The Oliphaunt of Jandelay

Speech's page

Goblin Squad Member. Organized Play Member. 39 posts (58 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character. 1 alias.


Scarab Sages

It'll be long as she doesn't pick at it!

Scarab Sages

Jarazix wrote:
As the big date is comming, who needs a game in the danvers beverly area? I could take on a few players, I have two regulars and a host of guest stars

I have been looking for a game close to where I live forever. If you have the space for another player-I'd be into filling it.

Let me know if there's room.


Scarab Sages

Ah well...never ran with the cool kids...just wanted to say congrats! :)

Scarab Sages

I just read an email from Paizo saying that the first print run has been sold out and that they are scrambling to run another printing.

I just wanted to say congratulations and well done. It's great to be around for this (to me at least) rebirth of the game and to watch it succeed. It's an exciting time for gaming. :)

If you build it...they will come!

Scarab Sages

Ahhh..thanks! I saw the video that Eric was in, and wondered how Pathfinder would compare to the Ptolus book.

I can sleep at night now.


Scarab Sages

I'm just curious to know which is the larger/heavier book-the Ptolus "brick" or the new Pathfinder hardcover.

Just being curious...not sure if this question has already been asked.

Scarab Sages

G'day all,

I was told you're looking for new players for this PBP-what does the party look like now? I want to make a character that would fit but I also want to make something that excites me too!

I am pretty open to what I can play...just need a base to work from.

If I get the info, I'll try to make a character tonight or tomorrow morning. I have to read over what has already happened in the game so far...I haven't read the Darkmoon Vale stuff yet-so I don't know the adventure.

Hope to see you in game!

Scarab Sages

Thomas Thiessen wrote:

Set, if you want to jump in, let me know...

Need a few more players...things seemed to have died off again.

I'd like to play if you'll have me. I'm mostly new to PBP but I'll learn quickly enough.

What sort of characters does the party need? or is it an open type game?

Let me know.

Scarab Sages

Just wanted to chime in and say that I'm looking for a Pathfinder/3.5 game as well. I will continue to check these boards for any that are starting-but wanted to put my name out there too!


Scarab Sages

I'm always on the lookout for a game on the North Shore. Pathfinder preferable.

Scarab Sages about:

Samwise Gamgee vs. Rudy (Sean Astin)

the winner....the viewing public!!


Scarab Sages

Tom Qadim wrote:

Not a personal sounds more like retirement, which could be for any number of personal reasons. Perhaps Aroden fell in love with a mortal (yeah, probably a little too cliche) or something like that. I think Krome's idea has a lot of potential.

I'm liking it too...the Whispering Tyrant could have found some chink in Arodens' armour and Aroden gave up his portfolio rather than have some undead monster ruin a power for good...or something like that. I plan to steal Krome's beginning and whip something up with it.

Thanks Krome!

Scarab Sages

F. Wesley Schneider wrote:

For most of the big ideas in Golarion, yeah, we have ideas. What happened to Aroden? There's a plot. The situation with Nex and Geb, sure, there's ideas. Will we ever come right out and say what's the deal with these mysteries? Probably not. At least, not any time soon. Why? Because these amount to Campaign Setting Spoilers. Mysteries are fun and GMs who work their own stories up detailing their takes on these mysteries can do some really cool stuff, but us just saying "Oh, it's like this" relegates an interesting facet of the world into just another bit of trivia.

Take the Far Realm for example. In the second and even much of the third edition D&D days, its was this spooky other place where awesome monsters came from, full of potential for aberrant horror. Now it's been largely revealed and it's just another place gross monsters come from. Details kill imagination fast.

So we'll be keeping a lid on our secrets, many of them forever if some of us get our ways. Golarion is a shared world, between both us as designers and GMs, and you shouldn't have to feel like we're going tromp down the aisle stepping on everybody's toes with each new product. You do what you want with these big mysteries in your game, and we'll do what we want in ours.

Thanks for the response. I had figured that most of the big plot points had answers, but also were put there as building blocks for GM's to further develop. I suppose I wanted to know if they would be revealed in the future as a way to advance the global plot somehow-and you answered without my actually posing the query! Good work!

Ah well, it doesn't matter either way if anything was Golarion is different from everyone else's.

