plungingforward2's page

While I think there is some room for "good" necromancers - in the real world, these are "mediums" and other "speakers of (for? with?) the dead," and probably most similar to diviners in terms of what they do for a party - I'm not on board with going back to defining necromancy as somehow linked to the creation or manipulation of life energy. The prefix "necro" means DEATH, and that's what its "mancers" ought to be students of. If you want someone who studies life energy, there was some old dragon magazine article or other on "vivimancers." (Though keeping the "life" side of things in the hands of clerics and druids makes more sense to me.) The necromancer meddles with death - whether this is the person who speaks with spirits, honors the dead and plays by the rules, or the next would-be-Nagash-from-Warhammer-World, is a matter of taste, I suppose.

(And as far as nonevil undead companions, one of the best character ideas I ever saw was a guy in GURPS: Voodoo who was accompanied by the ghost of his murdered friend. A full-on ghost may be too much for a 1st level PC's undead companion, but some sort of low-level poltergeist - like an unseen servant or something, with room to grow - might fit the bill, no?)

I've been with this game since "elf" was a character class, and I've almost always been DM because D&D has always had a lot of complex subsets of rules and options. 4th edition - while I really don't like the "married to minis" aspect of it, and I've got some problems with some of the more "gamist" elements ("per encounter" powers, the four character roles, and so on) - is at least easy enough in comparison that other people are interested in running games. For that, I like it.

I'll probably stick to my own"divorced from minis" version of 3.x (what with pathfinder and everything, I think that rules engine is making great strides) as DM - those same "complex subsets of rules" expand the scope of the game - but I'll gladly play in a 4th edition game.

No way to the Dex penalty. Dwarves have a knack for solid craftsmanship and are good with their hands. ("Man-made" is dwarven slang for "shaddy.") That does not add up to a Dex penalty. The Charisma penalty suits the gruff nature of the dwarf. This doesn't mean a dwarf doesn't have a strong personality (which is represented by a combination of the three mental stats), just that interactions with strangers are hindered by stoic behavior and that the dwarf isn't very glib or splashy. If this means he lacks some of the requisite splash to max out on sorcerer spells or turning undead, that to me makes more sense than making the dwarf all thumbs.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Wow... too much data to think about.

Wow indeed.

Remember Gauntlet? It's fun, hack-n-slash dungeon crawl with various expendible and non-expendible resources. It has two-dimensional characters that do little more than a series of cool moves. While all their powers are unique everyone contributes equally to just about every combat. It also has graphics, sound and all sorts of other value ads that D&D doesn't have. If I never want to use a Profession check again, or if I want PCs to be an interchangeable set of cool moves, I'll go play some gauntlet. That way, I don't even have to be the DM.

No love for Logan Bonner, here. That line reminded me of Gary Gygax's worst moments of arrogance. At least Gygax had a great vision and what seemed like good intentions. This Bonner fellow just sounds like some Marketing Guy posing as a "hip gamer" trying to sell me what sounds more and more like graphic-free Gauntlet every day.

Not to add to all the agreement, but it's true: I prefer 1d20 to a series of d6's for two reasons: 1) I like the 10% chance of a "dramatic" 1 or 20 and 2) It is easier for me to get my head around a situation, set a DC and convert that into a baseline percentage on the fly with the 5% increment thing. I wing it a lot, and d20 makes that easier for me. That said, some folks I know really like bell curves because it is easier for them to wing it on a bell curve. They also argue that the Yatzee effect is cooler than the natural 1 or 20. So to each his own.

That said, hats off for the opening up of the d6 system licence! Many, many years ago at Grade School recess (is this what it is like to FEEL 30?), I used to DM a simple, made-up RPG that was, in retrospect, a primative precursor to today's d20. (Rolling high was always good, armor class was expressed as a negative modifier to the other guy's attack roll, success/failure was decided by a modified d20 roll, etc). What I never told the players was that I got the TN system from Ghostbusters, together with the RBF (really big flashlight) used as a weapon by one of the NPCs. Back then, things like "Move Silently" were percentages, Skills were modified ability checks, and saving throws were fixed numbers. Before THAC0, we had to hit tables. Circumstance modifiers for each task (and their ability to effect a given situation) were wildly divergent, and certain direct head-to-head contests or margins of success could be hard to judge. It was a lot easier to smuggle a little black notebook full of various NPCs and their modifiers out to recess than several books full of the right charts and tables. In that context, the TN idea was a revolution.

