Sanael Idelien's page

Hmmm...my power-game combos are all things I throw at PCs. When I'm playing, I develop a PC around that PC's specific theme...even when that means forgoing obvious advantages (yes, Fake Healer, I'm describing exactly what you suggest: a role- (not roll-) play oriented PC.

As a DM, though...I love encounters with things that cast "grease" in rooms with heavy slopes. I love the combo of a troop of heavy-armored, high-STR (and therefore heavy-bodied) PCs with a rickety, decaying bridge. I love the insidious combination of a pit trap with a gelatinous cube at the bottom. All things a party can surmount, but which go somewhat beyond the norm.

"What, a goblin? Oh, how cute...he has a wand of Grease...let's take him! Chaaar-ohohohh--whooaaaaa!!"

Heh.

I just finished a game in which I was a Poison Dusk Lizardfolk ranger/pyrokineticist. Once I had enough pyro levels to set my weapons on fire, I was nigh unstoppable...manyshot in the surprise rounds or against high DR, rapid shot the rest of the time. Couple that with the Poison Dusk's camoflauge ability (on top of all the nifty ranger stuff) and this was all from a point of virtual invisibility. In a party with a high-level samurai and a celestial barbarian, I did more non-magic damage than anyone else combined after the first round, and I was usually the only one in the party without much HP damage at the end. So, front-line fighter? No. Damage factory? Oh, yes. And the tertiary healer came in handy, too.

Now, I do miss the sweet, sweet days of misread feats, when I would fire off four arrows at a time, five times in a round. Twinky Manyshot and Twinky Rapid Shot, I call those feats. Too bad we realized the mistake before fighting that Pit Fiend. :)

Also, something I haven't seen mentioned, if you put ranks into Craft (bowyer), you can make masterwork archery equipment at significantly less cost to yourself, meaning you can spend money on other things. This isn't as impressive once you're really high level, but its a good way to buy some impressive magic items at lower levels.

The other more conceivable idea I've had is using a battle mat made up of those detachable squares and pretty much have one player always drawing the map on the combat grid itself - detaching and dry erasing tiles as necessary as they move to far from that part of the dungeon.

This actually isn't too expensive, depending on how you do it. Tact-tiles, from wwww.bc-products.net, are great, and for twelve one-foot square tiles it's only about $60. You may also be able to find cheap used on Ebay. Even less expensive, though, is to put together a one-inch grid on a sheet of white paper and take it to Kinko's. Have it photocopied onto transparency sheets, however many you think you'll need. Set up a white posterboard on the table, or even a light-colored printed background (like a poster with trees if you're in a forest), and set the tranparencies up on that to draw your map.

And what I've found works really well, although it takes away the job of the mapper, is to draw out major rooms on tiles beforehand...normal 10-foot hallways don't get drawn, just important locations. I draw them beforehand and then put them down as the party reaches them. That way, there's no time wasted in telling the players what to map, and I can just get straight to the "in the far corner of the room, a large altar rests, covered in dust and grime..." portion of new-room description.

I started at about eight years of age, with a small "All-American Karate" school, taught by a kickboxing coach. Although the discipline was somewhat removed from any "true" Okinawan/Japanese roots, the school was one of the best I've seen, as the instructor was both extremely good at what he did and extremely humble about it. He worked with kids very well. I was there for nearly four years before my family moved, and I started taking TaeKwonDo. I took TKD from one of the large national franchise schools...I was there about five years, worked as a junior instructor for a little while, but ultimately hated the school because the focus was too much on self esteem and not enough on self defence or self-discipline(sad truth was, technique and self-discipline weren't necessary, so long as you or your parents kept the money coming in). When a second-degree joined the school who was younger than I had been when I started martial arts, I left.

Since then, I've been much happier. I found a new school and D&D at about the same time; this new school taught Karate and TKD, as well as Aikido, KungFu and Brazilian JiuJutsu and I took to the Aikido and BJJ like a fish to water. My girlfriend and I also practice Japanese sewordsmanship when we aren't cooking up new campaigns, and we are both theatrical fight choreographers and stunt people. So there's a lot of fighting in my life, which is grand, really.