Keep up the fantastic work! Looking forward to the new rules.

Scarab Sages

Just a quick question to the writers of our beloved Golarion-is most of the world you've created already decided upon? Like, do you already know what killed Aroden and what happened to the undead ruler that disappeared (Nex or Geb or something, I don't have my book with me)?

Do you know some of it...most of it...none of it?

I'm just curious if you've already decided/know these things and they're just waiting to be expanded upon, or if they're completely open waiting for an enterprising writer to flesh them out.

I suppose I could direct a similar question to the DM's out there about how much of a world do they flesh out before they present it to the players. Sure the starting area/town and populace-but do you first flesh out the mythology of creation...and the structure of the planes...and the history of the world before PC's set foot in the world? How much is enough for you when you create you're world?

This is mostly idle pondering-but I am curious how much of Golarion is already decided upon.

Scarab Sages

I can't believe my favourite beer was not mentioned-even if others from the same brewery were: Maudite from Unibroue. That's some damn fine beer. I also like Bass, Keiths, Sam Adams Lager and even a Molson Canadian once in a while too.

I've created sort of a following in my area of Massachusetts for Maudite; I introduced it to my step-son and he introduced it to a bunch of college age kids. The result is that it's a whole lot easier to find this beer north of Boston.

*sigh* can't wait to get home and have a brew now.

Scarab Sages

The Wraith wrote:

I've just found out (after years of playing at 3.x) that this horrible (IMHO) rule that was present in 3.0 is still present in 3.5 (and subsequentially, in Pathfinder).

Page 344:

"Hardness and Hit Points: An attacker cannot damage a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon or shield struck. Each +1 of enhancement bonus also adds 1 to the weapon’s or shield’s hardness and hit points."

This rule basically throws out of the window the possibility to use effectively Sunder against PCs at all.

Let's take some examples: a Frost Giant is a CR 9 with the Improved Sunder feat and no magic weapons (by SRD). A party would start reasonably to find Frost Giants around 7th level. Now, at 7th level, any character would have at least a +1 weapon; conclusion is, a Frost Giant cannot sunder characters' weapons (or shields, for the matter) at all.
Worse yet, a Frost Giant Jarl (CR 17) has a +2 Frost Greataxe. The enhancement bonus of the weapon is +2; a 15th level character (again, a reasonable moment of his career to find such a creature) has at least a +3 weapon, right? So, no sunder again.

I could go on indefinitely; a Balor (CR 20) has just a +1 Vorpal weapon !!! Again, no Sunder possible !!! And so on, and on, and on...

The thing is even worse for creatures that do not use manufactured weapons, but instead fight with their own body (because a GM could give some share of the treasure a monster has to boost his equipment...). What is the 'enhancement' bonus of a Great Wyrm, a Tyrannosaurus, a Purple Worm - the Tarrasque !?!... Nothing ! At best, we can consider the DR of such creatures; and again, a Great Wyrm has DR 20/magic (which can be considered +1 at best), and cannot cast Greater Magic Fang without using Limited Wish or Wish, since it's not on his spell list! Only the Tarrasque has DR 15/epic, so a GM can consider it +6 (but not as per RAW...)

And, icing the cake, a Monk who fights unarmed...

I'm not sure how I feel about the rule altogether...I wouldn't like my weapons being sundered-but at the same time having the players nervous around the weapon-sundering evil guy raises the stakes too.

In any event-isn't a +2 Frost Axe (as per your example) the equivalent of a +3 item? When you make an item (according to the 3.5 SRD) you have to have a +1 to the weapon already and then add the additional property, which adds to the price and power. The frost property would add +1, Holy items add +2 and Vorpal adds +5. I could be mistaken-but that's how I've always thought of magic items with extra properties.

As far as natural weapons go...there has to be an answer for that too I'd hope.

Be well

Scarab Sages

Some of my faves from years past:

Whichway Dideego (AD&D fighter/theif) who had a nefarious uncle named Lifter Lendfence.

Izzit Reallythere (AD&D illusionist who had 35 prisms hanging off of his clothes that he would use to fascinate ppl)

There are many others...but these are the ones that are most dear to my heart. :)

Scarab Sages

veector wrote:

If anyone wants to meet me. I'll be over at the registration tables around noon on Saturday, wearing a black D&D t-shirt and maybe black jacket.

