Donovan Vig's page

But if the wizard d-doors the beatstick into melee range of the enemy artillerist, she now has to waste an entire round or more re-positioning, hence abandoning any minions that were part of a formation (mariliths being the master tacticians they are), and this of course is AFTER the beatstick got off his full attack.

Could you give me an example (core only) of what the wizard/cleric/druid could do that would be better than disrupting the enemies formation AND engaging the leader in melee?

I am sure there will be a few things in the theoretical sense, I am genuinely curious as to why this is such an awful option.

...WE WANT MORE!..WE WANT MORE!..WE WANT MORE!...

C'mon DG, Don't make us break out the torches and pitchforks! More sex! More violence! More...all the other stuff!

I'm at work, so forgive my asking and/or ignorance, but doesn't the monk still need to be within 5' of a vertical surface to slow his fall? If so, he either needs to leap THROUGH threatened squares (provoking numerous AoO's) or OVER the squares taking falling damage?

The example build is a great offensive build...but appears to be missing ANYTHING in relation to defense. This is a bad move for a monk...one that as a DM I have exploited many times to splatter them all over the battlefield.

considering that the biggest complaints on these boards involve;

A.) The sheer amount of time suckage involved in creating NPC's and custom critters, coupled with -
B.) Book flipping in the middle of combat

with the average number of rounds in my 4E games easily exceeding the average for my 3.5 games, it seems IMO that it is the lags in combat that are pissing people off, not the length of combat itself per se.

This approach would ameliorate that immensely. I always wondered why more books like Enemies and Allies from sword and sorcery didn't make the mainstream. I would give my extra testicle for a 250 pg hardcover with, say, 10 NPC's per 5 level range flushed out with exhaustive stat blocks. Draconomicon did it for dragons, and it was decent (at least the stat blocks anyway).

Intelligent weapons can be a blast. There is a good update to the 3.5 ruleset regarding them in one of the last issues of Dungeon...war of the wielded I believe was the title.

Just remember, that they are generally created with a specific purpose. That purpose is their whole reason for existing. Their personalities (especially newer items) tend toward naivette, and OCD.

Also, make good use of their EGO scores. They have absolutely nothing to lose by repeatedly asserting their influence over a weak mind.

with sub-light travel times being what they are, the rec room should probably be second in size only to the cargo holds. The dining area as well, with the crew's quarters barely larger than the beds placed in them.

If it is a "clunker" a whole room could be designated as spare parts, possibly with an entire mostly intact engine nacelle. The players could then figure out what they want.

Otherwise, break the rest of the square footage down into life support pods containing atmo scrubbers or algae tanks or something. Heck, include some smugglers holds.

I LOATHE 4e - This is a disclaimer. However, giving someone the cold shoulder because they don't is simply an example of Douchebaggery of the worst kind.

I don't alweays agree with you Sebastian, but I have no problem with you or your preference in role playing games. I hope I can help by apologizing on behalf of the mentally challenged individual that decided to crap on you.

I'd have to agree - get rid of the silly 1970's stereotype and give the Monk all simple weapons, and perhaps a sidebar explaining the Oriental equivalent of the European weapons for those that want to retain the names for flavor.

The Turkish Whirling Dervish practiced the equivalent of a martial art, and their weapon of choice was the Yatagan, which was just a long Knife, or shortsword in European terminology.

Even the Vikings had a form of martial arts, and practiced catching thrown spears and returning them at their enemies (adding their own momentum to the already speeding missile).

Its counter-productive to hamstring a class based on out-dated bigotry.

LOL! The "Hashish Master" PrC? Kinda like drunken master, except he keeps forgetting who to punch?

Warmage with best BAB progression. My $.02

We use the "standard" size modifiers, requires a full attack action, and causes either a relevant -2 penalty to related actions (similar to PHB table) or double weapon damage.

IT doesnt come up very often though, its utility has pretty much been absorbed into the sunder mechanic. A variant of sunder could pretty well cover physical damage to a body part though....what are the hardness/HP per inch of flesh? lol.

