describes it as being unconnected to the water in the plank room, I determined as soon as I saw the map that any player who thought to investigate swimming under the wall would be able to cross through. None did, however, as a protection from evil and magic circle against evil kept the IS's at bay.[I assumed that stalkers would be subject to a cop evil as their description contains the word summon it its second sentance]

Change the doppleganger's class levels to something that will match more powers of the character you wish to replace, but be careful not to change his CR too much. Also, consider announcing to the players, after allowing them all to engage in solo activities in the Free City, that one of them has been replaced by a dopp, but not telling them who. A good time to spring this information on the players is after the attack by Elaxan at the Crooked House, either after the party drops Elax and he reverts, or, should he escape, they get around to thinking of dopplegangers as the obvious culprits in the "case of the stolen identity".
Also, be aware that the mirror maze sort of assumes that dopps can do things they can't, so either give the dopp guards a class level that lets them cast disguise self, or count on your players not being fooled when they come across their wizard in studded leather armor with a heavy steel sheild and a longsword.
Another problem with the mirror maze is that if the party enters from the planning room, it kind of funnels them to the final encounter, which sucks if one of the PCs is actually still tied up in the hall of deception. My advice if this happens to you is to move walls around to ensure that the party gets back together before the big fight, because if one of the players is still controlling a dopp when the brawl with Telakin begins, a TPK should be almost certain.

he was like a magically quiet Brock Sampson. we named the tactic the "Nogu Bomb". it was sick

Lizard folk at the seige of BK were such a push over that the party just buffed the half orc barbarian, silenced him and let him take the lair solo.

It seems to me that if a PC wants to try to stop a gout of flame by placing his hand over it, I won't bother asking for a reflex save.

I think the idea screams for a less traditional campaign. Not so much Conan and Subati and more X-men Blue and X-men Gold. I think that the additional burdens of actually governing the town that the adventures protect may be overwhelming, however. Perhaps each player should have a non-adventuring character (say an aristocrat or an expert) as part of their portfolio of PCs?

As a player throughought all verions of the D&D rules, i have found that dungeon mapping is easiest if detail is ignored as much as possible. Our party would explore labyrinthine crypts, sewers, caves or what have you, and my map would always look the same, basically a flow chart, with boxs for rooms, usually with a little note in, and simple lines to show which rooms were connected. Of course, these maps were never totally acurate, but they got us in and out alive, and did not neccessitate the PCs walking around each chamber with a measuring tape.
Indeed, as a DM, even in 3.5, i find that that sort of mapping/note taking works out the best until it's time to make initiative checks. Once combat begins, acurate floor plans are a must. IMO, this means that the DM should be the one responsible for battle maps, not a player. Whether this means premade maps or hastily sketched outlines, it's much faster if the person making the map is looking at the DMs notes.
Most recently (for the AoW AP)I've taken dungeon mapping to a new level, by pre-mapping the <entire> dungeon to scale on foam board. For any who are interested, I used a project board called "ghost-line", which has a grid already marked of in pale lines that are only visible from an angle. The boards cost a couple of bucks each for about a 2 foot by three foot sheet, and I managed to get the entire Whispering Cairn out of two boards. Many rooms and stretches of corridor can be used for different areas of the complex, but it is best to draw the map out on graph paper first, to make a pattern that can be cut up and rearranged to fit the most tiles out of one board. Once all the tiles are made, and a visible grid is marked off for combat(the "invisible" lines mark half inches, so I drew over every other line with a 'Sharpie'), then the dungeon can be laid out before the players as they move through it, much like "Space Hulk", if any of you remember that game. One additional advantage of this method is that every time a PC opens a door or looks around a corner, I pull out a piece of map, so it's not a dead giveaway to the players that an encounter is in the offing. So far the players have really enjoyed being able to move their minis around, and while it might seem as though this sort of table-top gaming would detract from the role-playing aspect of D&D, I have found just the opposite, with their minis standing around in an otherwise boring hallway, they speak to each other in character almost all the time, whereas before many of our players tended to table talk unless their character was directly speaking to an NPC, and even then they would break character routinely through out the encounter for meta-game discussions.

