-Squee-'s page

-Squee- wrote:

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Sorry Squee, no goblin is pretty enough to tempt me, not even a golden one.

Oh, you meant tempt me to break in half? That's based on behavior, and flanking (even with sneak attack) isn't behavior of the right sort :P

Typical long-shanks. Squee will just go burn the filthy Gnome-munchkins without you - to think Squee was willing to share big fire and glory in song!

Have fun, don't forget to mail their heads to their families.

Only after Squee savors and munches eyeballs. They make better snacks then slug worms.

Sorry Squee, no goblin is pretty enough to tempt me, not even a golden one.

Oh, you meant tempt me to break in half? That's based on behavior, and flanking (even with sneak attack) isn't behavior of the right sort :P

Typical long-shanks. Squee will just go burn the filthy Gnome-munchkins without you - to think Squee was willing to share big fire and glory in song!

TOZ wrote:

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

...I want to go curl up in the corner and never, ever come out.

I want to break these PCs in half with extreme prejudice.

Don't you mean breaking those players in half? because pushing someone around like that certainly tempts me >.<

Maybe Squee tempt Kyrt, Squee needs someone to flank with...

Squee smell something rotten and for once it not Squee's feet or breath.

Thought and smell of Squee roasting munkin-sluggs over hot coals makes Squee hungry...

Hey folks,

I have a question for you (for research purposes and all that):

Do you notice any performance difference between when you open the file containing the adventure (i.e. the biggest file) versus the other (smaller) files?

I'd like to hear from you folks with drek-hot, super-fast, monster machines, as well as folks with 98lb weakling computers (like mine at home).

** spoiler omitted **

No, it doesn't slow anything down at all.

Selk wrote:

I know it's the easy sell: take some enchantress, put her in a jiggy little outfit, slap some bangly jewelry on her and call her the personification of lust. But it's too pat and will rob the Runelords of their majestic menace.

/brainstorm off.

What if this particular runelord lost their physical body long before the event that left them sleeping?

What if it needs a host and what better way to prolong such a nemesis by having them take a succession of hosts having been awake a lot longer than the rest using the device of a supposed secret artefact th hide its presence so it has been using and abusing a succession of hosts across the ages and its only know being revealed as a result of the first runelord's defeat?

Personally I've been looking at this and thinking... what if I ran it in Eberron?
I know, I know, its hasn't been nice between Paizo and WOTC but when I first heard about this i though make the Runelords giants... make it a return of the Giants saga and in the process reveal what really happened in Xendrik.
I apoligise again if this offends some of you but still it only makes me want to buy it more as some of the things sorely lacking as far as I see it is more lower level scenarios especially set outside of Sharn and this, Hollow's Last Hope and Crown of the Kobold Kings has reawakened my interest.

So more the merrier, now to see how I can afford all of this...

Hey I like this! This has killer potential for a great story!

Disenchanter wrote:

You're absolutely right. My comparison is flawed. I bet you feel better now that you pointed that out.

Except...

I wasn't actually trying to compare D&D to a game console.

I was trying to help illustrate why some people feel ripped off by WoTC releasing 4th Edition "so soon."

And your correction of my comparison neither helps, nor hinders that illustration.

You might not have been trying to make that comparison, but you did anyway.

If somebody's not interested in organized play, why, they could continue to play 3E as long as their group is still interested in playing 3E. Nothing's stopping them but peer pressure. There's certainly enough books for it.

I'm still not sure why announcing that a new edition's coming out eight years after the last edition and five years after the last major revision counts as too soon, though. I mean, yes, it's shorter than the time between 2nd and 3rd edition, but on the other hand, if TSR had bit the bullet and made its 2nd Edition revision in 1996 actually mean something instead of just screwing everything up worse, why, they might still be a going concern today.

*shrug* Some people just aren't going to be happy no matter when a new edition comes out. There were people complaining that the old World of Darkness ended too soon when White Wolf finally pulled the plug on that cancerous mass in 2003.

Look since you REALLY REALLY *WANT* to make this comparison, or at least assert yourself over those who do....

1e is like Sega, 2e like Sega II (Genesis), 3e was a huge jump, so well call it Xbox, and 3.5 is Xbox 360 (some backwards compatibility, but not everything carried over). 4e is going to be like another version of Xbox, but it will not have any backwards compatibility.

Gamers in the console arena would be upset about that, so it is not unreasonable for people to be upset about 4e not having conversion supplements, thus making you current edition (platform) obsolete if you want to keep current. If it had any amount of "backwards compatibility" half of the complaints would go away or be kept to low grumbles of "already?!"

But since conversion means Not being able to use you book with the new edition... for those who bought a bunch of materials, it is a hard blow. Imagine having 100 games that your console no longer supports. No one else wants you to hook up the old machine because they want to play the new one... with a platform game, you could hook the old one up and play by yourself... but if you think people should play tabletop D&D by themselves.... you have more issues than creating straw-man arguments.

It has already been said, but I would like to second it: If Paizo made a choice about 4e without first checking it out and seeing what it has to offer, as well as to see what the market trend is towards it, I would lose respect for them.

And if Paizo does go 4e, so what? You can still run 3.5 and just convert it back, OR you can pony up the $100 to have the core books.

Personally if they make the coversion, I will still use my 3.5 material... just make it fit within the mechanics of 4e.

My personal hopes of Paizo staying 3e has everything to do with the fact that I don't want to give WotC any more money....

The Düde wrote:

I tend to agree with this, after all, why over complicat peoples jobs when you don't have to.

I suscribe to KISS (keep it simple stupid).

Which is why I suggested doing 3.5e modules under the Game Mastery line as individual adventures...if the market is there. They can maintain location names from Pathfinder for those DMs that want to use the setting info.

While I would love Pathfinder to stay 3.5e, the odds are that at some point Paizo will have to move to 4e just due to lack of 3.5e support. If WOTC no longer produces the 3.5e PH and DMG, but maintains the copyrights, then there goes access to the XP and advancement tables. Owners of existing books will have no trouble, but it will be hard to attract new gamers to systems based on 3.5e that use those XP tables from the 3.5e PH and DMG.

If there looks to be a big switch to 4e while still maintaining a sizable 3.5e following, then it would be better to switch Pathfinder over to 4e sooner rather than later, and open up submissions for freelance 3.5e adventures.

Yes but doesn't OGL solve that issue? How can you restrict access to something that has OGL?

Fenrat wrote:

Sorry to be a bit behind, but can someone point me to where it says that WOTC will not be or only partially supporting Macs in its new digital iniative????

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=908272 Just search the page for macs.

To the guy who suggested two campaign settings, that'd be awful. Though I wouldn't mind Paizo putting out an occasional 3.5 module (I will afterall still have all the books) developing one world takes so much creative juice that to ask them to make two would just be cruel, and the quality of both would suffer.

I tend to agree with this, after all, why over complicat peoples jobs when you don't have to.

I suscribe to KISS (keep it simple stupid).

Truthfully, I will be running Pathfinder in Eberron. All of my players were adamant about continuing to play in that setting.

So easy conversion will be nice. But hey, in the end I don't mind footing some work (as in I don't expect conversion notes from Paizo).