One has to be careful though, otherwise I found that it really undermines the critical hit mechanic, as well as all fights becoming:

Ranger: I shoot him in the eye.
DM: Roll to hit AC 24
Ranger: No problem
DM: Uh...he has an...arrow sticking out of his eye...
Random Player: No Way! He should totally be dead!
Ranger: Take 9 damage.
Random player: An arrow in the eye? For 9 damage? LAME!

Just a small rant feel free to give it a miss.

In the old days when there was a Fighter, Thief, Cleric and Mage , Fighters had a very well established place and role in the game. But now do we really need one ?

I mean a Barbairan, Ranger and Paladin are all Fighters with a certain flavour. Do we really need a Flavorless Fighter ?

I'll grant that fighter are really good at doing one thing, multiclassing hehehe. So perhaps they should be relegated to a new type of class specifically for multi classing only.

Good BAB, extra feats no fancy abilities to speak of grab a few levels as you require. Why keep hitting a dead horse , we all know the reason Barbarians Ranger and Paladins arose was because people who play'd fighters were sick of the blandness of their characters, ok so now we've got Falvour'd Fighter why not let Gramps go the way of the do-do ;)

Contrary to your position, I would respectfully submit that the fighter is actually the equal to the other options. This is due to the "blank slate" that allows ytou to take this class, more than any other, in whatever direction you feel necessary.

Pally, Ranger, and Barb all come with their class "baggage". That is a theme or flavor that you either embrace, or play in spite of. Some folks don't want this at all. Besides, you ever try to build an exotic weapon centric character with any of those? What a waste of time!

Donovan Vig wrote:

Phlebas wrote:

Donovan Vig wrote:

my take would be to tie it to the same mechanic as combat reflexes, allow the character to, as a swift action, evade a number of AoO's equal to their dex modifier for 1 round.

Simple fix in line with existing mechanics. What say you all?

simple gets my vote every time

(assume you mean AoO's from movement rather than any AoO?)

Your assumption would be correct :)

The only remaining bit of errata would concern whether the number of attacks relate to the same creature (i.e. a gargantuan creature threatening several squares that must be moved through) or simply "attacks provoked" which is the direction I am leaning.

Short example being monk charging gargantuan red dragon (threatens 20ft IIRC) with a 17 dex (cruddy example to make point). The first three squares are free, but the last one earns a free bite attack, and likely, a quick demise.

Otherwise you have an insane parody as the monk literally runs circles around the dragon with impunity without the DM ever having a chance to put him in his place.

As an aside, the mechanics for Large and in charge may need some help, as this feat will be useless against most characters who favor movement on the battlefield.

Attacks provoked would be my assumption as well, so if we assume its one AoO / dex bonus would mean

Dex 13 = 1 AoO - could ignore reach weapon or 10' reach when closing, step away from enemy without reach

Dex14-15 = 2AoO - could ignore 15' reach, or move partially around a single opponent, or partially between 2 opponents

dex 16-17 = 3 AoO - could run directly past a single individual, ignore 20' reach, move partially between multiple opponents

dex 18-19 = 4 AoO - could move between & past 2 individuals(if starting next to one

all useful but not overpowering. I would be tempted to say that the AoO is an auto-miss which would mean that enemies without combat reflexes & high dex wouldn't get the AoO if its the 3rd / 4th provoke...

We are on the exact same page :) It is always refreshing when that happens.

The AoO non trigger vs. automiss is a big deal. One - to be perfectly honest - I hadnt even thought about. I would tend more towards them just not happening, as auto misses would be a HUGE mechanical shift. i.e. the dex 24 monk sprints along/through the enemy lines causing all the bad guys to expend, possibly their only AoO for the round, as the rest of the party crashes through them like a sack of bowling balls.

I'll have to pondere this a wee bit...

