donnald johnson's page

344 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 344 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Thank you Diego for the quick response, and for the quick action. I am looking forward to getting this stuff.

Sorry about the double post. :-) Not very good at this.

I hate to bother you like this, but I had some questions about this order:

Question 1: is there still a Pathfinder Cards subscription? If there is, I haven't seen any cards (although, I haven't paid for any either). If there isn't, the subscription can be removed, unless there is any benefit to keeping a subscription on a product that isn't being made anymore.

Question 2: This order was made on 23 March, if there is a certain product holding this up, whether it is on back order, or any other reason as such, it can be removed. All I was really looking for were the bases, if available.

Question 3: Can the maps be held to combine shipping? such as one package every 3 or 4 months?

Thank you for your consideration and time.


Take a page out of "Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of N.I.H.M." and accelerate the plan. Have the BBEG finish what ever it was he was working on, and use it on the village or whatever. Even if your plan was to have take another month, or week, he had a break through moment, where everything just happened to fall into place. Now the PCs have to deal with the finished product, and have to be quick about it, as opposed to stopping the product.

Also, if you are a douche GM, and your players know this, why care if they are angry about what the BBEG does, or about not giving them X.P.?

I have no doubt in my military mind that there will be options books coming out. I think the DMG is really pretty good. (As a side note, started playing the Holms book in 1979, been DMing for the most part since, skipping 2nd edition, wishing I had skipped 3.x). There are rules options in it, but more importantly, there are discussions on how to make your own options. A good 1/3rd of the book is treasure, and who can be mad about that.

If there is already some winter domain that you can modify, I say do that, if the "Game that Shant be Named" (Pathfinder) has a winter domain, then modify it, or just make it up your self. You can either create spells for it, or re-skin existing spells. There are a ton of fire spells, change the energy to cold/snow/ice etc, rename it, and there you go. A winter domain.

Have you finished that metric conversion yet El Ronza?

bugleyman wrote:
Looking forward to getting my hands on one. However, a lack of Monsters by Challenge index is a disappointing (and even a little baffling) ease-of-use ding. Much like not denoting the spells with the ritual tag in the class lists in the PHB. I guess they had to leave something to improve in future printings. ;-)

here (some body can link no?)


I love Harn. I bought a box set years ago, and gave it away, I do have a couple of the sets, and would love to set a campaign in one. The problem seems that it seems pretty densely populated. There is not much land that doesn't have a village, etc. It seems like it would be a great "Game of Thrones" style setting. Something mostly free of monsters.

Once Dungeon and Dragon magazines come back, which I am expecting not long after the DMG, then all the bits can be expanded upon easily, and fairly cheaply. Traditions, backgrounds, oaths, fighting styles, feats, spells, archetypes, and all of it. It will be great.

TheRavyn wrote:

ITT: We make bizarre assumptions about 5E after a cursory glance through the rules.

many lols :)

I see a lot of that here. I have played 5 sessions so far, two at 9-10 level, 1 at 1st level, 2 dungeon mastered at 1st to 2nd level. I really like it.

I never played them. I was out in the field too much in the late 80s and most of the 90s when they were around. I really want to play them, but I hope that they just update the operating systems, and leave the graphics and game play the same.

I will watch for this. :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
donnald johnson wrote:

Player's Handbook (which is the same as the Basic Game), page 203: "Normal activity, such as moving and attacking, doesn't interfere with concentration. The following factors can break concentration:

Casting another spell that requires concentration. [].
Taking damage. [].
Being incapacitated or killed. []."

Concentration allows you to cast other spells that are immediate, such as attack spells.

Last time I was playing, I was a fighter, our wizard cast fly on me, and while I was flying and attacking (move part of movement/attack/move the rest of the movement), and the wizard was blasting things, the cleric was casting damage spells, and healing. Was a fun battle, until the draco lich showed up.. :) .... :(

I like to play a game to get the feel of a game, reading a thing really doesn't give a feel of the game. Buff magic is one of the things that I hated about 3.x.

Buff spells can be scaled as well. Fly for example: if cast as a 5th level spell, two characters can be affected. Having two characters bouncing around the battle field would be high fun.