Oh, and here's what I look like...

Bald man in blue

Hey..I met you a while back. It was the first time that I went to a Meetup in Cambridge.

Good to put a face to a name around here. :)


Scarab Sages

crazycongirl wrote:

Quick update:

Only 14 days left till the start of TotalCon XXIII

Only 10 days left to pre-register and save $$$.

Only $10 per day or $30 for 4 funfilled days of games, friends and fun plus ticket fees. pay on-line via paypal or mail-in your form by February 15th. $15/$40 at the door plus tickets.

Full and final event listing is now available: a whopping 130+ role-playing events including recently added pathfinder society listings plus don't forget to check the indie section for more rp games run by the game designers if you want to try something new!! full selection of board, mini's, ccg's, and video games too.

Looking forward to seeing you there!

I just found out about this today and alas it's too late to attend. :(

Oh...another MA gamer up here on the North Shore.


Scarab Sages

Jarazix wrote:
We have a group in Danvers/ Beverly not sure if thats close for you

How often do you play in Beverly/Danvers? I've been looking for a solid game on the north shore.

Scarab Sages

I've come to a time in my life where d&d is another project to juggle and I don't have the time nor energy to want to play anymore. I'll probably take a break from gaming, so I won't be needing my subscription anymore.


Scarab Sages

I received the package last night. Almost a month between when the order was "placed" and when I received the package.

Scarab Sages

Bump for honour!

Scarab Sages


My order was placed on July 26 (as part of my ongoing subscription) and I have yet to receive anything yet. Any word on when I might be seeing this? It has been more than 2 weeks.

Not exactly a complaint...merely anxious to get my hands on the next Adventure Path. I know I can (and have) download the pdf's, but the mags are what I like.


Scarab Sages

Just to chime in my vote, I think that Moorcock's take on Melnibone (or however that is spelled) would be a great fit for drow. In my mind, the deals with and worshipping of demons, complete debauchery and depravity of the society not to mention the arrogance and sense of entitlement to rule the "lesser races". They also have the deep-rooted connection with all sorts of magic (straight sorcery, a form of "pact" magic, inherent skill handed down through bloodlines etc) and a history with martial supremacy.

You could also more closely tie them to the natural forces of chaos (say to pay reverence to an incarnation of chaos) as Moorcock did.

I don't mean that you should completely rip off Moorcock's creations...but I think that is a fine template that captures the essence of the archetypal drow evil. Haughty, amoral, jaded and very much aware of their own penchant for doling out suffering.

Just my two coppers.

Scarab Sages

crosswiredmind wrote:

Every published game is a revenue stream for some company.

Second, what corporate policy is reflected in the design of 4e that is any different than any other business decision made by any other publisher?

I agree that every published game is a revenue stream, but I think that WOTC is focused too much on the stream in 4th edition.

On your second question, the whole idea of synergy, which I mentioned in my first post. In my mind (and I admit not necessarily reality) WOTC took Dragon and Dungeon magazines with D&D and DDM and and mashed them together so they could capitalize on their combined popularity so ppl would give 4th edition a try. I think they took D&D a step closer to DDM because they already had most of the rule set for such a system. WOTC could also sell a ton of minis and further capitalize on the minis by creating an online element where you could buy virtual minis along with a bunch of other buzzes and whistles not needed for the game. I don't see the redesign as an evolution of the game but a step away from role playing.

Back in the beginning, EGG and DA were wargamers that took their wargames a step towards role playing and I think that WOTC is undoing that. Now, I know that this is the prerogative of WOTC to do since they own the IP and may do with it as they want-but I won't be following.

In any event, I don't want to argue this and most likely won't be posting on this thread anymore. I wanted to give my opinion and have, I see no reason to defend myself. I am not looking to be proven wrong nor swayed.

Be well

Scarab Sages

Logos wrote:

The entire premise of 4th edition seemed an extension of their DDM product, coupled with MTG ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming online offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.