Donovan Vig wrote:

my take would be to tie it to the same mechanic as combat reflexes, allow the character to, as a swift action, evade a number of AoO's equal to their dex modifier for 1 round.

Simple fix in line with existing mechanics. What say you all?

simple gets my vote every time

(assume you mean AoO's from movement rather than any AoO?)

Your assumption would be correct :)

The only remaining bit of errata would concern whether the number of attacks relate to the same creature (i.e. a gargantuan creature threatening several squares that must be moved through) or simply "attacks provoked" which is the direction I am leaning.

Short example being monk charging gargantuan red dragon (threatens 20ft IIRC) with a 17 dex (cruddy example to make point). The first three squares are free, but the last one earns a free bite attack, and likely, a quick demise.

Otherwise you have an insane parody as the monk literally runs circles around the dragon with impunity without the DM ever having a chance to put him in his place.

As an aside, the mechanics for Large and in charge may need some help, as this feat will be useless against most characters who favor movement on the battlefield.

Excellent! Thanks for the feedback, it is greatly appreciated.

For reference sake, pn pg.140 of the PFRPG Alpha 3, there are several magical pieces of equipment. In their description, they state that the bonus is temporary until the item has been worn for 24 hours...

I can read that in several ways. Can I get a clarification? While I realize that a cool item that is only good for 24 total hours of use is ludicrous, the statement is pretty vague. Also, why does it matter at all that it is temporary for the first 24 hours? Am i missing something?

my take would be to tie it to the same mechanic as combat reflexes, allow the character to, as a swift action, evade a number of AoO's equal to their dex modifier for 1 round.

Simple fix in line with existing mechanics. What say you all?

Donovan Vig wrote:

dude...www.dmtools.org

been up awhile and has several hundred critters rolled, statted, and templated up already. They do requests too!

I am totally aware of this web site and a big fan -- though I haven't had much success in adding Pathfinder NPC's to it.

Also, as I use WORD to document all the scenarios I write -- it is just easier to grab a stat-block and dump it into a thread.

CJ

cool, just making sure. Not a whole lot of folks do know about it, and we can always use more peeps helping out.

Donovan Vig wrote:

The whole reason for the monks weapons in the first place was to allow different damage types to be possible. Otherwise they would be utterly useless against anything with a DR vs. Bludgeoning. Also, the damage dice are better at lower levels.

Actually, the monk weapons were introduced in 3.0 when DR worked differently. They existed for flavor and to make it so that monks could benefit from Magic Weapon and weapon enchantments, because their hands did not act like manufactured weapons and the Amulet of Mighty Fist didn't exist yet.

Donovan Vig wrote:

Talk to your DM. He can make whatever weapon you need into a monk weapon (I would think) Greatsword? Try Daikatana. Longsword? Ninja-to(IIRC), and yes, all three base spears should be there as well.

I promise no one has ever Flurried with a Daikatana or no-dachi.

agreed, but sometimes you have to SEE the horror with your own eyes to understand. I allowed one of my players to wheedle a greatspear onto his monk weapons list...it was REALLY bad. I mean REALLY REALLY bad. The party killed him, and buried him with his stupid spear.

The current rule is pretty much light weapons only. It kills a teeny bit of the flavor, but it fits in with adapting to "western" cultural ideals.

BTW, Hand axes seem to be the best one so far, with kukris a VERY close second.

Eberron 3.5 safe? lol.

Alpha 3 is pretty good. Most of the glaring issues would probably never come up in a "normal" game.

I would, however, strongly reccommend getting "un-rusty" using something you are already familiar with. With the focus on backward compatibility, it will be pretty easy to convert one way or the other.

Thats a DM caveat. If you want minions, use a generic stat block, and give them 1hp. It's that easy. However, I don't feel it should be core.

I ditched XP too, just gave levels when the going started getting rough, or the story dictated it.

Dumped xp for item creation, required "special" i.e. questing components for creation.

Allowed players to take 2 item creation feats for the price of 1, as they were always viewed as a wasted feat.

all the raise dead type spells require a feat (thank you Dragon magazine!)