Until someone hits the wizard and your ability to fly goes away.

You are wrong.

You get hit and that does not automatically end concentration: Page 203, Players Handbook, "Taking Damage. Whenever you take damage while you are concentrating on a spell, you must make a Constitution saving throw to maintain your concentration. The DC equals 10 or half the damage you take, whichever number is higher. If you take damage from multiple sources, such as an arrow and a dragon's breath, you make a separate saving throw for each source of damage."

I guess I should have entered the entire text of the rule.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Player's Handbook (which is the same as the Basic Game), page 203: "Normal activity, such as moving and attacking, doesn't interfere with concentration. The following factors can break concentration:

Casting another spell that requires concentration. [].
Taking damage. [].
Being incapacitated or killed. []."

Concentration allows you to cast other spells that are immediate, such as attack spells.

Last time I was playing, I was a fighter, our wizard cast fly on me, and while I was flying and attacking (move part of movement/attack/move the rest of the movement), and the wizard was blasting things, the cleric was casting damage spells, and healing. Was a fun battle, until the draco lich showed up.. :) .... :(

I like to play a game to get the feel of a game, reading a thing really doesn't give a feel of the game. Buff magic is one of the things that I hated about 3.x.

Buff spells can be scaled as well. Fly for example: if cast as a 5th level spell, two characters can be affected. Having two characters bouncing around the battle field would be high fun.

I have one of the Hamerdog Games "The Worlds Greatest Screen" and I always put Order of the Stick cartoons in it.

The one sample card seems a lot like a 4th Edition Power. Many of the powers added something to an ally's attack, or defense, or some sort of healing. If many of the cards are like this one, looks like it adds synergy to combat. I really like that about 4th Edition combat. The powers make the party more of a cohesive team, allowing one character to make an attack, but also give a buff of some sort.

I like these cards. Are all of them as system neutral as the sample?

I have always felt that what you do in the privacy of your own home was up to you. I say talk to your group.

Imbicatus wrote:
The problem with reduced magic item availability is that the system math assumes those items are there.

This is a design flaw.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Enderrin wrote:
Legendarius wrote:
I like the cover art. Interesting they went the no maps/tokens/pawns route, I'm sure to keep the cost down. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure those cost drivers will lead to a flimsy box like Gloomwrought or Gardmore Abbey. Still, I'm definitely going to buy it.
Strange, I was just looking at the cover dress and think how little it made me think D&D.

I am not sure what you are looking for if this is not D&D.

I know that this is the wrong crowd for this, and will probably get flamed, but, I feel that this could add to the discussion.

4.0 has a mechanic called the skill challenge, which is a series of skill rolls to complete a complex task. If the number of success reach a predetermined number before the number of failures, the whole challenge is a success. The failures just indicate set backs.

The beauty of the mechanic, is that the players indicate what skills, spells etc. they use, the GM sets the DC, the die roll is made, the DM records success or failure, and the game goes on to the next roll, which may or may not be the next action.

I run it a little bit differently, in that I roll the dice for the player, while roleplaying the encounter, or for a great idea, and or great roleplaying, I simply assign the success. on the other had, if the idea sucks, or the roleplaying is dead, then I let the player roll the die, and adjudicate from there.

The mechanic is supposed to be invisible to the players, which is hard to do sometimes, since the players may or may not pick up that a challenge is starting. The point is, this situation would be perfect for this mechanic, and I am going to write it up and use it soon. Thanks for the idea!!

Don't mind me, I just want to find this discussion, and keep track of it.

I don't like Pathfinder RPG.

I like Golarion, I don't like the pathfinder adventure paths as a whole, too railroady.

Why not use the Intelligence modifier to determine number of free actions? a character has to think about what he/she is doing in order to do it, seems intelligence should be a reasonable ability to determine free actions.

I have the Dungeons of Dread (and will be buying this one as well). It is NOT just a scan of the original. It is a well done, edited, with many fixes in the modules, on high quality paper. The new NEXT play test contains monster conversions for all 4 of the modules in Dungeons of Dread. I imagine that the Slave Lords has received the same treatment. I find this very exciting.

