Mormegil's page

Indeed.

The adventure seems exciting to run and has some interesting NPCs with lots of roleplaying opportunities. At last, a very good adventure with a bit of story as well.

#4... The rules are clearly better than 3,5.

Haven´t played KotS but with SOW we have a great time... Although it needs a lot of work.

Yoda you are right...

Although I think that 4th is awesome, the path is below average at best..

Excellent point Tharen. Time for some thinking...

I love it when Hollywood does Greek myth as long as it is Greek myth and not someones fantasies....

Mormegil wrote:

I've read it twice already and I liked it.

Nevertheless, Paizo still writes better adventures. It seems experience helps , although I like David Noonam a lot (from SCAP).

My biggest problem was the fact that the map doesn't point the location of the dungeon.

About the locations in Brindol's map, I suppose that they will show them in another article of Dungeon or perhaps Dragon this month.

And it is not entirely only combat.

If you could, Mormegil, could you post your thoughts when running it?

Oh, unfortunately this won't happen soon. The AP will start on Sept when my group returns from summer holidays.

tube containing the

into a huge mess

Plus the problem was when the players tried to determine the level of the BBEG through the level of spells and abilities it had. And here goes Meta-gaming.

David Marks wrote:

I never knew a snark was aquatic! :O!

That's what you get for failing your Dungeoneering check :P

LOL

If the people who are happy with 4th Edition are not bothered by the changes to many things, were you unhappy with previous editions?

By extension, if you were unhappy with previous editions, does that mean you actually didn't like playing D&D but like RPGs?

And if this last point is true, why do you need a "new" version of D&D - there could have been something great already out there, like True20, Rolemaster, Heroes, etc).

I would like to hear what a 4th Edition supporter thinks about those questions. It just seems that more people would be happy if 4th Edition was called "Pathfinder RPG" and Pathfinder was called "4th Edition D&D". Everyone gets what they want, and no-one gets upset.

To start I wasn't unhappy with 3rd Edition, I just got tired of it. I didn't try to play other systems because in Greece it is very difficult to find support for them. WotC made a new edition and I was happy about it. The thing is that after 3rd edition I am quite quite optimistic about the quality of work in Wizards to create a new game and they haven't failed me (IMO). Ok with adventures they seem to have missed the train but that is why we have Paizo and other companies.

About Pathfinder RPG. If I wanted to stick with 3.5 then it would have been the best solution. The problem is, as I said above, that I want to move on.

If you need further clarifications please ask.

Very good suggestions. Hope the dragon or dungeon have more info about the future installments.

Very good job Scott. Congats.

I think that Charles Evans made an excellent post.

I wish I had more time to answer a lot of posts from Dread, Tadkil and others but I could not find the time.

There is still a lot of anger with 4th. If you do not like it don't play it. I do not understand why you still feel the need to attack 4th. You certainly do not respect others that like it. I was a crazy paizo fan till they decided to create PRPG but I never bashed them or vocally told them that I feel betrayed. And having decided the direction I want to take I've never made even one post in the Pathfinder section (You can check it).

So please act reasonably and try to help in the improvement of the game you want to play, rather than trying to bully others' people games.

EDIT. Jeremy also rocks.

Tranquilis wrote:

Nahualt wrote:

...I can pukk out a huge random encounter from out of thin air like I used to do way back in 1st edition and OD&D.

Man, that's hilarious, and I know I'm being silly...

Is that "I can _puke_ out a huge random encounter..." or "pull out"...?

ROTFLMAO sophomorically!

Well its supposed to be 'Pull' but making it into 'puke' gives it all kinds of randy awesomness!!

Indeed.

etrigan wrote:

whenever I propose to my player to choose between heroes like Legolas, Aragorn or Sam... they always choose Legolas and Aragorn... I really don't know why... Maybe it's because they are heroics and it's the purpose of the game?

Actually, according to Tolkien himself, Samwise Gamgee was the hero of the Lord of the Rings, so saying Legolas and Aragorn are more heroic means the point of the story was completely missed.

Perhaps you are trying to find a point for the story because Tolkien had clearly written that there is no point for the story. It is just a Story.

And whatever you say childs are more influenced by Aragorn or Legolas, rather that Sam or Meri.

What I would like to point out because I have seen others mention it.

I think that what we have seen is only the adventure. Other articles in Dungeon might have some info about the AP. Certainly this issue of the magazine is not over so there might be sth more (I do not know, I just hope).

Another point that I would like to make is that when you try to compare it with Burnt Offerings then you are making a bad job. Burnt Offerings gets you from 1st to 3rd level while Rivenroar gets only to second level. If we take into account that there are 30 levels now then perhaps when we have the 3rd article of the AP we can make a more honest evaluation.

The above was just a side-note.

I've read it twice already and I liked it.