It's also why, in D&D, I chafe at the combat dichotomy...you can have it real, or you can have it streamlined, but you can't have both. As a martial artist, I want both. But none of my players want to spar to resolve an ambush. ;)

For basic NPCs (like the bugbear captain the PCs will have some conversation with before a combat ensues), I just do a basic statcard much like what you'll get with D&D miniatures.

For big-time NPCs, like the lord of the PCs' hometown--who is the source of many quests--I use a multi-step, handwritten process.

First, I fill out a character sheet as though building a PC. I usually roll stats normally and let that determine what this NPC is capable of, but when I have an important NPC with very sepcific needs, I assign whatever ability scores I think appropriate (you have to be careful, of course, to maintain game balance). Once I have a full-fledged character sheet, I build a small statcard. On one side of the card, I have combat information (attacks, saves, combat skills like Tumble, and feats); the other side of the card deals with social info (social skills like Diplomacy, skill-augmenting feats, personality quirks and so forth). The card is what usually goes with me to games (I have all my NPCs and monsters in a recipe card holder), and it can sit easily behind a screen.

It's a bit time consuming, but I find it ultimately helps me hold important NPC info in my brain, since I went to all the trouble to deal with the character sheet. Hope this helps!

definitely a fun prestige class...and overall quite balanced. I agree with TOG about the Focused Summoning ability, and concur with his possible solutions.
My other questions/concerns have to do with the Greater Summoning ability: I think I would limit the number of times per day this could be used, as it significantly increases the power of the casting. Perhaps make it usable a number of times per day equal to the casters INT/CHA modifier. Also, a question about this ability: what happens when a caster casts Summon Monster IX?
Otherwise, I like the general direction of this concept, and I appreciate that it takes into account the origins of the summoned creatures (other planes); I know too many people who take that sort of thing for granted, so I like to see the use of Knowledge skills in a prereq list. I'd like to see the final result from your feedback.

I say: yay HirstArts! My girlfriend and I have nearly all the molds available...we sold all our dwarven forge stuff on ebay and built our own, and we like it more! And I also paint lots.

The Steel Sqwire stuff is great, though I would have made my own with wire coathangers if I hadn't found the Sqwires on sale (used, got several sets for less than the price of one new), and we also use the Alea Tools magnetic marker discs for status effects.

In the past five years, we've graduated from a homemade dry-erase grid board to the puzzle-piece-like Tact-tiles to dwarven forge to HirstArts...and now we use a combo of the tact-tiles and the hirstarts. We have lots of the D&D Minis, but I also paint a lot as well; our PCs are almost always custom-painted minis, now.

I love the pizzabox stand thingy idea! Now I just need to order a pizza...

This is such a great hobby...I swear, if it weren't so wet outside right now, I'd build a house out of HirstArts and save money on rent...so I could buy and paint more minis. Isn't that sad?

Hi everyone. My players have expressed that they would like me to add to combat a where you got hit rule.

Does anyone have or use a rule like this? am I creating a whole can of worms to deal with?

I tend to agree that this is a big can of worms...however, in response to several players complaining about the lack of called shots (this is a group which plays many, many different games, mainly to figure out why any given game is better than D&D...not really a philosphy I adhere to), I came up with this, what may be the longest, most needlessly complex feat ever known to man or gods:

_Called Shot (General):
_Preq: INT 13, base atk +1.
_The character knows how to best make a potentially disabling attack against an opponent’s arms, legs, or head.
__Called shots are made at a -4 penalty (against arms and legs) or a -6 penalty (against the head).
__On a successful hit, the target must make a Fort save (DC 10+STRmod+1/2BAB). If the opponent fails his save, roll damage normally; in addition, the target will suffer -10 to speed and cumulative -2 to DEX (if a leg hit), or cumulative -2 to atk (if an arm hit), or be stunned for 1 round/10HP dmg (minimum 1) (if a head hit).
__A spellcaster hit in the arm must make a Concentration check as if for continuous damage to cast any spell requiring somatic components.
__A critical hit called shot doubles cumulative effects.
__The effects of arm or leg called shots last for four rounds. A character may make only one called shot in one round.
_Special: a character with Weapon Finesse may apply his DEXmod instead of STRmod to the Fort save DC. Special: A fighter may select Called Shot as a bonus feat.
_Normal: A character without the Called Shot feat may make called shots to the arms or legs, but at double the penalty and for only half the effect.