No more permanent ability score/level loss

was using "minions" 10 years ago to keep things rolling along faster.

Dumped the great wheel, all planes are pancaked next to each other, squished between the positive and negative energy planes. All the "fantastic" locations are merely pocket dimensions created by uber-beings in charge of them.

my personal favorite...Dragon scale type means absolutely nothing with regards to alignment...seeing my meta gaming party TPK'ed by the CE gold dragon was priceless.

Coming soon...dwarves being banned from owning blacksmithing shops, joining gnomes who've been locked away from the alchemical labs.

BTW...anyone else ever use the "dwarven ale that comes inside a solid stone that once cracked open melts a hole in the bar before nearly killing stupid PC who drinks it anyway?"

I see that one all the time, and for the life of me, cannot remember where I came up with it.

LOL! and Drow...sigh...makes me wanna pull my Talislanta books out again. NO ELVES!

The whole reason for the monks weapons in the first place was to allow different damage types to be possible. Otherwise they would be utterly useless against anything with a DR vs. Bludgeoning. Also, the damage dice are better at lower levels.

Talk to your DM. He can make whatever weapon you need into a monk weapon (I would think) Greatsword? Try Daikatana. Longsword? Ninja-to(IIRC), and yes, all three base spears should be there as well.

Just think of the starting list as more like "guidelines". After all, they are really nothing but someone elses house rules.

dude...www.dmtools.org

been up awhile and has several hundred critters rolled, statted, and templated up already. They do requests too!

no...just an incredibly annoying always off key half orc with a song in his heart. His perform was drums, but low wisdom always led to his singing along...like a terrible greenish jack kerouak(sp?)...only with a greataxe.

The only bard I ever played was a "Rage Singer" that's a nifty title for an evenly multiclassed Barbarian/Bard.

I got the skillz (lol) the rage, the extra movement, and buffing spells. I was pretty happy with it until he was eaten by a green dragon.

agreed, cruddy skill points to spend on cruddy skills. Never did like that one, hamstrings the fighter by making him either boost intelligence and lose whacking power/HP/speed, or being relegated to the party "big dumb guy with sword".

I look to the iconics for examples of how lame this is when compared to pop culture references. Conan? He could do more than swim, climb, ride, and intimidate - and it wasn't because he was "smart" in the bookish sense either.

I just hated seeing my players 1 level dipping twice toget the skills and skill points they wanted to make the character they envisioned. To many of my PC's would start as rogue for the sweet starting points, then after 2nd or 3rd level, move on to ranger or fighter.

IMO, skills are still criminally underused, even in PFRPG. I understand that a lot of it is up to the individual game/DM/Table, but really!

Maybe a combined splat book with all of the different skill uses would be useful.

Thanks for the feedback guys, It is appreciated!

Thanks for the feedback, of course positive is much easier to digest than negative. lol.

Like I said above, it has been a great flavor enhancer for my own game, but there is only so many opinions one can get from a small group.

Thanks for the rules reminder, I haven't had nearly enough time to fine tooth it. AND I keep getting the version printouts mixed up.

I've just found it funny that with all the awesome customization 3.X has, that we are still stuck with "someone else's" idea of what each class "should" get. It also IMO has reduced the dependency in my group for needless multiclassing.

It's really cool that cross class has gone bye-bye, but there is just a little bit farther to go.

Thanks, I really wanted to remember that bull episode while I was eating. Here, have my ramen - I'm not hungry anymore.

LOL! the greek brothel incident later that campaign was better, remember if you ever DO go to a brothel in another country - make sure it is not a gay one...full of vampires.

Name: Kiernan o' the dales
Human Bard 7

Cause of demise: OOC discussion bleeds into game

So the party encounters a group of stone giants on an old farm during the course of our normal adventure. The Bard decides to "negotiate" for access to the cellar of the farmhouse they are squatting on.