All that aside, if I ever make a million, I'm cutting West End a juicy check anyway just for giving me TORG as a wide-eyed preteen. RIFTS ain't got NOTHIN' on the Possibility Wars, but that's a tale for another time.

After years of signing on all sorts of messageboards with different screen names, I came late to the idea of a single, unified handle. I chose "plungingforward" because it seemed like a good idea at the time, although as far as messageboards I think I'm only using it here and Ultimate Central (comics forum), as I don't join boards often. Some time later I got confused as to which e-mail address I was using for Paizo (I have several), so I created a second account (hence the 2). Having since remembered which e-mail I was using, I now switch back and forth.

Dungeon Grrrl wrote:

Something can be both. Grendel is a villain and a monster.

I don't know. I think Grendel is a monster and his mother is the villian. If you were to run that story as a game, Grendel gets attack in the hall and fees back to the real threat, his mother.

Even so, there is a big back story surrounding Grendel (In the text. I can't speak to the recent movie), his attacks and his origin & reputation. He's clearly a proper villain as well as a monster. Grendel's mother is, if anything, slightly less defined and fleshed out than Grendel - but she's clearly a villain/monster as well. In D&D terms, a non-monster villain is most likely a PC-race (or similar EL0-2 or so) opponent who relies more on class abilities than, say, claw/claw/bite + breath weapon. As far as I can tell, though, neither term has as a rigid in-game definition.

Well, if you go to the very end...

** spoiler omitted **

That's exactly right.

Girls/women in my game have played a wizardly hobgoblin, a larcenous human with serpentblood feats, an elven assassin and even a mind flayer, among other things. I've had a lot of people tell me "chicks dig druids" in other groups, but I haven't seen it in mine. If anything, I've seen a slight lean toward evil characters (even in good groups), but only slightly.

D.

I'll either pick up the new books, or check out the 4.0 SRD, before I make any decision. I'll probably do what I've always done - tailor the rules set to make what I want out of it.

When my party and Lavinia found each other, both were in desperate situations. I don't know what led your party one way and mine the other, but my group loves Lavinia. She's more like a team member than anything else - she brings some pull, a small line of credit and a big claim in farshore to the group - and she's even been on a short adventure or two (she hangs with the spellcasters). She doesn't really pay them so much as covers expenses - the understanding is that when farshore pays off, everybody gets an even cut (plus Jade Ravens plus Amella). When misfortune falls her, my group will be off like a shot.

THat said, if the party can't help but dislike her, why not pull a "Buffy's Roommate" and have one of the PC's pull the false face of the demon "Lavinia?" YOu might have to re-work some adventure leads, but it is worth it to hear the satisfied PC's say "I knew it!"

The deal with the energy bill is that:

A) He lives on a huge, honkin' ranch. Huge honkin' ranches consume a wee bit more energy to run that an average house. If ... somebody had been able to show that Gore uses 20 times the energy of an average consumer per square foot or some other such standardised measure, I'd sit up and pay some attention.

I like Al Gore, and even if I didn't, I agree with not confusing the message with the messenger - but this rationale bugs me. Unless he needs that honkin ranch for his honkin' gut, maybe he ought to get a smaller house. Your argument sounds like "his huge energy bill comes from massive consumption, not massive consumption, so it is OK..." If you burn more gas because you're driving an SUV, is that somehow better than burning the same gas because you're driving a small car more often?

All that aside, I say he should hop on the treadmill and get in the race. I might even vote for him. God knows I can't hardly vote for anybody else.

Torillan wrote:

The Jade wrote:

I'll come back and play tomorrow but it's time to watch a zombie flick here, guys.

Which one? Sounds like a great idea.

28 Days Later.

Just a heads up: The sequel's no good. Really no good. Which is a shame, because you would think "U.S. Army vs. Zombies" would be the best movie ever, wouldn't you? It squanders its potential.

Most of Marvel's (and DC's) business is based on a successful "pantheon" of intellectual properties, like Capt. America. Every so often the Hulk turns gray or Superman dies and is replaced by four crappy stand-ins. They always come back.

The Sentinels cartoon included on one of the extras disks of Robotech's Macross component was pretty cool, too.

LlodoBaggins wrote:

I am starting a Gamma World campaign for my home group. Using d20 Modern, SnS GW book, stealing from Eberron, my old GW resources and "1001 GW adventure ideas". If my players like it, I will goto Eruvian and share.

I used to love that game. I have every edition.

