Gabriel N's page

cambion wrote:

Other than just providing us the names of the dieties in question, where are we to find the basic descriptions (other than the books as I have not received mine as of yet)?

But I do agree with NSpicer on how the presentation of dieties should be approached, at least as a basic outline (looks pretty good and readable).

The best place at this time to find out more about these deities is probably to sift through our blog. There's been a couple of threads on the boards here that talk quite a bit about some of them too. The Player's Guide to Rise of the Runelords will have some more info, and then each of the Pathfinders and GameMastery modules will add more.

Pathfinder #2, for example, has a "Core Beliefs" style article about Desna.

Woah, hang on. People who only get Pathfinder and not the modules aren't going to miss out on important setting information, are we? Because that's not just a deal-breaker - it smashes the deal to dust, urinates on it, and makes an obscene sculpture with the resulting paste.

To clarify, I'm fine with the modules providing appropriate background information that isn't transcribed word for word into the latest Pathfinder. However, if the answer to "I'd like enough information about Norgorber to play a cleric." is "Get Module FU: Search for the Exclusive Secrets of Norgorbitus.", I'm going to be upset.

Guennarr wrote:

I just had a look into today's blog entry:

Six new monsters per Pathfinder issue?!
I.e. 72 monsters per year!

That should actually read: MINIMUM 6 new monsters per Pathfinder. Some volumes will have more.

... aaand now I'm getting Pathfinder.

I still want player-oriented material (including base classes, while I'm thinking wishfully), but I'm a sucker for monsters. Unless... well, I'm not worried; I'm pretty sure Paizo couldn't turn out a piece of crap like the MM4 even if they tried.

Well, this manipulative crap is the proverbial insult added to the injury.

I hope their vaunted, mysterious online content does exactly as well as its quality warrants - I'm sure that's about the worst thing I could wish on them.

20% bonuses and stock options?

Too lawful. He'd filet them because, hell, demon princes need good gaming aids as much as anyone else. Haven't you heard he's running a bimonthly game for Primus, Mephistopheles and Gwynharwyf? At least, that's who they'll be down to with Yeenoghu quitting in a huff over never getting a Demonomicon article.

Pathfinder is definitely not strictly DM material. I forget what percentage James and Erik are shooting for, but a LOT of each volume of Pathfinder will be non-adventure-specific stuff. New monsters, cities, etc.

Monsters and cities are DM material, too...

Mind you, I love monsters. Cities from some new campaign setting I have no personal investment in, not so much. The one thing that could sell me on Pathfinder is, basically, a (perhaps slightly condensed) Dragon's worth of DM and player options and ideas in every publications. Basically, I'd be willing to shell out the extra money for even a rough approximation of Dragon tacked on to the other stuff. I realise you're aiming more towards making the new Dungeon, though, so... good luck.

Gabriel Noël,
mourning the death of an era and a dream.

I find that a petition is much more reasonable way to attain that than a boycott.

Eh, I'll sign every petition I can find when I get back online after a few hours' sleep, and write some e-mails too. I'm going to do every little bit I can, not just the bare minimum.

Well, considering that that we do know A) that it's a monthly product dedicated to offering a complete adventure path (like CS, AoW or ST) per six issues, B) will include spiffy extras (analogous to Wormfood and Savage Tidings) and setting expansions (like the "Backdrop" articles), C) is authored by the same people who brought us previous adventures in Dungeon and articles in Dragon, and D) brought to us by a quality publisher... I think those of us that have taken the leap of faith and become charter subscribers to Pathfinder have a idea of what we're getting in for.

You're right, of course; we know Pathfinder will be good because it's basically the new Dungeon. I'm just bitter because that still leaves me without a reliable, quality substitute to WotC's hit-and-miss sourcebooks; what I'll really miss - and what I subscribed to - is Dragon.

I'm not boycotting. I'm not gonna let this ruin my D&D games.

I'll just go with the flow. I'm sure they'll pass off the license to another company. And if they don't, we'll still have other great Paizo products coming in.

They won't. The whole point of this move is that WotC think they can rake in loads of cash with online content they know would never sell if they didn't shut down the long-running, proven alternative.

For me, boycotting WotC products isn't about getting Dragon back - I know that's impossible. I'm also not trying to cause losses out of spite - of course they'll never notice us in terms of money. What I'm hoping is that, just maybe, they'll have a little more respect for us when this is all over.