The player is having a raucous (and rather funny) ooc conversation while they are trying to decide how to go about this. Gradually, the conversation begins to slip more and more in character.

After hearing this group of tiny bugs talk amongst themselves about:

a.) the relative merits of just killing them.
b.) How ugly they were.
c.) how stupid giants are in the first place.
d.) that there was tons of food AND captives in the cellar.

The giants, understandeably, struck pre-emptively. The look on the player's face was AWESOME!

DM - I need a reflex save from all three of you.

Player 1 (fighter) rolled a 17, made it!
Player 2 (sorceror) rolled a 14 made it!
Player 3 (Bard) rolled a 6, what happened?

DM - The hulking hurler that you called "a walking mountain of misbegotten, half-retarded gravel just threw and outhouse at you...and hit.

Players 1&2 - laugh hysterically
Player 3 - But...okay damage?

DM - 82 hp, you are not only dead, you are wicked witch dead...oh! And not only is he trying to pull off a section of the farmhouse - his friends have their clubs out and are advancing with grins on.

Whole party (minus bard) RUN AWAY!

I won't get into the details of what was done to the body, lets just say it wasn't pretty - or humane.

So...assuming that your campaign isn't using the cliche of the war college, why do both fighters in you group have the exact same skillsets?

Never mind that they grew up on opposite sides of the continent from each other. Never mind that one of them was a village hunter, and the other a farmer. Aside from their respective "professions" they still, oddly have the same. exact. skills.

Why? If we are keeping the skill ranks system, why not go all out on the customization end? That being the strength of the 3.X system. Why should every single character be a clone of the next?

My proposal, remove static skill sets from chatacter creation. Chuck them out along with cross class skills. The only differentiation should be trained/untrained.

Instead, allow every character to actually flavor his character by choosing 1 class skill per base skill point @ lvl. 1 + int bonus. (humans, half-elves, and half-orcs get +1) Doing this gives a player incentive to create a "unique" character with built in RP fodder.

Now, a fighter working as muscle for a thieve's guild should be able to "pick up" a few things without making a character developement blunder (cross class skills, I'm looking at you!) one cross class point is fine and all at levels 1-5, but they quickly become wasted ink after that, especially when you have a class that has been shafted on skill points to begin with.

Better yet, a wizard whom traffics in demons and undead piddles himself because a fighter 5 levels lower rolls an intimidate check? This guy feeds babies to bebiliths, why is he scared?

It hurts nothing, removes the silly issue of having class skills that you simply do not use, adds immense amounts of flavor, and is still within the realm of simple conversion for backwards compatibility.

This system has been a house rule for three years now, and has worked rather spectacularly. The first time the party encountered a tumbling non multiclass wizard was priceless ;)

Think about it and heap your criticisms here, I have yet to find a break or exploit. Some feedback would be cool. Thanks!

holy cr@p...wish I had that kinda time...Excellent points!

At my table, we :

A.) limit the number of buffs to 1 per 4 levels. This one the players fought me on, but conceded early that it felt right. This was later adjusted to be "active" buffs, i.e. casting true strike didn't de-activate mage armor.

B.) Placed time limts on rounds in real time. I have an egg timer stuck to the back of my screen. When it's your turn, you have 2 minutes to at least have SOMETHING put together.

C.) Monster prep? Cut out custom skills. Monsters have set bonus of 25%-50% of hit die as static modifier. Using this as DA RULE, and make exceptions for BBEG or iconic encounters like dragons. Also, MAX HP every time.

D.) Being VERY picky about PrC's. Face it, 75% of PrC's are crap. Re-iterations of variations of specialized classes designed to fill pages in a book. Players who want an exotic PrC had better RP it to the hilt, and prove he wants it. This also helps weed out broken builds.

E.) Lately, I have had a lot of success using larger groups of weaker opponents. For a EL 20 party, this could conceivably be 15-20 7th level Gnoll barbarians led by a pair of 15th level priests.