Oh noes an edition of the game that has a tactical wargaming aspect and sells splat books


sorry for being snide, but you might want to consider what your saying because this is what it seems to me, maybe i'm being unkind but i don't think i am. Wizzies didn't invent mini's they existed from the begining, wizzies have been selling splat books for a good long time, neither of these things are new. Your premise seems to be I don't like in 4th edition that which has worked expressly in 3.5 and to large extent in 3.0, which i like because they where i don't know something that isn't 4th edition and wasn't informed by the corporate will of the company dispite being you know, produced by the same company (even so far as to say the same company in the same state [being owned by hasbro])

So what's left is that Wizzies made a money making decision, something you've already said your okay with. One of these statements is not like the other....

but anyway, thanks for playing

Wow! This post could have come straight from an MMORPG board, complete with l33t sp34k, smug derision, circular logic even topped off with a false sense of superiority! Oh well...

My premise, is that corporate policy seems to be making the design decisions in this new edition and I think that is a bad thing. I think that other companies (*cough*Paizo*cough*) make most of their design decisions based on actual playability instead of what is the current most effective revenue stream. I get that they still have to sell Paizo admitted in the past about putting females on the covers usually ensures lots of sales, but the choices they make in design are less likely to pander to the "What's hot/What's not" list.

My point-is that I don't like their choices both for their content and the reasons behind them.

Be well

Scarab Sages


I am going to pull a club from Sebastian's golf bag:

The entire premise of Dungeons& Dragons seemed an extension of their Chainmail product, coupled with Avalon Hill Squad Leader ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming AD&D offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.

This hobby has always followed this model. Create > expand > diversify > redefine the core > repeat.


I get that you're all for 4th edition and that is fine, I don't share that opinion. I recognize that corporate policy is dictating design elements and think that is a bad idea. Regardless of what happened in the past, I think that corporate thinking is not the same as RPG thinking and has thus designed a revenue stream rather than a game I want to play.

Be well

Scarab Sages

joela wrote:
For those who received the 4E core books early (*cough* *cough*), has a readthru of the books affected your decision in continuing to play 3.x or the future Pathfinder RPG?

OK, I've read through most of the thread and haven't seen my personal gripe I figure I may be able to contribute to the conversation.

To quickly answer the original question, I have seen the 4th ed "preview" and that sneak peek caused me to cancel my preorder. Why do you ask? Just one word:


That's right...I could have dealt with much about 4th that I didn't like (such as pre-rolled iterations of the same monster, predetermined powers and many of those powers being just weird) but when corporate ideals begin to shape the product to the degree that I observed..I can't handle it.

The entire premise of 4th edition seemed an extension of their DDM product, coupled with MTG ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming online offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.

To be clear now, I'm not against ppl or corporations making money-I'm all for it. The more money they make, the more books they publish the more the game expands! But the manner in which that company makes money does colour my perception of them, thus when the re-packaging of a bunch of money making ideas forms the basic framework of my favorite hobby-I tend to walk away from the company; I wish them well, but I do walk away.

Anyhow, that is my gripe-keep in mind it's only my perception and though you may disagree, it's going to keep me from subscribing to WOTC and their products. I don't agree with how (I think) they formed their "corporate design direction" and I think that the overall IP of D&D has suffered for it in this latest edition.

Be well

Scarab Sages

I think the idea of splitting up cultural and innate racials is a great idea. I think it creates a mechanic that encourages roleplay: have a dwarf that is the woodsy type? or a half-orc raised by halflings...the rules can more easily handle it this way.

I don't think it's necessarily a "must have" in the way of mechanics, but it's a simple fix, which would be backwards compatible (since nothing has changed about the traits-just their classification) and which adds to the game as a whole. I figure why not add this in!

Scarab Sages

I agree that the text should be kept as is because orcs as a race are listed as "often Chaotic Evil" in the SRD. This means they are, most often, the epitome of evil without any regard for the trappings of a lawful society. I concede that this is not true all the time, but if the majority of the race is evil that revels in anarchy-then shouldn't the official rules reflect this as well. I can appreciate that ppl might have issue with the rules as written, but to have any sort of consistency in the game, you can't on one page say they are brutish, repulsive monsters and on another page make them out to be simply misunderstood.

Like others have voiced-I want my monsters to be dispicable and deranged so that my heroes shine all the brighter.