I love the "take 20", almost as much as I love the "take 10". I use "take 10" all the time in my campaigns as a DM to generate reactive dungeons. For example, everyone in the party has a "noise signature" and an "awareness", as does every dungeon denzian. A creature or character makes noise equal to its move silently, modified for speed (_-5 for 1/2 speed, -10 for full speed, -20 for running or charging) as though it were taking 10. A creature or character's awareness is its listen, possibly modified by distraction or other circumstance mods, also as though it were taking 10. Since listen is penalized by 1 for every 10', the amount a creature's awareness beats the loudest character's noise signature by multiplied by 10' tells you how far away the party will be when the creature becomes aware of them (remember, a closed door counts as 50'). Or, in the case of very stealthy parties, it works the other way around.
Likewise, any information that would be revealed to a character taking 10 on a spot check, I immediately provide, on a note to that player if confidentiality is important in the situation, said information with the opening description.
I don't see this as an impediment to role playing so much as a just reward for players who load up on skills so their characters can be really good at something. If I know the DC for a jump is low enough for the barbarian to take 10, I don't even ask for a roll, I just tell the player that her barbarian springs across with ease, and she feels good for maxing out her jump.

Savaun, you are a gentlebeing and a scholar.
DD

You have to consider what the search DC associated with finding something really entails. Suppose your keys are in a full junk drawer. Now suppose your keys are an allen wrench or something that is more likely to be in a junk drawer. The DC to find that allen wrench is pretty high, because you have to dig around for it for a while, but it's in there. If you "take 20", then you are basically rumaging around in the drawer until you find it, and for the sake of simplicity, in D&D we say that takes two minutes.
Likewise a dungeon explorer who spends two minutes sticking her knife blade into the cracks between stones and wiggling it is also taking 20, and if there is anything there to be found, her thouroughness is quite likely to reveal it.

If you think that taking 20 for searches makes no sense, then why don't you just go ahead and stop looking for your keys after 6 seconds of not finding them?

You can absolutely take 20 on a search, regardless of what you are searching for, and whether or not it is there to be found. Taking 20 on a search check means spending two minutes to search a 5x5 area instead of 6 seconds, guaranteeing that the character will find anything that is possible for her to find, based on skill modifier and class abilities.
If you want to be nice as a DM, allow a character taking 20 on a search to find what he was looking for in only one minute if the search DC is low enough that he could have found it by taking 10.

The important question is "what method of ability generation do you use?" Most of the options in the book make characters that start out with an 18 a rarity, generally speaking a party of four characters is going to end up with only one 18 among them. But the PHB has a chart for bonus spells for stats above 20, and you know your spell caster has seen it, so you can count on wizards especially to try and buff their intelligence as much as possible. If the wizard player gets his way then the barbarian is going to start wanting a 21 strength, even though it doesn't really make as much of a difference for her. The first mistake a DM can make is to allow house rules for character generation that make high stats more common. That's when PCs start getting out of hand.
Of course, with stat buffs given every four levels, stats in the 20's should be expected at mid-levels, especially for characters whose abilities are based largely on a single stat. Strictly speaking, a spellcaster should really be able to get her relative abilty up to 19 by 17th level, or her 9th level spells will be unavailable, but to do that she could start as low as 15 at first level.
Remember that spells and equipment to buff abilities become available at fairly low levels, as well, so if your party's 3rd level barbarian has an 18 strength, that translates into a +12 attack bonus with his masterwork weapon, after getting a bull's strenght from the cleric and then raging. Since at CR 3 ACs tend to be in the 15 to 18 range, this is going to mean a lot of hits, and if he uses a two-handed weapon, we're talking about a +8 damage bonus against targets that probably have around 20 hp, which is going to shorten fights even more.

Igni, thanks for pointing out that clarification. I had actually noticed both when I checked up on the rules to make sure I wasn't remembering a 3.0 rule that had been altered, but I was trying to be brief.
DD

I've noticed a tone in many of these posts that seem to indicate the forgetting of one very important thing about trapfinding, which is that only a rogue or cleric using a find traps spell can do it. The party can spread out and start taking 10s or 20s for hours if they like and only find traps the hard way.
Secret doors are another matter, however. Anyone with an intelligence score can search for those, and since it stands to reason that intelligent monsters would hide their treasure, logically designed dungeons should feature at least one.

Probably the best way to speed game play with regard to searching is to become predictable- cults hide their loot in a secret compartment below the alter, wizards hide theirs behind a false back in a wardrobe, traps are always near entrances and bottlenecks. As the players catch on, they save time by knowing where to search. This may seem boring to some, and for them I would not recommend it.
Another option is to allow the PCs to spot traps and secret doors. Give any PC with line of sight to a secret door or trap they could search for a spot check with a DC of 10 higher than the search DC. This makes the spot skill way more useful, so to maintain balance and still maintain some distinction between what spot and search do, have the check instead be a search check, modified by the PC's wisdom bonus rather than intelligence. Of course they won't always succeed on this check, so don't tell them what their rolling for, just ask for a d20 and look up their skill modifier from your own notes. A limited range of 15 feet should allow a perceptive party to cover most of a room just by passing through it a catch most traps before getting to close. To make tis varient less of a screw job for elf players, the elves secret door finding ability should be extended to 10 feet without the +10 DC and 20 feet with it.
If you want to be a little more restrictive have a success indicate only that a character has noticed that "something is up" with an area, prompting them to make search rolls normally.