Mostly, you just have to fudge, fudge, fudge. If rolling saves for 20 bad guys is tiresome, just outright kill 5 of them, and scatter the rest. Us rules lawyers have a hard time with stuff like this, but we sometimes have to remember, fair doesn't always equal fun. Especially from the players POV.

Hope this helps.

...If you ever find you need proof that people can be stupid, just visit a forum, any forum...

This troll doesn't even rise to the level of true trolling. His facts are nothing more than 3E vs 4E talking points, his logic is skewed, and he evidently is a true red blooded racist.

I would LOVE to visit his home, on the condition thast I could bludgeon him with anything that was made in a country that "we" don't like.

a fool, plain and simple. One that was never onboard to begin with, and will not be missed as he waves his finger at us in the distance...but a fool nonetheless.

To the OP, does it matter? A concrete decision either way influences exactly nothing.

D&D is something different to everyone. To me, it was my first character being dismembered alive by a troll - it happened to be played with the 2nd ed. rules.

So many people, so many arguments, yet in the end, it doesn't matter.

WoTC will make their money and continue publishing 4E

Paizo will continue along PFRPG until it is no longer economically feasible to do.

Every single one of us is guaranteed to have a wildly different view of what is and is not D&D.

So what is your point? I loathe 4E, but that will change nothing. It simply is. Nothing short of the tactical nuclear annihilation of WoTC headquarters, the publisher, and now everyone who purchased a copy will change that simple fact.

I would argue that D&D came in a red box, and everything after that wasn't in said red box is NOT D&D, it is AD&D, Revised 2nd, 3e, 3.5, and now 4E. Rebranded, but totally different products.

excellent points, just what DO you replace SoD with that will remain somewhat balanced?

Excess damage just penalizes folks with low hit dice/fort saves.

Typed damage penalizes anyone(thing) that isn't resistant to it.

an interesting topic if there ver was one.

Name: Lezidius Faustus
13th level Human Evoker
Homebrew game 3.X

Circumstances of demise: Summoning the golden circle

Not too long after the big white bull episode that was burned into your memories a while back, The partie's battlemage (ahem...evoker) is assisting int he exploration of a ruined tower that seems to have a 20 foot circular shaft descending at least 100' down below the earth.

Using his impressive runelore knowledge, (i rolled a 1 for him ) he reads runes on the small podium near the shaft. "Step off, to summon the golden circle." he looks at me with what can only be described as resignation, then steps "off".

After falling 220' to the bottom of the shaft, he was crippled with several broken bones. The pack of doormats, I mean ghouls couldnt resist having dinner delivered and went to work.

The party cleric looks again at the podium and correctly translates "Step here to summon the golden circle" and steps on the assigned area, causing the 20' diameter disc of solid gold to levitate up to the top.

Upon seeing the now skeletonized corpse of what was once the party leader, the fighter says sotto voice "Hi guys, I am dead because I am a stupid wizard. Please take all of my stuff and use my bones as wind chimes. Oh! and make the fighter party leader". The wizards player then blew Mt. Dew all over the battlemat and had to leave the table.

IT only got better when the group met the senile lich in the basement library.

I hate the fact that it requires a simple and linear progression path to function effectively. The second your players think outside the box, you are back to page flipping again.

Thanks to Rouge for this wonderful piece of feedback!

I see. So now I'm "whiney" because I disagree with you. Perhaps you would care to offer an actual argument rather than just toss ad hominem attacks?

Sorry for the delay, I've been moving into my first house ;)

Any yes, rouge, the wonderful response you gifted me with does qualify as whining. After all, whining is just anger squeezed through a teeny-tiny pipe.

I didn't disrespect your opinion, I simply stated mine. Ad hominem attacks require a target to be ad hominem attacks, "bravely" throwing yourself in front of one doesn't count.

As to the mechanic:

SoD is a tricky thing. Remove it, and you can kiss off using necromancers or death magic centric characters at all. Keep it, and eventually the wizard will be the target of Power Word Kill and whine about how it was impossible to make his save.