Several members of the group took the feat, and it was generally agreed that it was workable and relatively balanced. I think it's a workable feat only if your group wants a powergaming, munchkinny atmosphere.

I'm generally not against the XP expenditure. I like it, largely because I see XP as a sort of "life-force" or "mana" that develops as a character progresses. Casting magic on a normal basis drains the caster; even if you don't allow that magic use causes fatigue (as it did in 2E Dragonlance), the fact that an arcanist must rest to regain spells represents this. How much greater cost, then, does it require to permanently invest an item with such a spell? To follow that question, if you wish to do away with XP expenditure for item creation, what then is to be done about the Permanency spell?

Now, I like the idea of awarding ad hoc XP for item usefulness as a way to offset the XP loss; I personally would wait a session or two to determine the genuine usefulness of said item, however (so making a Ring Gate might be very useful during the session in which it is built, but if the group doesn't use it ever again I might not award so much XP).

I have, however, played in a game with a house rule that creates a separate experience pool for the group in addition to each individual XP count. This pool was added to each session, I believe the formula was avg party XP divided by half (if four PCs are awarded 3, 4, 3, and 6 XP for a session, the group pool gains 2). This pool could then be used to augment XP expenditure for magic items or other things, provided the party agreed it would be useful to the party as a whole. In addition to item creation, this included the ability to add XP to a character very close to leveling up (there was a maximum amount you could use for this purpose, though I forget how that was determined). This setup, obviously, had some interesting effects on the game as a whole.

I ran an evil campaign for more than 3 years a little while ago. I ran two parties in the same world at the same time; one good, one evil on alternating Sundays.The theory was that both groups were high level and one be working against each other indirectly while during a world wide conflict.

Neffier, I've been planning to do this for some time, although with the modification that there be two DMs (one is DM for Good/PC for Evil and vice/versa). Glad to know the concept worked well for you, though I'd be interested to hear further thoughts on what worked/didn't work, especially as relates to metagaming (players deciding they like their good characters better, for example, and purposefully nerfing their evil; that sort of thing).

More to the subject of the thread, I love evil campaigns; they have their problems, but if you have (as others before me have said) a mature group, these are not insurmountable.

The biggest suggestion I can make is that at least a few of the characters have mutual backstory. For example, I played an evil Dragonlance campaign once; there were two draconians in the party. The Aurak was, during the War of the Lance, the Kapak's CO; they had both saved each other's lives countless times and had a distinct camaraderie, which ensured that they were typically united against any opposition. A Cleric of Chemosh (god of Death/Undead) had worked previously with our druid of Zeboim (goddess of the sea) to destroy a fishing town, so they had a definite alliance.
These were the two major power pairs in the campaign, so the other two PCs were typically in one camp or another, which helped direct the group very well. It also meant that, in times of stress, there were always allies to watch each others' backs. So the party kept itself in check far better than six individuals would have.

So, mature players, and mutual, roleplayable backstories. Those are my suggestions. Always a good time, evil campaigns.

I use the Steel Sqwire radius templates and love them...although the only reason I bought them was because they were used at a gaming store and I got the straight cones, angled cones, and radii for about 3/4 the price of any one set. If you can't find that kind of deal, and don't mind not having the colorful rubber coating, a wire hangar and a pair of pliers will get you the same effect.