More love for Gamma World here!

There's really no reason to force everyone into playing the same campaign.

Exactly. I don't really care about the backstory of 4.0. I have my own backstory that's survived and evolved since the red (pink?) box days, and it will continue to do so, 4.0 or otherwise. What kinda bothers me is that 90% of what we've been hearing about 4.0 are setting ideas. This would be fine if they were releasing a new campaign setting, but, really, we're talking about a new RULES ENGINE - so that's what we ought to be, um, talking about. The rules are my tools. What will those tools look like? I don't care about succubi/erinyes - if I want them back the way they were, I'll put them back - even if i have to go 'under the hood' and stat up a 4.0 erinyes to do it. Great wheel / no great wheel and points of light / no points of light are even easier to change, because I don't need to make any new monsters.

Eberron, Greyhawk, FR, Kaladmar, Pathfinder, setting X, Y, Z and dedicated homebrew players probably won't be interested in a new setting. We don't care that wizard order A favors orbs and order B favors wands, because we're probably not going to include either order in our games. What we might include are orbs and wands, so what's the difference between the two, mechanically? Is there one?

I've pretty much stopped checking for 4.0 news because it all comes back to story ideas. If I want to read about a cool new D&D world, I've got multiple options (like, say, Pathfinder...). Tell me about the 30 levels, or this idea floating about that your "race improves" as you level up. IS it actually possible for dragon breath to MISS COMPLETELY, or does a "fumble" mean half damage? The playtest articles are a joke. The design articles are no help. I guess I'm just waiting for the SRD, then.

Between the 4.0 "hype" and this horrid little DI promotion, I have to say wizards has failed to sell me on or get me excited for anything. I'm not against either concept (though I personally wouldn't buy an online magazine subscription), but the marketing is just awful.

Sorry to rant, but this has really been bugging me.

As I sit here and ponder this heated issue the following occurs to me.

Why not make an online mag, then sell it AGAIN in a paper format by collecting together all of the well-received contributions. Meaning WotC, every year or six months, takes everything that wasn't crap, and issues it in a thick softbound BEST OF.

Hmmm. I Wonder if they'll do that? The guys who pay for DI can pay twice, and they can still get money from dudes like me, who won't pay.

Now THAT I might buy.

You did not earn your position as the EIC of Dragon. ... And I for one want an explanation as to what makes you qualified to follow in (Erik Mona's) hallowed footsteps.

Your "letter" has merit and makes some good points, but I admit I was stunned to see Kim Mohan's name on this. He had a really good run as EIC of dragon in the past, and will likely do so again. It is strangely fitting that he see the magazine through another transition. I'm not subscribing to online dragon - and (probably) wouldn't even if Erik Mona were editor - and the editorial got me a bit riled, too ... but I do feel the magazine is in good hands.

Not because I want to keep the four (or eight?) from the Great Wheel

I remember 16 (4 pure, 4 para, 4 positive, 4 negative). If the para planes had positive and negative counterparts, that could mean 8 more.

This seems like a process piece to me, and doesn't get me all that excited (or upset). Seems like it was just thrown out there and i'm supposed to care. Like the "Points of Light" article. I'd rather they get into the mechanics of the thing than the backstory, which varies wildly from campaign to campaign anyhow. Lets talk about 30 level classes or how those (IMO, unsightly) Wizard's tools are supposed to work, not the trendy new "Shadowfell" and Elemental Unity.

ONE LITTLE CLUE: From the accompanying picture and the mention of the fortress overlooking Acheron I'm guessing the Reth Dekatha (or whatever they're called) from Book of Nine Swords have escaped Cap System status and gone core. Who knows what martial manuevers they've brought with them...

Indeed, the mark of the beast is a sign of the End Times. I spent far too much time last night reading these horrid little comics, passing through various stages of rage, amusement, sorrow, helplessness, indignation and horror. I'm pretty much Chick'd out, now.

Bell Curves:
I also take a light touch where the rules are concerned. (While I'm nominally playing "Dungeons and Dragons," any rules lawyers peaking at my notes would be mortified. My only defense is that my players love it.) Having an easy percentile grade to work with means I can usually ad-hoc DCs that keep things interesting without having to worry about scales of too likely/exactly even/too unlikely. That said, I can understand where such a scale might actually be easier for someone trained in its use.