And by the way, what's a Pathfinder "charter" subscriber? Someone who's already been suckered into paying without any idea what it'll be like?

Deimodius wrote:

THAT is probably the real reason that I am so angry with WotC, not just because we are losing a piece of D&D history (did WotC just bring out a big book celebrating that history?)

If you mean The Art of Dragon, that's a Paizo product.

I think he means the WotC book, "30 years of D&D" or something along those lines, that came out a while back.

The Jade had the right idea in another thread. If you're not up to a permanent boycott (I'm undecided, but I can play Eberron just fine with what's already published, and not much else that WotC is releasing lately is worthwhile), you could just do it for a few months; it will still help scare some sense into WotC (assuming enough people get involved), and you can always get any good books later, cheaper.

jokamachi wrote:

If this was one of the exciting new developments you were talking about, Erik, then you can cram it with walnuts.

Not sure how to respond to this, but I like walnuts, so we'll go with "thanks!"

Dragon/Dungeon Ending: Not exciting.

Pathfinder: Exciting.

GameMastery Modules: Exciting.

New Paizo Campaign Setting: Exciting.

Planet Stories Classic Fiction Line: Exciting.

You be the judge.

--Erik

I understand the need to put a positive spin on this, but you can't pretend that Dragon and Dungeon are equal to one or even all of those.

In any case, it sounds like readers of Dungeon will have decent substitutes. People who relied on Dragon for material of a higher quality than Wizards of the Coast crapped out are out of luck, though. Maybe they took back the license so we wouldn't have a better alternative to their books...

In conclusion, f%!! WotC.

Oh, please, not Lolth! Aside from the limited usefulness of an article about a monster god, I doubt the author could come up with anything that doesn't contradict or repeat what's been written a million times already about the most tediously overdone deity and the implausible society of her worshippers. Buy the upcoming drow book if you like, and keep that nonsense out of Dragon. I'd rather see Core Beliefs: Laogzed.

Ah, so that one's yours. I'm looking forward to it, and I'll definitely share my thoughts on it once I have the issue - which could be next month for all I know. Being ever full of hope, though, I'm going to go check the mailbox right now.

Congratulations, Frats! Want to tell us your name so we can keep an eye out for your article?

Kyr, does that offer to show off some of your queries still stand?

I always feel like they're taking too long, too, but that's just Canada Post.

Who's Wayne Gretsky?

A famous hockey player who's now making his second fortune appearing in television ads.

Wandering is right, they did add quite a bit of good material but its NEVER enough (my cleric is half Daelkyr of course.. and they sure could use some lubbins and dragonmarks!)

There will NEVER be new dragonmarks. It would ruin the setting as not even a horde of epic Elminster and Drizzt clones could.

Also, Races of Eberron sucked, a lot. Pretty much the only good part was the kalashtar section written by Keith Baker. I'm not saying other people can't write good Eberron material, mind you; I'm just saying it's not whoever came up with that Vulkoor drivel. "Ack! We made the drow too minor and different from the FR ones! Let's give them more material than the much more important goblinoids and shoehorn an arachnid deity in!"

As for the topic at hand, much as I like shifters, they don't really need more fluff. Their elegance lies partly in their simplicity. More shifter feats would be nice, though, but not ones dependant on anything introduced in RoE.

I don't have mine either, but I'm used to it. In the void between the canadian and american postal systems lies madness.

...warthog headed people...

You know, I'd actually play one of these guys, just for kicks.

Is it really so hard to tell him?

The answer is five words:

"The stats are the same."

A few other things, like weapon profs, change, but nothing major. Umbragen are, more or less, identical to Drow.

That said, I'd consider tracking down that issue, because it was a great one. One of the few Aprils I liked (mainly because it skipped on the jokes almost completely).

That's precisely why I suspect he's never actually seen the article before.

Alzrius wrote:

I'm somewhat confused by this answer. I know that "Silicon Sorcery" is dead, having been folded (along with "Novel Approach") into the new header "Divine Inspirations," according to the writer's guidelines (as I've never seen an article titled that in print as of yet). However, said guidelines make it clear that the aforementioned "Divine Inspirations" is still an active choice to submit article proposals for. Has this changed?

It is our great shame that our writer guidelines are woefully out of date. You may assume that they are still correct unless and until you read something different on our messageboards, such as my previous post in this thread.