I'm also a big fan of "Tact-tiles," a set of plastic 1' squares with dovetail joints (like a jigsaw puzzle) so you can set them up in any configuration. Dry- or wet- erase have worked equally well.

Finally, I LOVE HirstArts...these are silicone molds of bricks, floors, etc., with which you can make plaster dungeons. We've made a lot of DwarvenForge-compatible dungeon terrain, and we can make as much more as we need (it's also a nice little cottage industry on EBay and at the local game emporium).

As several have already said, SORs need to have an idea as to WHY they cast spells: in short, specialize.

For example, I just built an NPC SOR for a high-level campaign...his entire spell selection is based on battlefield manipulation. He doesn't buff, he doesn't fire off artillery. He looks at a battlefield and then shapes it to his will. Lots of Transmutation and Illusion, plus evocation for things like Grease and Web. He uses Abjuration for Traps and Wards. The point of this NPC is that the PCs will have a very hard time getting close to him.

This kind of thematic build can be very rewarding, roleplay-wise. For the above NPC, I decided on this theme of battle-shaping, and from it I have character history (training), personality (he's rather shifty) and a basic sense of how he thinks, acts, moves, etc. For a PC, your theme can shape when a party relaxes or panics during a given situation...it gives you a starting point for conversation...and, as mentioned in previous posts, the CHA helps with this sort of social effect, as well.

Because of this need for specialization, however, I do view SOR as similar to a Bard; they're not the going to be a party's battle front-runner as a WIZ can...they're better for localized and specific support.

OK...done rambling. Hope this helps a bit.

I once gave my group a situation in which the NPC most closely allied to the PCs was actually the criminal mastermind. My Paladin tried several times to detect alignment and the like, but this NPC had the equivalent of Belkar's lead sheet, and the PAL never got a straight answer. The party was dealing with this NPC for five or six sessions before they realized (in the form of a bloody confrontation) they should have believed the PAL when he said something wasn't quite right. That was fun.

I do usually try to make minor NPCs that will sometimes give false information, so there's precedent when the really big lies come up...that way, my players can't get too upset.

Y'know, there's an interesting thing about skill points...they represent something very specific which a character has trained for. Class abilities (such as the FTR base atk progression) represent fairly general things; the FTR BAP, for example, represents a certain knowledge of basic weapon care, basic weapon use, and basic military strategy (such as the weak locations in plate mail). The skill, Craft (Specific Weapon), represents something far more specific, namely, constructing and forging a specific weapon type. So a fighter doesn't need high (or any, really) ranks in that Craft skill just to take care of his armory.

Yes, the fighter has very few ranks each level. He's only able to max out two (or three, if he's human) skills, assuming an INT mod of +0. But, even in the army, you have tank pilots who are very good at what they do (with maxed out ranks in Handle Animal/machine, Ride/drive, and Craft (Engine)), yet are only moderate swimmers. Your navy Seals, on the other hand, are arguably also members of the Fighter class, and likely have maxed out ranks in Swim, Climb, and Jump (or Intimidate). Just because the Ranger has no ranks in Ride, doesn't mean he's incapable of driving a jeep or Tank; he just probably can't do it very well, as it's not his area of expertise.

Throw in the fact that a fighter probably spends most of his eight hours of training a day swinging a weapon, not reading books or talking to diplomats. Rogues, on the other hand, with their plethora of skill points, spend very little time training with a weapon, instead choosing to translate (Decipher Script), copy (Forgery), and pass off (Bluff or Diplomacy) that foreign passport he lifted (Sleight of Hand) during that Royal Ball (Disguise) he found out about (Gather Information) from Gorant the Herald (Knowledge Local) last week.

Really, it all balances out. Each class has its customizable options, its own intended niche, and its own strengths and weaknesses. If a fighter suddenly has as many skill points as a rogue, what's the point in playing a rogue? Why not take a class with more combat power, if you're going to get all the social power anyway, right?

I'd never really thought about it, truthfully, and now that I have, I see the wackiness inherent in a group of fleeing, terrified mohrgs as they scramble over each other in their haste to escape destruction.