Further, the percentile-DC-based nature of d20 + leveling up actually means that sometimes your best frame of reference for improving, say, your move silently skill, is against fellow party members that aren't as good. The evil sentry you meet at 10th level is probably going to be as likely to hear you as a 10th level character as the crooked guard you met as a 1st level character was likely to hear you then. The only guy who is going to notice the vast gulf of skill modifiers is the guy who never had any ranks in move silently. That guy could have made it past crooked ol' Cedric Grayshale on a good day (were our hero willing to lose the plate mail), but he'd never slip past the legendary Sentries of the Festering Pit - that's a job for the 10th-level rogue. This makes scaling easy, while maintaining a character's sense of improvement. Just don't spend too long thinking about it- it seems a bit cheap sometimes.

That chick tracts thing's got a lot worse on it than anti-gaming propaganda. It isn't just d&d they hate, it's imagination in general - among other things. This stuff gives all religion everywhere a bad name, and makes me embarassed to call myself a churchgoer. Anybody who buys into that sort of stuff needs a hard smacking. I volunteer to deliver said smacking personally.

As for D&D haters, among gamers, I find the folks that rapidly support less popular systems tend to be the strongest haters on D&D - probably because it is "undeserving" of its popularity. Palladium is pretty controversal - love 'em or hate 'em type of thing - as is the World of Darkness. I don't really HATE any system, although I like simple percentages (d20, etc) better than bell curves (GURPS, etc) - because as game master I find it harder to stat encounters "on the fly" using bell-curve based success. (I'm sure if I'd been raised on a diet of bell curve gaming, I'd think the exact opposite.)

Finally, somebody brought up Torg (yay Torg!). Somebody else brought up Smurfs (yay Smurfs!). Why noy combine the two with a Smurf Village reality, complete with mushroom stelae and StormKnight Smurf? This 2-D terror could invade any campaign! It's the coolest thing since a pirate ninja rode into town on a dinosaur!

Combats against "masterminds" generally last about as long as the minions hold out. In a stand-up fight without minions, most "fair fight" villians are going down in about 2-3 rounds. (Monte Cook actually dissects exactly why this is in an old Dungeoncraft column.) Minions change fights dramatically.
I agree that the "Evil Party of Adventures and/or monsters" (Linear Guild) approach works, and can lead to some tense fights. (I actually gave the recurring bad guy of Savage Tide three comrades-in-arms, "The Sasserine Skulls," working them into the early plot for use as needed later on.)
When it comes to whether or not the villians actually escape combat to live another day, I guess most of mine don't, but we go where the story and the dice take us. This leads to some unexpected survivors and casualties, but it keeps me guessing.

There is only one movie that causes more random quotes when invoked than does the Princess Bride.

And we are SO not going there. (It's a silly place ... ;)

Thoughts after reading this whole thread:

To whomever posted the prayer of St. Francis: Amen, bro.

Terrorists: While I agree that the US has some rather large equity issues with the third world, calling the US "the biggest terrorist of all" messes with definitions to the point where the word just plain doesn't mean as much. It isn't the wisest label to toss around, because the only people who are going to take you seriously are those that already agree with you. It therefore turns the serious issue of global equity into a farce.

Guns: I don't have one, because I'd rather believe I can live in a world wherein I don't need one. Anyone who wants an arugment in favor of owning guns only needs to hear Ted Kennedy ask "We're allowed to bear arms to defend us against a tyrannical government ... tyrannical government? OURS?!?" I almost signed up for gun ownership that very morning.

Bombing Japan: We're very far removed from that situation and that decision, so condemning it rings a little hollow. If anything, it demonstrated exactly what we were dealing with, and more-or-less convincingly persuaded the entire planet never to do it again. Dresden was just as destroyed by conventional weapons - and nobody cared.

On not paying people after you've beat them up: On the global stage, this is what happened after The Great War. This is why it was quickly followed up by another, bloodier war, and re-named World War I. American foreign (and domestic) policy is at its best whenever we completely beat the heck out of somebody out of line, dismantle the problem, then pour in money and investment to rebuild a more desirable Germany/Japan/Deep South/Whatever. Had President Bush the first flouted the UN and gone into Iraq after the gulf war and done this, who knows where we'd be now? Instead, we wait until we lose popular support, go in with a bad plan, ruin the place, and yell at the underfunded, infant government because it can't solve its own problems yet. If that comes back at us, can we wonder why?