Nevertheless, Paizo still writes better adventures. It seems experience helps , although I like David Noonam a lot (from SCAP).

My biggest problem was the fact that the map doesn't point the location of the dungeon.

About the locations in Brindol's map, I suppose that they will show them in another article of Dungeon or perhaps Dragon this month.

And it is not entirely only combat.

P1NBACK wrote:

Tatterdemalion wrote:

I often see debates on the 4e board ended one of two ways.

• "Come on, you didn't need that anyway. The rule was broken (or unnecessary, or nobody used it, or whatever)." Failing that, we move on to...
  
• "There are more books coming out. Just wait."

I am struck by how rarely we can agree that WotC might have eliminated an element for which there is a valid demand or need.

I like 4e (at least today, but that's another story). But I can still see that WotC has failed to provide certain things with 4e that players have reasonably come to expect.

I didn't say it wasn't there. It is. They do give you advice on world building.

I can agree, advanced options aren't there. I'm saying more options will become available as time goes on and more books come out. WotC is taking a NEW approach to putting out books. They have told us this. There will be a new PHB, DMG and MM every year. So you can't concievably expect ALL of the information to be in the first set of core books. They want you to buy those later books - so they are saving some more advanced options for those books.

It's up to you to peruse those books and see if they are worth buying for you.

Finally. A 4E supporter concedes that 4E is incomplete, and that this is a deliberate strategy. Thank you.

Also, as mentioned earlier: Asking a series of questions but providing no answers or guidelines to answers is not advice.

You really know how to change the meaning of words!

Well I do not have problems logging in but the pdf appears in text form or sth like that.

Lucas: a person with a 10 CHA and an 8 INT will not have a "good sense of people". A 10 CHA has a marginal sense of self ... not to mention the fact that a person whose "friends might be disturbed when they hear him talk about birthing foals while patching their wounds" obviously does not have a sense of people

Good sense of self or others comes from wisdom and not from Int or Cha. Cha means how courteous you are to others and it is mainly an intraction skill and Int goes along with stupidity and the difference is that a stupid person won't find the solution quickly while a wise person has learned from his mistakes.

Grim: you may survive a goblin or orc encampment as a child with "sheer strength and force of will", but in the streets of a city, a child could only survive by being smart and fast enough to take what they need and smart and fast enough not to get caught by the offended party or the cops. A 10 DEX and an 8 INT would not do this. (Also, Grim's 14 CHA would actually make him a little more likeable than ... well, grim.)

The backstory for Grim is that he was a thug literaly. I don't see the problem with DEX and INT. To bully someone you certainly don't need to be bright.

Now I don't see these as being deal-breakers in terms of the character backstory, but using the examples as a way to make up for the absence of certain skills in the core of the system (skills are a learned thing ... learning being INT-based) is problematic at best ... poor rhetoric at worst.

Last but not least. Skills are not a learned thing. To be good in acrobatics you do not need INT. The same applies to others like Endurance and Intimidate. Except the Knowledge skills I don't see a skill that uses INT (perhaps Thievery).

The hit points alternative seems quite interesting as it multiplies the tense of the battle. I would like to see it further developed.

Player's Handbook seems full with this group of classes and races. It seems impossible to fit more into it. They didn't throw the classes or races away. They will come back on PHB 2 with most of them if not all.

A table of contents might be nice. I typed in "blind" and even though it gave me numerous classes and powers with the word in the description, it didn't tell me what the condition means. I found that odd.

Maybe you should have used ’blinded’.

Guys sorry but I cannot find out.. Can you provide me with a link to download the Gazeteer for Punjar?

I liked it especially Kobold Rat Master...

The class acts clearly display the flexibility of the new system. Now, it is certainly quite easy to create a class with the flavor you like. Nevertheless, I would have prefered to see the Illusionist as a distance class based on shadow power.

I didn't quite grasp one power though. The spectral hound (I think that was the name) does not seem to explain how the illusion reacts with interaction. The illusory wall is just a wall and I cannot pass through it even if I interact with it but the hound if I choose to attack it should either show that I cannot kill it or else I should negate the effect the magic has on me.

The interesting thing is that the Ashen Covenant starts at page 34...

I would like to play warlord but I think that I will play eladrin wizard, after I DM the first campaign.

Whichever it is, I hope someone official will clarify it soon.

Something completely different. I'm running the introductory adventure in the DMG tonight and I foresee having trouble explaining to my group...

** spoiler omitted **

Anyone have any idea how it works?

I saw it and I found it weird too.

I will use carvings on the floor that they need a perception of 20 to be spotted, that force the boulder to move in such a way. The distance that the boulder covers I will attribute it to the initial speed.

I plan to homebrew, but I'll use Keep on the Shadowfell as a springboard. If you're interested in my homebrew setting, click here.