Yes, updating those guidelines is on our list of Things To Do.

Bummer. Why did you stop accepting them? I mean, worse case scenario, they all suck and it amounts to the same thing, but you might also get some good ones, right? Or is there something I don't get that makes that unreasonable?

And if it's not too much trouble, would it be possible to get a quick, up-to-date list of article types you're still looking for?

Finally, I have to agree with the general opinion here. Paying for an article that doesn't contain any D&D material strikes me as kind of a mistake. I'd honestly be happier knowing you guys made money from it.

Nice try, but no. It isn't too smart to ask for copyrighted material on Paizo's own boards.

Not gonna happen. :p

... I'm dead broke. :(

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall seeing it mentioned that the Osteomancer, Flux Adept and Cerebrex are in the Dragon Compendium. Since they were published before everyone realised just how painful a half caster progression is, I was wondering if that, or anything else, had been changed. You needn't be too specific; I'm just curious, since I've loved the idea ever since I saw them in my second issue of Dragon.

Compared to a typical issue, I thought it was decent, if a little lacking in substance. As a "special" issue of any kind, let alone the much-hyped 30th anniversary super-sized issue, I'm afraid I consider #344 nothing less than a dismal failure. The only articles remotely relevent to the game were the planar dragons and Dreadhold - I'm extremely disappointed that familiars like Spellcraft and Bazaar of the Bizarre were left out in favour of junk like a computer game preview I could have read on Gamespot. I'm not crazy about fiction in Dragon in general, but even there I've read much better than the mediocre stuff in #344; the Mystara story is utterly boring without knowledge of the setting to give it context, and the Wizards Three "story" about people eating messily isn't worth a canadian cent, let alone the familiars it displaced.

If I weren't a subscriber, I wouldn't have bought this issue even at the regular price - I would have read through it at Chapters, made a few notes about Dreadhold and the Anagakok, and walked away with a full wallet.

Sure man, go through wit' it! It seems as if epic material is slowly vanishing, I don't remember the last time I saw any epic material, least in Dragon. There was some in Complete Psionic, one epic spell in Power of Faerun prior to that and past that I don't even know.

The January issue of Dragon had an epic prestige class.

The thing is, epic games don't need much exclusive material since you can just advance monsters, extrapolate PrC progressions, create your own spells with the guidelines, and so on, whereas material designed for epic play is hard to scale down, if not impossible because of the crazy abilities involved. At least, that's the biased view of someone completely uninterested in epic play.

I got the issue a few days ago, but I've been too absorbed with it and other things to post what I've been wanting to say until now. The rest of the issue is pretty good, although the Catalogue takes up a big part of it. I could really do without the Forgotten Realms fiction, but I know some people love that stuff; on the other hand, Hal Maclean writes a mean feature (is it his first?), and the interesting-as-ever Ecology's history section is compatible with Eberron for a change.* The Creature Catalogue, though, is just BRILLIANT. It's the kind of top-rate material that single-handedly makes an issue great. Every single monster is creative and interesting, except perhaps the norker (it's not bad, but it's eclipsed by an otherwise stellar selection). The nuckalavee appeared on WotC's website a while back (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mm/20030829a), but I prefer Dragon's version (although I'm anal enough to be annoyed by the fact that the illustration lacks transparent skin).

*The obvious adaptation is to have the spider-loving druids be Children of Winter who became obsessed with some of the vermin the sect traditionally regards as bringers of a nature-renewing, apocalyptic "winter"; and the "demon" can be a Daelkyr acting through its minions. Ironic, since the first druids were trained by a dragon to fight aberrations and their Daelkyr creators.

For the record, alignment restrictions mean a lot of clerics will lose their spellcasting ability when they get absorbed. In fact, I think very few deities would keep granting spells to a piece of undead masonry. A demon prince or some such might do it just for the fun of knowing that there are flame strike-casting walls out there because of him.

LOL! As least we can all agree that we want more psionics. :)

Lilith: I love the idea of an Eberron psionics article, but that's like "crossing the beams"! If Eberron is "fringe" and psionics is "fringe" then that's... "fringe^2": it could never happen I tell ya! Unless... well they certainly won't do it if they don't have the proposal. I'll check with the 8-ball later.

Actually, psionics are "core" in Eberron. In fact, one of the four races in the ECS book (the kalashtar) is naturally psionic, with bonus PP and a mindlink psi-like ability. The Inspired (a major group of villains) are all about psionics, as are the Quori (dream-dwelling outsiders) who control them.