On Labor day weekend, there is a game convention in Denver, Tacticon, (http://www.denvergamers.org) I believe that they have pathfinder games going on. don't play it, but I recall seeing something about in the brochure.

you may be able to find a game there. the game schedule is right below the log on. I have been to several of these cons, and they are really good conventions.

I DMed a bunch of old TSR (boot hill, gang busters, top secret, gamma world, star frontiers) games at a convention, it was very easy to replace the tables and charts.

it stands up nicely, it is much more stout than binders. I love it, I have had mine for many years, and still shows no wear or tear.

Phil and Dixie?

Len Lakofka?

i may just have to check this out. by the looks of the web site, i thought it would be not good.

it makes me sad that these are not available. i got the sheep and wood a few months ago for the wife, but now, i can't complete her set. gamers are completists, when will these be available again?

it is fun that i can say got wood for sheep though.

Finlanderboy wrote:

Well that is sad you let rueles kill your game that are there anyway.

Do you turn a blind eye someone quoting a rule and rules lawyering?

That is sad you let what is there wreck your game sometimes, but not others. So it is only ok to use the rules you think are ok?

If you wanna drink beer and roll dice with friends you can do that in veags as well.

I am sorry but I think your points are fallacious. As in embodying a fallacy.

Yes, i suppose that i do have bad, wrong fun. but, we do have fun, and none of us have to spend too much time outside of game time gleaning every last point out of rules, that leaves time for work, school, wives, children, and the ocassional deployment.

Rules lawyering doesn't impress me either, by the way.

by the way, i said neither your way is wrong and that my way is right. just throwing out.

power gaming kills verisimilitude for me.

i, the player, have a rule book with all these great and wonderful feats, abilities, weapons, de da, de da, de da......and i want to make the most awesome x y z race 2052.

so, i am race 2052, i have my stats, which i am apparently not born with, i can manipulate my intelligence, my wisdom, my strength, and, apparently, my charisma?

i grew up in a place, where all weapons and fighting styles, feats, magic spells, de da de da de da exist, so i can just pick whatever of those that tickles my fancy. I can learn x class, then turn around and learn y class, then turn around and learn z class, because....i want to mine this class feature, that feat, and this spell.

killed. dead. here lies verisimilitude, dead on arrival.

i feel that there should be some limit to what i can create, as a creature who exists in the world. the ninja who taught me ninjaing isn’t going to be very pleased with me when i go learn something else from some other master, if i can even find said master.

as far as power gaming magic items, to squeeze this or that point out of a build. how do i even know such an item exists? how do i know as a magic user, that spell 427 exists unless i have come across it in some tome, or some training, not every caster can know of every spell that exists in the world, and that i can make a magic item with it?

i do not power game becasue of these reasons, luckily, there is only one power gamer in my group, and he always brings good beer.

rule of gaming:

get together with friends
drink expensive beer,
role dice.

i have not seen the wish spell on the spell list yet, so i can only speculate how it is going to work. the 1st edition limited wish suggested that greedy limited wishes to go bad, and the wish spell suggesting that the referee use great discretion when adjudicating the spell,

i do not want a wish spell on the spell list at any rate. besides, the spell takes time to cast, the miscibility table takes place instantly. I am pretty sure that the universe would be confused by any wish to predetrmine any dice rolls, past or present.

even more exciting, is that it is percentile based.

im not sure what the most popular sci-fi system is. i play star wars saga edtion. i have d20 future, but havent played it. I have a few of the old school sci-fi: traveler (little black book edition), star frontiers, and Space Opera.

Thank You Mr. Agresta,

I agree that the mechanics set is problematic, there being so few good ones, and licensing issues, etc., etc.

What are the chances that these sorts of projects (razor coast, far horizons, ebon shroud) be system neutrual?

I am always on the look out for good material to port into some of my favorite systems.

While i, too, love nick's work, i was less excited about Razor coast than the science fiction setting, and my memory of what it was called fails me.

what are the chances of that becoming reality? perhaps as one of those extra things as the kickstarted goes way way beyond what is being requested. perhaps way way way way beyond

i will gladly pay for razor coast today, to get the scince fiction setting tomorrow.

i really do hope the rules cyclopedia is reprinted.