Off the top of my head, perhaps you could replace the fleeing with a "stun" or similar effect, leaving turned undead immobile and helpless for a certain number of rounds. This, based on the sudden exposure to divine power implied by a turning attempt. The rules for turn-based destruction, of course, remain the same. This would give a party of PCs plenty of advantage over "turned" undead, and be somewhat more acceptable to those of us who think a squealing-in-terror ghast is just silly.

Sturm Brightblade. His death scene brought me to tears in the book, it would do the same in a movie.

Elmore's painting of that scene gets me every time I see it.

Dragonlance would be fantastic. It has, I think, a broader appeal than most of Salvatore's Drizzt books (Icewind Dale was good, but the books have become progressively more masturbatory since...woo Drizzt! He's the best...bleh), and it does a good job of being rooted in the rules of D&D without displaying those rules. So many of the D&D novels of recent memory come too close to describing the die rolls rather than their effects.

DL Chronicles has an added popular appeal: it's pretty close to being the Sparknotes version of Lord of the Rings. Similar characters, similar Big Evil plotline, but with a lot more humour thrown in. And, as much as I like Tolkein (which is bunches), the characters are far less detached.

Some of the above posts have mentioned the difficulty of writing game mechanics as drama. I think we can all agree, the beauty of this game is often the fact that the people around the table are what helps it transcend mere die rolls; you HAVE to play a module in order to make drama with it. Which is what Weis and Hickman did, in large part, to write the DL Chronicles. And then they went on into Legends, etc., after the world became literature rather than game. I think it's the best example of that kind of writing out there.

So I think WotC needs to start a small film company, Margaret Weis needs to come on as a screenwriter, and they need to hire Richard Ryan (Troy) to do fight work, and WETA for SFX.

And as long as I'm dreaming, they'll hire me on as part of the stunt/fight team.

Now I just need to figure out who should play Fizban...

I'll bring ... my honey's Uber Oatmeal Stout (that's so dark that you can't see through it with a Mag lite in a shot glass).

Mmmm....beer...

MMmmm...I like my beer opaque and chewy...

More on subject with the thread:

I love playing a campaign that lasts more than 2 years, and continuing to pick up those characters anytime the original players get together (we graduated college and dispersed), then sending out memos so everyone knows what happened and continuity is maintained. Really, I love the fact that the aforementioned campaign is one reason we DO manage to get together despite the five of us being stretched thinly between coasts!

I love dropping a big, steamy pile of CR on unsuspecting PCs in the middle of the night, then watching as the players realize they CAN win after all.

I love meeting new players who think there's more to PC life than a d20 roll.

I love painting minis that will likely only be used in the one encounter scheduled for this week and never seen in-game again.

I love building Hirstarts dungeons for those minis.

I love the look on my players' faces when I hand out the personalized mini representations of the PCs they've played for more than 2 years.

I love cracking open a new rule book.

I love players who never touch a prestige class.

I love Dragonlance (and therefore I love Sovereign Press).

I love the game, and what it does to all of us.

Yes, the idea that it must be a specific campaign, with a specific group, is very true...I've certainly had groups I wouldn't dream of trying it with.

Farewell2Kings, that sounds like a fantastic game, and just the sort of roleplaying I enjoy.

Hopefully, this sort of evil plant wouldn't go hell-bent for leather on killing the other PCs, but he would make it plenty crazy for PCs wanting to "just get along." It's the kind of DM machination I like. Thanks for your opinions, folks...keep 'em coming if you've got 'em.

um... you guys do realize that dwarves (lawful good) are described as among the most avaricious (money grubbing, if you will) races in d&d, right? thus, by your argument, they should actually be lawful evil?

tog

This tends to be my opinion, too.

Let's look at a Paladin for a moment...not all PALs, obviously, but this one in particular, we'll call him Biff.