Strangely enough, I never hear these arguments when death comes from a failed save vs. a 15D6 delayed blast fireball. Or a Old Red Dragon full attack action with 10 point power attack option. Same result, different path. Hell, you don't even get a save when the dragon tears you to pieces.

Is it SoD that is the culprit here? Or just the fact that players die?
In 16 years of gaming, I have never witnessed a player sidelined for more than 20 minutes. They either found something enjoyable to do and bit the bullet, were drafted as co-DM, or brought back.

There is no such thing as a game that is "fun" all the time. This is generally proportional to the amount of emotional investment one has in the game being played.

Simple solution: Agree before campaign starts how it's gonna play out. Go over the house rules and have everyone agree. Then play the game the way it is meant to be played. The dice do not lie. They do not cheat, hold grudges, or play silly games either. Most importantly, the one thing they do NOT do is pull punches. If you rolled a 1 on your finger of death save...sorry, you DEAD.

How is this a bad thing? I bring you back to the dragon example, and pose a question. If said dragon encounter involved 7 rounds, 1 surprise and 6 combat rounds, and each one of them involved a character being rended to death, burnt to a cinder, or ensorcelled into oblivion, is this REALLY any different than having most of the party roll poorly and fall to a death spell?

The "problem" with save or die is whiny players. Ironically, most of my gamers LIKE occasionally dying...they get to run monsters then. It is a nice change, and helps me out considerably.

Other than that, in any game when the whole raise/resurrect thing hasn't been houseruled into the Nth dimension, death is generally just a minor setback.

Now disintegrate and destruction? MUCH more fun. Undead conversions even more so.

good call, they seem to get the short shrift as disposeable "Oh Crap!" moments all to easily forgotten after the next fight. Excellent use of difficult terrain as well. Calcifying pools and crystalline fish...sweet.

Gotta meet the king of broken swords...sounds quite appropriately sinister.

MORE! must have more! C'mon DG, Fix this gamer junkie up!

Excellent...purely excellent. Love the cinematic feel that you have produced here. Hungry for more!

anyone at all?

...and ice cream?

wrapped in a mystery. My rage threw off my aim...I mean how tactless! It's all good though. I just think about what his car must've smelled like with half a bottle of fat free ranch - in July - and I get all tingly feeling.

Nothing quite like it since, just the typical player on player drama.

nobody at all? I have pie.

Donovan Vig wrote:

It's all good guys, at the end of the day...They have their D&D, we have our D&D, and we are all still hamsters. Where's the downside?

The downside of being a hamster.

LOL! Being a hamster is no joke. It is an enterprise for the bold, the brave, the...fuzzy.

Take to the skies boo! Take to the skiiiiieeeeeessss!

It's all good guys, at the end of the day...They have their D&D, we have our D&D, and we are all still hamsters. Where's the downside?

Baaaa.

...insert appropriate velcro handgear joke here...

/dodge tomatoes ;)

1200 page.. hmm.. talking about a certan AD&D tome.. cause that was less then 100 pages? I can't think of a D20 tome like that.. of that size. *snickers*

If it is a supplement for 3E, what tome might that be? Peak my interest.. sounds like a party book. :)

That would be the original, unedited great netbook of spells, 2nd edition. There's probably still a few copies floating about. I spent a 4 day weekend once removing all of the sex, alcohol, and prank jokes to build and actual working Book of horrors...shrunk from 571K words to 187K...pretty amazing. Held such gems as Personal nuke: material component a 1 kilo chunk of uranium...you've carried for at least a year. Or soul sundering, allowing you to explode in a burst of energy - dealing d12 points per level with no save. It had a 75% chance of destroying you forever...or you were dumped on a random level of the abyss - naked, at 1st level clutching the one material component - wait for it! - a platinum dagger.

IT was a lot of fun to use before the official 2nd ed. tome of magic was released.

I will now attempt to return this thread to it's original topic by inquiring as to Dame Scrimm's health and circumstances. Anyone?