I do this every year. Chicks dig it! ;)

The Jade Ravens can be removed without too much fuss. I think the only adventure that's going to require some revision will be "the bullywug gambit." Otherwise, the group doesn't spend too much time "on screen." Beyond that, just alter a bit of backstory, and I'm pretty sure it's all good. The Jade Ravens are a big part of my campaign - largely because of the role-playing opportunities and suspicion (I played my share of GURPS: CYBERPUNK, and enjoy going around in circles) - but if they're not working for you, I'm pretty sure they're not critical.

Just because Dr Jacobs hates them:

Dire Corby (CR 1)
NE Medium Monstrous Humanoid
Init +1; Senses Darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision; Listen +3, Spot +3
Languages Common

AC 14, touch 11, flat-footed 13
hp 11 (2 HD); ferocity
Immune fear
Fort +1, Ref +4, Will +3

Spd 30 ft.
Melee 2 claws +5 (1d6+3)
Base Atk +2; Grp +5
Atk Options leap attack

Abilities Str 16, Dex 15, Con 13, Int 6, Wis 12, Cha 8
Feats Blind-Fight, Run (B)
Skills Balance +6, Climb +7, Hide +3, Jump +7, Listen +3, Spot +3

Leap Attack (Ex): A dire corby begins combat by combining a jump with a charge against an opponent. If it covers at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with its jump, and ends its jump in a square from which it threatens a target, it can attack with both claws at a +5 bonus for 1d6+5 points of damage each.
This attack follows all the normal rules for using the Jump skill and for making a charge, except that the dire corby ignores rough terrain in any square it jumps over.

Ferocity (Ex): A dire corby is such a tenacious combatant that it continues to fight without penalty even while disabled or dying.

Immunity to Fear (Ex): Dire corbies are immune to all fear effects, and to any spells, powers, or effects involving a morale penalty.

Skills: Dire corbies receive a +4 racial bonus on Balance and Climb checks due to their clawed limbs. They also receive a +4 racial bonus to Jump checks. A dire corby can always take 10 on Balance, Climb, and Jump checks, even when conditions would normally prevent it.

Yay! The Dire Corby is BACK, baby.

I'd rather have demogorgon ... or, now that I think about it, both...

You mean we can now use the ****ing insanely broken Powerbow now? Sweet!

If you mean Hank's energy bow, you can actually use it in 3.5, although it lacks some of the inexplicable abilities it has when it needs them on the show. See Hank's page in the little booklet that comes with the D&D cartoon series for details. I know I want one... (Presto's hat got REALLY nerfed, although it will give you spell components. Yipee...)

Maybe being a cleric of Asmodeus in your dm's campaign doesn't mean what it means in my own. Maybe they're just a bunch of harmless goths and not active agents of a great evil. Even so, I'm with you here. It just doesn't sound all that severe. I'd talk with your DM about how s/he expected you to act. Maybe just pick a less ugly spell next time. I was initially nonplussed over the "let her go" remark, until the poster above cleared it up.

Just say you don't like the Realms and wish Wizards had started off converting a different setting. Trying to justify a matter of personal preference is usually an exercise in futility.

As wise as only a man who's handle is a Rush album could be. I like reading posts like this, though, with people going back and forth, knowing all the while that nobody's mind is going to change. Substitute "Chocolate" for "Forgotten Realms" and "Chocolate Chip" for Eberron, and you'd have pretty much the same conversation.

Plunging "Fly By Night" Forward

With the announcement of D&D 4.0 on shelves this May 2008 I am considering waiting on running the STAP and adapting it. Anyone else feeling the pressure and considering a similar move?

Heck no. The Paizo people go to all the trouble to stat up all this interesting stuff in 3.5 so that I don't have to (I hate to be one of those guys who says he uses prefab stuff primarily because he no longer has time for stat blocks ... but there you are). I'm not averse to playing a little 3.5 (or a lot of 3.5) while "4dventure" gets its act together. Then again, I've been known to bust out the 1980's box set (green dragon in the water, guy with spear, girl w/ magic orb...) and "The Keep on the Borderlands" or "The Lost City" to play with non-d&d players, so maybe I don't count. The system engine isn't a big thing to me or my players - we start with the story, and we'll pick the engine to fit it. STAP is 3.5 - and, unlike a lot of what is out there, GOOD 3.5.

OTOH, I think a year is long enough to wait on Khelben.

A YEAR? wow, I'm more out of touch with FR than even I thought... or did I just forget, with all the other craziness going on... trudges off to do some cursory re-reading...

Accidental Simulacrum of PlungingForward.
Leader of the Giant Bats.