Sliced meats, smoked fish, cheese, crusty artisan bread, grapes, sliced apples and pears. Add a moderate amount of wine, ale or mead and you have a spread that is not only easy to prepare and clean up after, but one that is relatively healthy and suggestive of medieval fare.

I know this thread is a little stale but i was just perusing old material when I came across it. The DMG offers a fine system for damage to specific areas (p. 27). In the 2E books (somewhere) I recall that a called shot was made at -4. That seems resonable, so a player (or monster) that wants to damage a body part would have to do some set amount of damage on a successful hit (at -4) to give the target a -2 on the various checks listed in the DMG. I would suggest that 12.5% (1/8) of the targets maximum hp would be a satisfactory threshold. multiple hits to the affected area would confer stacking penelties.

I prefer to think that it takes the same amount of time to swing a great sword as a dagger, in that a knife fighter has to pick his moment and strike in a sort of dance, whereas a two-handed weapon is generally swung full force at a location in space the weilder suspects will be occupied by something he doesn't like by the time the business end gets there.

A player who uses character knowledge to make a bluff seem more likely recieves the benifit of a lower modifier to the NPC's sense motive check, no further bonus to the PC's roll seems neccessary. A player using player knowledge to affect the out come of charisma skills should have his xp award modified, not his check roll.

An important factor weighing in the use of charisma based skills is that they are skills. PCs and NPCs alike must sacrifice points in skills with more obvious combat application, such as concentration, in order to buff their diplomacy, and in general a high charisma score means a lower stat somewhere else. Remember that prior to 3E, charisma was the ability that almost universally took the hit when players had a low score in their rolls.
Some characters now recieve concrete game benifits from high charisma (bards, paladins and sorcerers), and these character types make great party spokes-people or key NPCs, and their knack for interaction is part the package in the same way that evasion and opening locks is not.
A big issue when characters are on the recieving end of charisma checks has to do with player knowledge of the mechanics behind the game, and the best way to fix this problem is to reduce player knowledge. For example, if any out there remembers the Paranoia game, you'll recall there were tables that the GM had to "translate" the players rolls, so that a natural 20 might be great, or horrible, or average. This is a great way to let players make checks to sense motive against a bluffing NPC without knowing how well they did based on the die roll. (this works great for stelth checks, too...and saving throws against disease). Of course, if a character's sense motive is maxed out, then it will be hard to pull one over on her whatever she rolls, but then, thats why she maxed out sense motive. Also, an NPC with a high diplomacy is alot different from an NPC with a high bluff. A diplomatic NPC isn't /lying/ to the characters, just being polite. Intimidate, on the other hand, can work like a diplomacy check, but it can also be used in a fight. NPCs with the capability should /absolutely/ use intimidate to demoralize PCs in a fight.

A spiked chain is like a pole arm or a greatsword. If you're the sort of person who puts their weapon away /ever/ then maybe this isn't the sort of tool for you, try the rapier. In your box.

Hamms Casio? I think he might be the p.w.t. cousin of a Lathandrain paladin I know named Royce Bently. A champion of virtue and two damn fine cars.

Lucky for magic-user types they're often the only member of the party with a decent light weapon-- "Hey Zanzifar, you want this +2 dagger? Cuz I got dibs on the Frostbrand."

In one of the campaigns I participate in we recently explored a facet of the spiked chain.
A player aproaching the spiked chain as a double weapon from a stylistic (rather than game mechanics) pov was interested in a weapon for his sun soul monk that had a different enhancement for each of the two ends of his spiked chain.
Given the level of availability of enchantments in the campaign in question (high), I felt it appropriate to allow a single spiked chain to actually be "two" magic items (at the cost of two magic items, of course) allowing the wielder to choose for each attack which will be the "business end" of the weapon. This kind of thing borders on "munchkinism", I know, but as I have expressed before, so long as PCs and NPCs have access to the same advantages, and that is the sort of game everyone wants to play, then it all works out to a fun balanced game.