Tom it seems you have very interesting stuff over there. Please, keep us informed.

"roll to hit a defense, apply a few dice of damage modified by a stat, maybe move the target around a little".

And this is somehow different about the way it is done in 3rd? The mechanic is the same with the slight difference that the defender gets to roll for a saving throw. But now it is not only hit and damage. It is all about moving people, getting tactical and putting flavor in your swings, spells etc. To understand powers you should not only look at the entry. Every power functions differently not in a mechanical way put how it applies in the story. The powers have a hit mechanism which is the same for all classes. But if you see it like that then you see half of it.

And yes, all of the classes do essentially have the wizard's base attack BONUS - 1/2 character level, just like they all have the same base defense (varying by only up to 2 points).

And what is wrong with that? The wizards wont use a melee attack when it can use his at-will powers more effectively and even if he does just that then he must be very lucky to hit a monster.

For me Winterhaven is a small town that happened to be on crossroads which helped to thrive initially. The walls are wooden (interior and exterior) and the purpose of the town is to make money out of trade. Of course trade has almost stopped for a long time but winterhaven is a haven for the occasional trader who happens to come through. The people there are a hardworking folk who just does not want to abandon the land that their parents lived and this is the reason that they endure the abuse of the kobolds.

My gaming group consists of 7 people - myself included.

Me - 28 - Financial Analyst
Brother - 23 - studies for bachelor
Alex - 28 - Pilot
George - 28 - Master in Finance and searching
Bill - 25 - George's brother
Junior (Alex II) - 23 - studies for bachelor
Vaggelis - 23 - studies for bachelor

All single except George and Alex.

I know everyone at least 5 years and we play every Sat.

My gut reaction.

Well the last three months I started to play characters from the Bo9S to get a feel about 4th. And I liked what I saw. The powers from the book had a lot of flavor and I was glad of the outcome when I utilised them. Other people that played characters from that book enjoyed them as well.
As far as I have seen this happens too with 4th. Ok I know that I was a big fan of 4th but now I am reassured that this is the game for me. From a tactical perspective is overwhelmingly interesting. The mechanics are not a big evolution such as the one we had from 2nd to 3rd just more simplified. About creativity the rituals simply rock and the fact that there is a dragon-race in the PH shows a lot. Having read a lot of fantasy literature I could say that powers will put more flavor to a character in the sense of signature moves.

All in all, I was and still am excited. Now, I just hope September to come; fast.

Honestly, folks ... I don't know about you, but I was there when the 3ed ed PHB came out.

Almost everything you are bashing 3e about was lauded, praised and applauded when it came out. Such a progress it was. And I loved 2e, but I was rolled along the change.

You have the new game you enjoy, and I can understand that. I have played other games besides D&D (all previous editions) and all of them have their pro and cons.

Now, honestly, what can make you think today that 4e is perfect ? In a few years, 4.5, or 5e or whatever it is called will come out. And 4e will be bashed as the stupid grognard game.

The paradigms of 3e are largely built upon the collective experience of the previous editions, both in fluff and mechanics. That means I can access a 30+ years library of modules and rules supplement, and (maybe) with some effort use them all as if they were bright and shiny.

What makes you think, TODAY, that 4e will manage somehow to do better than all of this combined ? How will it endure better the passage of time ?

This is genuine question, I am curious about your opinion.

Your assumptions aint right.

4th is based on all the previous editions you happen to point out. And it certainly knows the plus and minus of each edition. It is heavily influenced by 3rd and uses a lot of its mechanics. It didn't change them rather than simplify them.

4th is not perfect. You would be naive to think like that. 4th is better from 3rd just like 5th will be better than 4th. This is evolution and it is a good thing.

Actually, there is NO monster in 4E you can't create using 3.x (or for that matter, even 1E) rules.

What I think Orcus was referring to is the fact that the "guidelines" seem more open. Technically, there's nothing preventing you from simply giving a monster say a dragon Attack bonus, a humanoid's HD and the saves of a Fae in 3.x. It's just that many DMs wrongly feel that they are cheating if they do so in 3.x

I do not think that the problem was about cheating but mostly due to the realisation that after designing a monster it was difficult to assign the appropriate CR for it.

Ok antioch since it seems that you have received your copies I would like to know how many monsters a typical encounter usually has and whether the books are completely generic or they favor a particular setting. Also if you have KotS is there any link between it and fallcrest?

Ok, but how did you felt about the skill challenge? Were you anxious or indifferent? Does it add anything to the game?

Well, we would like to hear more.
Thank you for the info.

I like the enhanced interaction among the players. This might help players that they don't invest much in the game to become a part of it.

Actually 4e is not a total rewrite of 3.5. There are changes but not large enough that you need to learn a completely different set of rules. 4e still has class, level, AC, HP, standard actins, move actions, to hit rolls, damage rolls, skill checks, DCs, GPs, XPs, etc., etc.