That's just one of the many things that make Eberron awesome. It's spread a little thin, but pretty much every Eberron book has new psionic material, and a lot of people are hoping for a Sarlona sourcebook which would naturally focus heavily on the psionics favoured by the inhabitants of that continent.

Thanks for the spoiler, Shade! Sorry I took so long.

Speaking of which, I'm still waiting for the issue, and you're all making it harder with your talk of awesome-this and incredible-that. We're in the same boat, Mortis, only I'm bailing shamelessly if my copy comes first. :p

I don't expect the magazine to make it to Canada for a while yet. If you're going to tease me, could you do it with something a little more concrete? Say, a list of monsters? ;)

For the record, "all time" for me is "the last year", pretty much.

Keith Baker's articles on Dal Quor, the Lords of Dust, the cults of the Dragon Below and the Umbragen were absolutely awesome (though if the editor of the first one is reading this, I'm curious why the Kalaraq Quori was toned down so much from the submitted version). His article on noble PC's, while not as revelatory as his writings on the various creepies of Eberron, was an excellent approach to the topic and proves he can write more than Eberron material (WotC don't seem to know what they have in that man, and it's everyone's loss).

It goes without saying that the Demonomicon is some seriously good stuff, though I found Baphomet slightly less interesting than the other three. Last October's article on hauntings was also a definite winner, as was the slightly older article on the Far Realms (Xoriat, as far as I'm concerned).

The recent Creature Catalogue was incredible; it gave me a bit of an inkling why people remember D&D's past so fondly. If the next batch are half as cool, the upcoming Catalogue belongs here too. I also liked the illithid-related monsters in the November issue, but the brainstealer dragon in particular really made that article. Between it, Zugtmoy (and her minions!) and the Lords of Dust, that issue was... oh hell, I've seen some of the issues from before my subscription (still not going THAT far back, admittedly), and while there was some great material (I'm glad I bought the espionage issue at the bookstore), I seem to have subscribed just in time for a high point in Dragon's quality.

For the record, though, the astrology issue was a "meh", as was the (September, I think) FR-heavy one, though the latter was in large part redeemed by the Charlatan prestige class that won that contest, and Amber E. Scott's contribution. The lizardfolk ecology was very interesting, and your Bazaar of the Bizarre (only I think it was called Magic Shop then) was great - not just the items, the "fluff" was really inspired as well.

I've rambled right off the topic, haven't I? I can't even see it from here. Time to pick a direction at random and hope for the best; I'll shut up, lest I start talking about Fremen or infinite-mana combos. I have a terrible sense of direction.

It's like the flavour text says: the sidhe are jerks, and they're giving you rope to hang yourself with. I don't think Trickery would be a fair exchange, as that's a lot more useful in general; I think the point is that the Evil domain is mostly useful for combating good creatures, but using it might get you into even more trouble.

The article was pretty cool, but what's up with the feats not being supernatural? I'm not familiar with the ninja class, but all of the monk abilities that involve ki certainly are magical.

Could someone, by any chance, tell me at what levels a ninja gains the "ghost strike", "ghost step (invisible)" and "ki dodge" abilities (I think those are all the prerequisites of the jutsu feats), as well as the "ki uses per day" progression? I don't want enough information to use them in any way, shape or form - I just want to turn the jutsu into monk feats, available at roughly the same levels and usable about the same number of times per day. Monk/rogue multiclassing makes for a decent ninja substitute; that's precisely what Eberron's Shaarat'khesh goblins do, and I love the idea of a little stowaway Wind Oxen'ing his victim off an airship.

All the relevant information on a magic item and its history can already appear in an item's description in the old-style format if the creator is doing his or her job. There's no real reason to break it into a bunch of separate paragraphs and headings and spam it down the length of the page. This is especially true with the mechanical details of an item's price, caster level, creation prerequisites, cost of creation, etc; all of those were easily contained in the one small paragraph we already had and no one I know has ever had a problem reading it.

... SNIP! Well spoken, but too long to quote.