I recall a rule in the 3E books, which may or may not have made 3.5E, stating that charisma based skills specifically could not be used on PCs, either by NPCs or by other PCs. Of course, as the DM, you have an edge over the players in that you know more or less what is going on with all the characters, while they know only what you tell them about the NPCs. If the party runs across a hobgoblin guard with a hgh diplomacy mod (for whatever reason) just start the encounter by describing the guard as "different from the others, not bigger or better equipped, but nicer, and possibly brighter. He seems to want to talk rather than fight." Meta-gamers and munchkins might be tempted to ignore this set-up, but there is an easy way to fix that tendency: Early on in the party's career, put the PCs in a situation where it seems like they are being, for example, intimidated by a barman. when they predictably start throwing their weight around anyway, have the retired adventure put down the towel and mug in his hands and treats the party to a free clinic in grappling. They'll be backing down from scullery maids well into epic levels.

Thank you everyone for the nice things you say about my post.
"Meat-shield" is nice, but in my groups we've always preferred "Damage-sponge".
DD

In my experience the important thing in the case of PC mortality is to decide how available life restoring magic and how deadly encounters will be simultaneously. If the town building guidelines from the DMG are used, then a 9th level cleric might occasionally be the high priest in a large town, and would most likely be found in any population center greater than 5,000. Therefore, a strict interpretation would suggest that anyone with five grand and fresh corpse can get a "cure fatal wounds" spell cast. That being the case, so long as treasure is available to cover a sloppy party's ever escalating medical expenses, the DM should feel free rend, swallow whole, and generally deal out the damage whether the characters are at full hit points or in the single digits. Players just have to make sure that the cleric is still up when the dust clears to stabalize any dying characters she can get to before they bleed out, and to park a wagon out front large enough to accommodate bodies as well as loot.
Of course there are a variety of ways to reduce the commoness of adventurers making return trips from the great beyond. Under the 2E rules one could create priesthoods which didn't have access to the spheres neccessary to bring back the dead. In the 3&3.5E nothing prevents a high level cleric from casting raise or ressurect, assuming they have the material component, but a DM wishing to make death more meaningful might simply reduce the population of clerics of level 9 or higher. Another option is to reduce the availability of diamonds- "Yes, I can help your friend. The Eye of Elderith is hidden somewhere to the north of town. If the rumors of its size are accurate, it will be sufficient for the spell to work."
Just make sure that if, as a DM, you limit life restoring effects, you try to get everyone out of the dungeon alive on most nights, or players will have a hard time getting really involved with their characters.

I've been perusing some recent threads and noticed various mentions of min/max-ing and spiked chains and such. I have a few thoughts of my own on the subject.
When the 3E rules came out, I was stoked, because they finally answered an issue that a few fellow gamers had bemoaned. In point, high level fighters had always been "boring" in comparison to high level spell casters, as far as range of choices in an encounter was concernerned. While the magic-user had books of spells to choose from, the fighter was stuck with nothing more than stronger version of the same option he had as a first level character.
Now, a high level fighter can choose from an array of weapons and tactics, each uniquely suited to certain tasks. You wouldn't expect a wizard to cast a fireball that doesn't include the most or toughest enemies within its area, so why discourage a warrior who wants to get the best effect out of her raison d'etre.
Of course, if a DM caters to his players wish lists (and in campaign worlds where magic is abundantly available, such as...the Forgotten Realms, the DMG can become like a Sears catalog) then game balance can get skewed, especially if only one player is taking advantage of the system, while his team mates wallow in mere above averageness. Nevertheless, if the availability of ability boosting items and specialty weapons is adjudicated evenly, a balance is quickly reached.
So pick up that spiked chain and take the Combat Reflexes and Improved Trip feats as soon as you can- then wade into a roomful of orcs and show that wizard he can just memorize water breathing in the place of that fireball next time.

I like to think of hp as sort of a combination of vitality and luck, i.e. when a 10th level fighter gets zinged with a hobgoblin arrow for 5 damage, it does in fact graze him or just barely poke through her armor, but the 1st level sorcerer takes it to the meaty bit of the shoulder and begins to dispense copious amounts of rich arterial blood onto the dungeon floor. As far as healing goes, well, it is divine magic after all, so it may be easily presumed that most of the energy of a cure light wounds cast upon a high level character would actually be used in restoring the fortunes of the individual, vis-a-vis the impending encounter with a cantankerous ogre in the next chamber.
Regarding the miraculous recovery of a peasant laid low and dying who recieves the ministrations of the hamlet's 1st level cleric: this is a situation which can be rectified by sort of ignoring the limit of -10 hp for peasant types and let a falling slab of granite knock that poor loser down to -43 hp and way out of cure light wounds territory.
As far as pools of boiling water or one-way trips down hundred foot long vertical corridors goes, well, people walk away from disasters like that every day, in a D&D campaign, it just happens to always be the same four people.