3e to 4e is an evolutionary step not a completely new game.

I fully agree.

And you can create 2 front battles too...the controllers guards the rear entrance where wave of minion pour out, while the strikers try to finish the solo "boss" before they are overwhelmed.

That is something I always wanted to do and never could...

Big thumbs up for me.

Exactly, that is what I like, more creativity for the DM.

Hell, a lot. The new BAB, feats, skill system, abilities and the way they interact with the game, saving throws...

Well, everything rocked but I feel that 4ed also rocks. I play a lot DnD and I trully wanted the move forward. I like the changes too. After so many years playing 3ed I got tired of it and found some things that now I dislike. This will certainly happen with 4th as well but perhaps I'm a guy that always look forward.

Alright; I can see that this minions idea is 'cinematic'.

It seems to me that if there are any powers which deal damage to multiple targets, with a chance of hitting which scales in proportion to character level, then any encounter involving minions could get very swingy in terms of ease depending on if the PCs win initiative.

Yes, you are absolutely right. But this is the beauty about it. If a PC uses a power to do area damage, he will be able to incapacitate multiple opponents. But, this may be effective once or twice.

In addition, the DM can easily introduce more minions in the battle without becoming an overwhelming battle.

For me minions seem to be the best concept about 4ed.

Keep in mind to check the wizards website for some errata that have posted for the module. You will find it on the module page.

I would have linked but I don't have the know-how.

Yes, the best concept by far...

That phrase - "for me" - is the kicker here. There are, in fact, very significant differences between religions that have very significant implications for societies collectively and individuals particularly. And no, these religions to NOT speak about the same god, though your personal belief system may consider them so.

And there is the problem. You try to find the differences. In reality there are no differences except of the ones that we have dictated our eyes to see. In reality you can see that those religions pray to the same god but you do not let yourself. Those three religions come from the old testament and this surely means that they have the same god. For me it does not matter how each of them percieve Jesus because in this part we have the arrogance that I know better, the strive for power and many other things inherent in the nature of humanity.

bubbagump wrote:

I too have a problem with discrimination. But there's a difficulty here when one attempts to draw the line. For example, if a Hare Krishnan wears an orange robe and sports a shaved head that's a public demonstration of his religion. If a Wiccan wears a pentagram it's a public display of religious belief. If a Catholic sits in a bar and talks about his Catholic faith with your buddies that's a public display of religion. If I advocate for tougher penalties for shoplifters it's a public expression of my beliefs. Should all religious speech, symbols, etc, be banned from public life? No, of course not - it's not even possible, much less practical.

I agree with you that this is a difficult line to draw. But how many do you think can trully tolerate another person. On the other hand there are many who fall victim to this by politicians and other world saviors as I mentioned in previous post.

Serious question -- do you think that this would change if there wasn't religion? I feel like discrimination and manipulation will happen with or without religion. Religion feels like an easy scapegoat.

At the same time I am not condoning the discrimination that religions do. This does need to be brought up and stopped.

Moff sorry for responding so late, I had some stuff to do, but anyway I'll try to expain myself.

Yes, I believe that religion cover in its midst descrimination. And it lets to be used by politicians for their insane machinations.

To continue I would say that I agree with what mothman said. People shouldn't have need for a religion nowadays. I understand that in earlier versions of society religion played a major part of every day life even by trying to explain certain every day effects like the rising and falling of the life-giving sun.

Nevertheless, the world has progressed a lot and for me humanity does not need that kind of guidance. Anyway that is my opinion. And I'm happy that you are such an openminded person.

bubbagump, I think that I disagree with you.

I accept the freedom of religion and its importance but I don't agree that it should be publicly displayed. For me all these religions are all about creating labels and segmenting the masses. That is why certain religions are more powerful than others. I don't claim to be an expert in the field but all religions seem to strive for the same goal and are based on the same tenents.

For me the differences between an orthodox and a catholic christian are almost insignificant. I also observe this relationship when I try to compare Christianity with Islam or Judaism. In the core those beliefs speak about the same god and have same philosophy.

The biggest problem for me is discrimination. Because for good or bad there are people that can be easily manipulated and quite fanatic in their beliefs. This is why I have problems with publicly demostrating the religion that people believe.

At last being able to keep up I found out that the discussion focuses around descriptions and this for me does not make a lot of sense. Even Christianity does not seem to agree in several aspects that is why there is so much segmentation, and this happens in other religions as well. I think that segmenting society is done due to reasons that take advantage of the human being but on the other hand this is a very powerful tool in nature as well.

Where I want to sum up is that by trying to ask ourselves whether god exist we lose our focus. The problem does not lay there but on whether humankind created him and for what reasons.