I agree wholeheartedly. I'd rather have "filler" items that are still perfectly useful additions to a game than a lot of redundancy and extraneous flavour text that's rarely applicable to Eberron (where elves aren't tree-huggers, gnomes aren't fools or tinkerers, the cosmology is entirely different, and so on). Don't get me wrong; I have nothing against passing references to Pelor or Mordenkainen. But what am I going to do with a long story about Angsty the half-elf's quest to slay a non-existent demon on a plane with no equivalent to avenge another character that doesn't fit in order to prove to his loving, well-adjusted parents that he's as worthy as they already think he is?

I am very, VERY annoyed to have lost the long post I wrote. Long story short: alternate classes are fun and don't all have to be quite as good as the sidhe scholar, but they should be playable with just the core books as references; articles with nothing for core classes are disappointing, so please try to throw in a little something for them like the Guerrilla Trapsmith feat in the "Naruto" article or a useful sidebar (psionics are something of an exception since the relevant material is available in the SRD).

In general I don't think the style feats are that great. The bonuses provided are substantial, to be sure, but the steep prerequisites preclude anyone other than a single-class fighter.

I think that's the idea. There's not much appeal to being a high-level fighter - even if you want the exclusive feats, the last one is at level 12. It can't hurt to make a straight fighter more attractive.

As for the greatsword, I don't think it needs a style feat as it's already one of the better weapon choices in the game. The existing style feats all affect weapons or combinations of them that wouldn't otherwise interest a fighter or other character with a good set of weapon proficiencies - for example, wielding two different weapons is detrimental if you have Weapon Focus or similar feats.

I thought we were getting all new creatures this time around. It hardly matters, but I think that's what was said (in the issue with the last catalogue, maybe).

More importantly, what's a norker? For that matter, what's known about the hex dragon? While I'm at it, are there any Ravenloft veterans who could tell me more about the curse that transforms... humans? goblinoids? flumphs? ... into goblyns? I found that one part a little vague.

Anyway, the last catalogue was one of the best features since my subscription started last summer (better than the Demonomicon, just under Keith Baker's Lords of Dust article). I look forward to finding out if any of this next batch can match the carrionette. :)

I got my copy just yesterday.

In the blending of american and canadian postal services lies madness, and a jerk who opened and damaged issue 339 before sending it along almost two months late (whereas one month is the norm).

Aspiring Writer wrote:

By the way...

*Waves two fingers in Mr. McArtor's direction.*

... I REALLY like variant classes.

I hope those aren't two middle fingers. ;D

I'll try to keep putting them in whenever I get good ones. :)

Nah, jedi fingers. :)

I think I'll be trying my luck with a query sometime soonish. I should probably change my username before I hit the ten-post point of no return, on the off chance one of my submissions ever gets accepted.

It's my understanding that the submission guidelines are somewhat out of date, so I'd just like to assure myself that Class Acts should be sent to you while anything else goes... er, to someone else, right?

Out of curiosity, can you tell us why Wizards of the Coast have forbidden substitution levels?

By the way...

*Waves two fingers in Mr. McArtor's direction.*

... I REALLY like variant classes.

You're reading way too much into a gratuitous throwback to the awkward adolescence the fantasy genre is trying to escape. The caption in the upper right of the table of contents merely labels it a "heavenly body".

Given that they have been pretty adamant that they are only going to support two settings at a time, and they don't seem too keen on leaving either Eberron or Forgotten Realms in the dust, if they do realease the other two settings it is likely to be as one shot Campaign Options much like Ghostwalk, or else the might use peices of the campaign settings (i.e. character races, classes, prestige classes, or even magic systems) in other core products.

For all we know, Magic of Incarnum might be based on one of those settings.

Anyway, this is awesome. Congratulations to Rich Burlew and Paizo - I look forward to more OotS comics and a magazine that's better for it.

Pathos wrote:

One thing I would like to see, would be come coverage for the alternate base classes that have appeared in the varios "Complete..." series of books. Such as the Spirit Shaman, Warlock , Hexblade and, Scout. It would be a shame to see that material be put out there, and then forgotten.

Your wish shall be granted...

Possibly sooner than you think...

:)

Having said as much, might you be persuaded to say something equally subtle about the possible inclusion of material pertaining to the psionic classes? :)

For Eberron, I think these guys make pretty good rakshasa Rajahs (who are the rakshasa's masters, but not rakshasas themselves, despite the name) with a few tweaks... LE alignment, original names, and a low divine rank about covers it. Oh, and an alignment change and the "native" subtype instead of "chaotic", "evil", and "tanar'ri" for anzus, skurchurs, and whatever other special demon minions are to come.