Biff is a Paladin, bent on becoming a Beacon of Righteousness in a World of Shadow. He feels the best way of doing this is to A)destroy Evil, and B)ensure his name is well-known, so Evil will quail before Biff's Very Reputation. To do this, he takes a significant cut of the treasures his party finds and redistributes it to various temples/NPO's, etc., all the while ensuring that they all know Biff the Mighty is responsible for bringing the Evil to heel. He downplays his fellow PCs' roles in the matter (they probably used poison or subterfuge), and basks in the glory. He then uses his reputation to find new quests (with little input from the rest of the party), and the cycle continues.

Biff is Lawful, as he has a set code (don't use poison, kill Evil things, give the treasure away, pose for cover of Righteousness Weekly as often as possible) by which he strictly abides. He's Good, as he supports the cause of Good, doesn't kill innocents, and so forth. He is also rather selfish, as he hogs the glory and keeps a stranglehold on party leadership. So selfishness itself is neither Evil nor Chaotic. It's simply a character trait.

No, this isn't a thread for players wanting stats to play as a Shambling Mound...

It's a fairly tried-and true method for placing the DM's voice to create a dedicated follow-the-party NPC...what about asking a player to play something very specific for the sake of story? In other words, planting a PC in the party to deliberately introduce a sub-plot.

For example, a party is composed of good-aligned PC's. They have uncovered a growing cult of undead-worshippers, fueled by an unknown power. A new PC joins the group, dedicated to the discovery and destruction of said cult.

Unknown to the other PC's, this new PC is actually an evil cleric of the dominant god of death and undead, bent on eradicating his patron's new competition. Clearly, the evil PC has a reason to stick with the party, their goals being similar; however, the paladin-types in the group will have some serious misgivings about the evil character once they find out, and even the more forgiving PCs may be upset about the deception.

Out of game,the DM requested the player to play this concept, and, for the sake of reducing the hellacious metagaming some players tend toward, asked the player in question to keep this portion of character concept secret, so that the players and characters discover the truth at the same time.

I've had mixed reviews on this idea with those I've pitched it to...So, what do you think? Is this practice of "planting" a PC concept acceptable/ethical/as-unique-as-I-believe-it-to-be/etc?

Cockle: Diminutive aberration, 5 HD, CR 8; Special Attack- Immolate Heart

Thank you. I'll be sure to use that in a future game; some of my players will find it horribly amusing, as do I. The other players...well, they don't have a sense of humour anyway. :)

Despite my professed love for rogues and rangers, I do enjoy the Warlock class on a lark. It's got a lot of very interesting things going on about it...and it drives a DM crazy sometimes.

You don't need an animal companion...wand of summon monster!!!! I am the cold-sore on the lip of crime!!

Ah, yes...Wand of Summon Monster. How could I forget? Of course, summoned monsters aren't always as well-trained as an animal companion would be...maybe I need to take a level of Druid, or something. Oi...I'm getting dangerously close to twinking for the sake of twinkage...

Hmm. Sake of Twinkage...a rice-wine granting a temporary bonus to all rolls...I'll have to write that down...

Ranger is definitely my second-favorite class, right behind the Rogue.

I don't need spells, because I can use wands and scrolls (which I can steal as easily as find). I don't need the fighter's base atk progression or armor, because I sneak around willy-nilly until there's a brilliant opening, sneak attack for plenty of damage, then disappear again. No trap can stop me, no bonds can hold me (and a silence affect doesn't change that), and I can smooth-talk through anything. The only thing that's missing is an Animal Companion, which I really only want to help me flank. I am a silent assassin, an impeccable diplomat. I am the terror that flaps in the night...

Maybe not that last thing.

What I really love, though, almost as much as playing a rogue, is seeing a group play a campaign from 1st-10th level, never straying from the core classes, and ending up with a group of PCs that could take on any prestige-classed munchkin party and win, almost by sheer force of roleplay alone. That's what warms the cockles of my cold, stony heart.

What is a cockle, anyway? Does the MM have stats for those?