Played this at Tacticon with one of the authors. I really enjoyed playing it. It has some great mechanics, one I thought was really cool was the cleric attonement mechanic, the cleric could piss off their god by casting spells poorly, to the point where no spell works, and they have to seek attonement.

I also liked the scaled spell effects, the better you roll, the more effects. I had read a short story or some other about elminister at a super secret mage fair, where there was a fireball contest, this mechanic could really bring that contest to life.

I played a thief, and the luck points were key to my success, didnt survive, but died in a great cataclysmic sceen, and ensured the survival of a few remaining party members, so it wasnt a TPK.

I dont think it would be all that hard to do. I make myself these sorts of lists with just about every campaign i run. currently in saltmarsh, the DMGII version. just made a list.

Not looking for players, i have enough, but, we use Google+ Hangouts, and it works great. I usually have 3 to 4 players in the room, and 2 to 3 on hangouts, plus a cam on me (the DM) and a cam on the map. I email handouts around etc. I only play with friends that i would hang out with, drink beer with, and smoke cigars with. I trust all my players die rolls, and we mostly laugh, and drink beer.

but, it works very well.

I was running Age of Worms, and my party won the initiative, and killed dragotha before he even got a chance to act once. I had put....days...of work into 3d terrain for that encounter, and it was beautiful. the players didn’t even acknowledge it, just wanted a list of loot.

I haven’t played 3.x since.

call me what you will, but it sucks to go through that. The dm should have fun also.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

my advice: play with friends. play with people you really like, and who really like you. friends will forgive your treaspasses, and you will forgive the treaspasses of your friends.

make the session about fellowship and friendship. dont care about how many experience points you get, but make the experience about how much you laugh.

drink good beer, eat good food.

your character sheet is not as important as the character sitting next to you.

thats my advice, not just for gaming, but for life.

the beauty of cannon is that it is like any other rule, it can be ignored. my 4e greyhawk campain is set as of what was published in 1983.

In my head: most wizards would have a certain amount of spell slots.

player 1: could fill those slots with level appropriate spells, which are memorized in the morning, and cast based on description during the day, ie past editions.

player 2: fills those slots with at wills, econunters, and daylies, ie current edition

player 3: has attack spell, movement spell, utility spell etc. the player casts a spell, describes it in as much detail as the player wants to use, rolls damage based on level (which is on par with player 1's attack spells) of the spell and picks an effect, and casts until all the slots have been used.

player 4: has a point pool, and casts based upon that pool, either from the whole list ala wizard/cleric, or from a truncated, chosen list, ala sorcerer.

if all the damage theresholds are the on par, and each has some sort of effect attached. these players can all play at the same table, and none of them are having badwrongfun.

player 1 gets to scrutenize lists, follows descriptions, make selections etc.

player 2 makes fewer choices, and gets to use some as often as she wants, use some a few times a day, and a few only once per day. not as much customization, fewer things to decide from etc.

player 3 can have as much or as little investment as he wants. the lurker can just roll dice as appropriate, the thespian can have wild, descriptive fun without anything minimizing his imagination.

player 4 gets to do some serious accounting.

if we are talking wizards (magic-users), clerics (priests), warriors (fighters), and theives (rogues) (i personnaly prefer the magic-users, clerics, fights, and theives) each could in those blanks how they want. fighter has a sword, or at wills, or moves, or points to spend etc.

thats in my head.

all at the same table.

I subscribe, have since the very beggining. I plan on continuing my subscription for ever and ever.

Also, they post all the art from all the books, and all the maps from dungeon articles. can never have too much art.


i figured that this was as good a place as any for my 300th post.

I started my Greyhawk campaign at first level, with cannon as of 1983. not to much published by then.

I started out with the blue cover basic (the 1978 booklet, didnt get the box set, wish I did, since I didnt have dice until about 1981). Went into Ad&D, then in 2005, started playing 3.5 after skipping 2nd Ed. In 2006, I wasn't playing at all until 2008. Now, I play 4th edition.

