Protectar

Deceitfuldreamer's page

13 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


I'm currently not running anything but my last group used to meet on Fridays. The session usually runs about 6-10 hours. With maybe a hour break during for a foodrun.


drunken_nomad wrote:


That's all I can think of in the last year of rejections. Some of this info is kind of old...but Mr Walker said recently low-level and 'urban' adventures are still given preference. And epic-level adventures are really needed always.

I can do that. I have an Epic-level idea that I was saving for my next group.


SirMarcus wrote:

I think the leadership feat is yet another example of how versions 3.0 & 3.5 constantly create problems and then later are forced to impliment complex systems to fix the problems (or worse, force DMs to untangle the mess). It's like the overmedication of our elderly, for crying out loud!

I believe WOTC created the leadership feat as a way to curb the large-scale usage of followers/henchmen by the average PC so that the whole thing didn't get out of control (which I wasn't aware has ever been a problem until now), instead they succeeded in creating the very problem they sought to avoid. If characters are going to spend a hard-earned feat, they sure as h*** are going to use it. This just motivates PCs to squeeze every possible advantage out of their followers and creates the kind of headaches the original poster complained about. This requirement is not enforced on NPCs because WOTC figured no DM in his right mind is going to waste time with endless underlings and thereby rob their cool villian of the spotlight.
Still, now they have created this problem and it won't be easy to fix. You can't unring a bell so changing leadership to a non-feat option for those who've already played it in its newest version probably will do little to alleviate stress and trouble. Once a DM finds him/herself in this quagmire, its best to use tactics like those described in the thread above. Those DMs who haven't encountered this as a problem, remove the leadership feat while there's still time or risk going screaming into the night!
Thanks again, WOTC!

Before leadership it was indeed worst. I had parties that where trying to recruit worshipers in a bid for Godhood. Imagine having to answer the question.P.c.How many worshippers do I need before I can become a minor power? Hmmm...1,000,000. PC..Okay I'm going to go into major cities and begin paying beggers to worship me. DM...oh crud.


Epic-level characters need epic level problems. any creature that's in the epic level handbook can lay waste to a bunch of pions or a stronghold and if the pc's want to stop this problem they are going to have to do it themselves or they wont have an army or stronghold for long.

Demon Hordes
A Rage of Dragons
A Gith invasion


The open-air bazaar can't be stressed enough. Everyone comes to a bazaar and it is a place where you should be able to find anything. Haggling is a must. In most arabic cultures its considered rude not to haggle. Nothing in a bazzar should have a fixed price. Traveler's are often well treated in Arabian cultures. Women Pc's in your party will have a lot of problems adjusting due to the custom in this setting. And you should have a spellslayer in your campaign. Its my favorite kit from the Al-Quaddim setting.


Dire Weasels: If you give them advanced hit dice so that the fighter cant get rid of them with a power attack/cleave combo. You have a group of low challenge rating enemies that can take just about anyone down. No matter how tough you are con damage sucks.

Mind Flayers- there classics. There smart and they always have fodder.

Death Knight/Vampire: These two are about equal in my book. Nothing like a death knight riding a nightmare and sprouting bad poetry to make a party cringe. I also have a soft spot for the hero fallen from grace sterotype.

Celestials- hard to believe,but to me there is nothing like having a party run afoul the forces of good. It offers them a problem that they can't hack-n-slash there way out of. they have to role-play and it usually teaches the group that sometimes alignments aren't as clear cut as they seem.

Kobolds- this only happens in high-level campiagns. I usually run high power campaigns. Usually when I run a campaign where I use notiable NPC's there is always the temptation for the PC's to get cockey and break the law or some other nonsense because they look at their character and begin to feel that they are upstoppable and that they can take anything. Which is why I always warn players who haven't played under me before because those are usually the one's out to prove the point that since they now have this really good equipment such as the "+2000 sword of god-slaying" then obvious there unstoppable and I can't provide a challenging encounter....I simply say. "I can kill you with kolbolds and I can do it using existing rules..." Of course I never do. I just give them a good run for their money to prove my point.


The Fey are definitely underdone. I think the much needed exposure is a good idea. I even have a couple of ideas along that line of introducing some new fey that will give adventurers nightmares.


The Master of the Unseen Hand has enough firepower without needing the arcane spell progression.


As a reader I enjoy the Class Acts articles. Some of the articles are campaign specific and I can see how that could be a problem. My reccomendation would be to feature generic classes and give ideas of how they can be adapted to each campiagn setting or just run a couple of class acts that were from different settings in each issue. I've always adapted any material I've needed and since I run a planescape campaign. I end up encountering and dealing with adventures from every setting including my own "homebrew" settings. I will agree with early comments that I would enjoy seeing more planar cities. Because this saves me the time of creating cities and there various histories. I don't agree with eliminating all the campiagn specific material. I think it would be a big mistake and alienate a majority of your fan base.


The creator of the Golem usually cast all of the spell-like abilities that he/she wants the golem to have during the creation process. That way he doesn't have to worry about the creature's spell immmunities.


How about creating a really cool new Monster for the boss encounter?

Woontal wrote:
drunken_nomad wrote:
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
whats meant by 'low encounter'?

I think he means no hack-n-slash. More roleplaying, lots of atmosphere and description. Which I can't write worth a durn. I have some city proposals in this batch for Dungeon...so we'll see. And for the budding writers out there, if you use a half-??? template for the big bad evil guy, the powers-that-be said to make it super cool! That is what killed two of my last proposals. The newness of template-ing has worn off.

It's funny because I've been told that the most important part of any submitted adventure is the promise of a dungeon. Political city adventures I can do, having them accepted by Dungeon, that's another matter completely. Seems that it is a lot more acceptable to write a dungeon that is generically fittable to any campaign than to write a plot-based story that revolves around character interaction.

Now I'm not dissing this, far from it. If people wanna pay for dungeons, then dungeons it is...


Night Below was really good. I wouldn't mind seeing that one again....Of course I also liked the Rod of Seven parts.


I allow every character race but, every character must have a background. I award minor magic and money based on these. I feel It allows the characters to personalize their history. The rule of Vorpal weapons. To have a Vorpal blade or Sword of sharpness you have to kill the original owner. After all, If you had a blade that could instant kill most creatures would you sell it or leave it lying around? I also make characters make balance checks when fighting creatures 2 sizes bigger. If you are a rouge with 12 strengh and you get hit by a stormgiant are you really going to be standing up after it?