Scarab Sages

Archade wrote:

I think you could do a variant of this that is less complicated.

Maybe say that a wizard can cast a spell directly from his spellbook, but he must make a caster level check equal to the spell level +10. So a 5th level caster attempting to cast a 3rd level spell would have to roll 2d0+5 and exceed 13.

You'd want to limit this, so wizard's can't cast spells an unlimited number of times per day. You could do this by:

- have the wizard take 1 pt of Intelligence Damage
- have the wizard become fatigued, then exhausted if they do it again.
- have the wizard take 1d6 hp damage x the level of the spell

We did something very similar in our 2nd edition game back in the day (without any penalties)-the only difference was if you read a spell out of your book, the spell/pages was consumed in the casting. You had to find a place to get the spell again to re-input it into the book(our characters were famous for having backup spellbooks). This way, if you really needed that extra spell, you could have it...for a price. In those days, a mage burning a spell was a big deal...because there wasn't many places to get spells, unlike the magic stores found in the game today.

Anyways..just wanted to add my 2 cents.

Scarab Sages

The two that were most famous/infamous that I can remember were both mine:

Halfling thief/fighter: Whichway Dideego
Gnome illusionist: Izzit Reallythar

I had a slew of other similar themed names..but these two have always stayed with me.


Scarab Sages

There seems to be plenty of gods that have come and gone-could we get any info (a partial list or something) about the gods that came before the ones that are around now? We know a little about the Peacock Spirit but I am curious about what other gods were around-and hopefully what caused them to not continue to be around :)

The backstory of Shelyn got me curious!!


Scarab Sages

I think part of the problem is that many of the ppl who are labeling others grognard are the ones who just came on board in the recent past. They have a different idea about the flavour of D&D and they don't understand that these "old timers" are only trying to maintain the flavour that they have come to love through multiple editions. If the game "evolves" too far away from some basic fundamentals-it's not a the same game and not one they/I will follow.

I personally love the pulp fantasy feel of the older editions-where you didn't need a specific spell to describe or explain any random occurance and evil was REALLY evil (not a moral ambiguity that ppl like to debate ad nausem). I don't consider myself anything other than a gamer who likes what he likes and ppl can label that anyway they like.

Scarab Sages

Sadly, the entire party bought it when fighting The Faceless One and his minions-they somehow managed to turn the Alip and deal with the cultists to begin with...but when The Faceless One came around...and started summoning, the party was at a disadvantage-when the Alip returned afterwards...they had little chance.

So...the list of those defeated by the Age of Worms grows..

Jovan-level 4 human cleric of St Cuthbert
Alissandra-level 4 human cleric of St Cuthbert
Nuanisne-level 4 elven ranger
Belmont-level 4 human rogue


Scarab Sages

I posted this in another thread too...but I think it bears repeating.

With Paizo not being tied to WoTC, Paizo now gets to call all the shots; it sounds like they're planning on their own campaign world (which I'm sure will be stellar) and they get to contribute another flavour of D&D to the world. From what I have seen from them, I'm kinda feeling like it's a relief that Erik and James et al don't have to answer to a brand manager who is more concerned about what his boss will say than to what would make a good product. Now, I'm not saying that business practices and marketing be damned-just that with one less level of red-tape, Paizo can produce the product they want to see and create something fundamentally their own flavour.

I look upon this move by WoTC as unfortunate but might overall be a boon to the rest of us.

Scarab Sages

This may be a stupid question, but what is the difference between the $4 envelope and the $4 parcel delivery method? I'm just curious which one would work better for me since in the past the USPS has not been very tender with my Dragon and Dungeon mags.


Scarab Sages

On one hand I'm sad that the only 2 magazines I've ever subscribed to are dying...yet on the other hand I see how this frees up Paizo. This way, if they make their own campaign setting, they'll have more say in what goes in it and not have to worry about/consider what WoTC thinks (and WoTC won't have the ability to pull the rug out from under it has).

My biggest disappointment is that there won't be any more Greyhawk material published...maybe this was a factor in WoTC's decision too-one less world to complete with the new setting.

Ahh well, I setup my transition copies and eagerly await what is in store.

Best of luck to Paizo.