Rule #1 was missing from 3.5, and that is its biggest downfall.

Rule #1 is once again rule #1, which gives the edition a very AD&D feeling to it. The rule arguments at the table dont exist any more, the interaction is much more real. The imagination is very real.

I disagree that 4e doesnt handle roleplaying well. Unless your idea of roleplaying is rolling a d20.

in combat, there is very real cooperation between the party, because things that one player does, often affects one or more of the other players. The buffing that went on prior to combat in 3.5 seemed very stilted, and programed. In 4e, their is buffing, but it isnt encounter breaking, and it is fluid, a part of the encounter, and evolves, and doesnt usually last forever. Most positive effects last until the end of the buffing characters turn, and negative effects until a saving throw is made.

3.5 is a very antogonistic approach to gaming. 3.5 deffinatly has a I win you Lose feeling, pitting player vs DM (which the deck is stacked in the player's advantage) and player vs player (arcane casters trump, after a few levels of being protected by the fighter).

The end of the adventuring "day" when the caster is out of spells, or really out of their highest level spells. that wizard can cast magic missile all day long. and those encounter powers, although gone right now, after a short study period, are back in mind. There is also a mechanical advantage to continue the march, instead of finding a hidey-hole for 8 hours.

As far as the dayly martial power, the above description works well, it can also be explainded that the perfect oportunity to use this power at this time is the opponent has to be in the right place, the pc has to be in the right place, etc.

The adventures that WoTC produces are designed to be light on story, becasue the story is supposed to come from the table, not the booklet. Which is where the story is supposed to come from. There is a little plot, there is a little hooking, and then great encounters. the plot, the story, the hooks, are supposed to come from the coopertive story telling at the table, instead of being railroaded from this hook, through this plot, and these encounters.

I love that WoTC isnt trying to tell OUR story, just assisting the telling, by giving me great encounters.

I am sure this is a ramble, which most of my posts are. OP: if your friends arent willing to try it out, give WoTC's encounters program at your FLGS a go. My fiends embraced it, even the hard core 3.5 optimizer who would only play 6th level and higher arcane spell casters is enjoying it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just a quick note.

The game truly boils down to the social contract of the table, and each table is going to be different. I personally would not last long at a table of players who clearly do not like each other, nor would I last long at a table of players who do like each other but do not play well with others (and I mean this in a strictly kindergarten way).

Fun should be the centerpiece of the table's social contract. Fun is why we get together, drink beer and roll dice. The goal of each player should be to support the others in a mutually beneficial goal within the lives of the characters.

I agree with the article, and many of the posters interpretation. A player taking an action of which that action is not beneficial to all, either by being adversarial, or deceitful, with the excuse of "because this is what my character would do," at a table which is conceived under the contract that all work together toward a common goal, truly adds nothing positive to the experience. If the table chooses a social contract where backstabbing, infighting, treachery and deceit between players is acceptable behavior, then please, enjoy your game. I do not wish to play that way. If I wanted an experience like that, I would just go to real life, instead of my fantasy realm with my friends.

I agree with WotC's right to point this out. The Neverwinter campaign setting is ripe with factions of opposing viewpoints and different mechanical aspects tied into their themes. During character creation, it would be very easy to pick a theme which is contrary to themes chosen by other players. Unlike other campaign settings with opposing factions, Neverwinter is very small geographically, and these factions will interact with each other, much like gangs in any city. A slight “push” from the Dungeon Master should be enough to prevent such issues at the beginning of the campaign.

In conclusion, WotC is not trying to tell anyone how to play the game. What they are saying is be cognizant of the choices you as a player make, to fulfill your duties of the social contract in effect at your table.

This was neither quick nor just a note.

zylphryx wrote:

Anyone remember this thing?

I must admit I picked one up back in the 80's. Used it for a couple months and went back to using actual dice.

I do remember it. never had one but i do remember it.

i will use the cards as a role playing award.

example: player 1 does something really cool, funny, great idea, great use of powers, skills, criticle hits, etc. player 2 says: player 1 deserves a card. and i issue a card, the player gets to use it whenever he/she wants to.

so, they are an award for fun.

1 to 50 of 344 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>