4 days from Dragon #341 being shipped and I still haven't received #340...my patience wears thin. :|

This is the second time in three months I haven't received a copy until after the newsstand date; I'm in PA and used to receiving my copy by the second week of the month. I've sent an email to customer service...the last time this happened, they responded pretty quickly.

Where in MO are you? I went to school in Cape Girardeau...usually got my Dragons pretty quickly there, too, so I'd suggest sending an email, if you haven't already. Good luck.

Sanael Idelien was born Golanth Elgion, a minor cog in one of the various wheels of the Silvanesti's House Servitor (So now you know this is a Dragonlance campaign). As a servant in the home of Rinill, a House Mystic wizard, Sanael chafed under the rigid caste system and dreamed of weilding the kind of freedoms enjoyed by those elves higher on the pecking order...he turned to a life of petty theft, until he was caught breaking into his master's home to steal a minor magical item. He was, as you might guess, thrown out of Silvanost.

He took the name Sanael and began travelling Ansalon, eventually holing up in Palanthas. That's where the campaign began, more or less, and there was much fun to be had as Sanael ducked notice by the party's Silvanesti Bladesinger, became good friends with the outcast dwarf paladin of Reorx, held a kender's shirt-collar and burned Palanthas' thieves' guild to the ground. Sanael was killed at least twice in the illusion/dream of Silvanost, although he actually survived all the way through (including a major encounter in which he climbed the back of Cyan Bloodbane!). Finally, while the party moved on (and I took over as DM), Sanael took the Elf Maiden NPC to safety in Tarsis.

Since then, Sanael has come back as an NPC in various games (some of which I wasn't running), and I've played him in various circumstances at various levels in brief one-shots as future continuations of the original campaign. He and the Elf Maiden have a stormy semiromantic history, he helps take care of the kids at the dwarf's Orphanage, and he steals back stolen magic items for the conclave (a job given him by none other than Everyone's Favorite Dark Elf, Dalamar)...

Sanael's a lot of fun. Obviously. Most recently, in third edition, he's at 20th level, 10ROG/10Shadowdancer. His alignment was originally CN and, over the course of the original campaign it changed to LN. That's one of my favorite things about him. He started as the annoying constant pickpocket (at which he failed miserably) and evolved into a voice of reason and often served as one of the party leaders.

I keep a Word document of all the great quotes of a game...over the past three years, it's about 15 pages. Here are some of the better ones:

Gunner (wizard):I was just going to feel my pouch to see if squiggly’s inside.

Devi (the cleric): She’s TIRED!!! I don’t have a NOT TIRED spell!
And, several weeks later: Wait...Cure Fatigue? Is that a not tired spell?

Trogdar (dwarf fighter): Is there a Cleric in the house? This girl’s afflicted!

Trogdar: are you now, or have you ever been, a member of Morgion's cult?

Player:It’s a Kender Gender Bender

Player: (stuffing the pink d20 in her bra) It’s the bad die. I’m trying to make it happy.

Also, threat range seems dependant on curve, which keeps reverb down. I'm not sure how an axe could get the curve to have a 19-20, let alone an 18-20.

My guess is that the threat range opens up for two reasons: First, because there's a lot of weight in the business end (like a kukri or falchion, both 18-20 machete-like weapons); and second, because there's a chance of hitting with two blades at once (bringing this axebeast down so one blade hits shoulder and the other hits head would be nasty indeed).

Although I really think the second reason is more likely to affect the multiplier...but, yes, I think 19/x3 would make the most sense for this thing (although I shudder to think of the feats and flags some of my players would apply to this thing).

Has there ever appeared in Dragon magazine something detailing aerial combat rules???

Closest thing I can suggest for 3.x is the Dragonlance Campaign Setting (an otherwise highly disappointing volume); since the setting involves a lot of dragonback combat, it has about two pages of fairly useful info.

This would be nice...DragonDex is a good resource, but it's a bit difficult to read...and I, personally, don't like the way its organized. The only solution I've found is the long, hard road of building my own spreadsheet.

But if the wonderful people at Dragon were willing...yes, that would be nice.