Two friends of mine played this game to death, buying new cards like you would not believe and passing extras and unwanteds on to me. The same thing happened in Magic: The Gathering. Thing is, the poor kid with cast-off cards could still win at Magic. Spellfire was for the lucky (who happened to get the right card) or the biggest money (which could outbuy the competition.) I BARELY play magic any more, so I don't know if it is still true that a simple suite of the right commons (Lightning Bolt, Shatter, Tranquility and Giant Growth, for example) can get you out of most messes, or if game effect is still determined by mana cost rather than rarity - but I assume it is still the case. Spellfire, by contrast, could offer you two cards: One card offered +2 and no other benefit (or in-game cost.); the other offered +5 and no other benefit (or in-game cost). The second card is CLEARLY better. Anyone with a choice will use it over the first. That's just a bad way to make a game based around customizable decks.

A decent portion of STAP is played in places where Merc soldiers aren't easily found:

Far Shore - Not a whole lot of people to draw from.

Olman villages & IoD in general - You might get a henchman or two, but a big group of important hunters/protectors and so forth would be a lot harder.

Scuttlecove - Don't hire here unless you're looking for unreliable help.

The Abyss - Not a good idea to hire here, either.

Ever since I heard YYZ in Guitar Hero II, I've been listening to more and more Rush in order to see what they have to offer, and I must say they are an awesome band. I'll have to check Snakes & Arrows out.

Do indeed. It's good stuff.

What's this 50% rate of retention nonsense? I don't have fiendish codex 1 on me right now, but I think the phrasing is something like "it is easier to list the few that escaped (like, say, Siragle) than the many who remain..." The wells of darkness is a pretty darned dire fate for anyone. I'm actually kinda shocked Mal's master plan is to engineer Shami's escape, because you can pretty much rest assured she'll plot some serious revenge (and knowing my player characters, I wouldn't put it past them to help her plan it).

I was sort of disappointed myself that Big D didn't have something to throw at the party coming out of Divided's Ire. Vanthus is sent there as a lure, and then ONE killer is sent to dispatch them. Having to flee a huge horde of Retrievers would be nice ... or the DoI Demogorgon. ;) As you probably already know, most optimized, experienced pc groups can often cleave through a single opponent well outside their CR with comparative ease. A few minions make all the difference ... but, either way, it's an interesting fight you'll have on your hands, I'm sure. Be sure to give us the results.

Not to mention that you'll need those diplomatic types when it comes time to put the hard sell on Red Shroud, Iggwilv, Malcanthet, Orcus, and company. Or to get the inmates of Divided's Ire to kill each other off instead of you. In some cases, even where combat is inevitable, diplomacy makes the ultra-deadly high level combats just a bit less deadly--cf. the "Thanatos" section of Enemy of My Enemy.

Exactly. In "Wells of Darkness" you're not doing a whole lot more THAN talking, and Skullport, Divide's Ire and Enemy of My Enemy have some tense parleys indeed.

Just remember, as you hack through an endless string of vine horrors, that soon enough The figher types will be sitting uncomfortably around Iggwilv's table, trying not to mess things up for the talker-types, while fondly remembering the isle of dread, back when there was just no reasoning with good ol' T-Rex.

This AP's got something for everyone. Don't sweat it if it isn't somebody's particular turn right now. It's coming.

Best thing about gummy bears: It was a troll, and I I think it might be the bounty hunter you mentioned. He had a hand-crank "machine gun" that I think shot nuts. AWESOME.

Ugleemax indeed. Oh well, guess I'll just hang out on the Paizo boards.

Don't be TOO hard on Wizards. They did come up with the OGL (even if I think they could make more use of it and extend it further), and have done some good stuff (like shopping out Dungeon & Dragon to Paizo in the first place.) And quit hatin' on Magic players. We may not understand 'em, but they're people, too. While I have yet to see Wizards' master plan, I strongly suspect taking Dungeon and Dragon back from Paizo was a bad idea - but time will tell.

P.S.: Guy in Iraq - stay safe, keep your fellows safe, come back in one piece, and thank you for being there in the first place.

The article on Titilvus was great. That devils, even petty ones, offices and titles is a big part of what sets them apart from demons, and excellent ones were chosen in this case. Keep these coming.

Someone mentioned the Lords of Hell. I would be very careful of any PC group going there for the first time this late in the game. Last minute deals with devils never turn out well.

That said, something as big as the savage tide might already have attracted diabolical attention. and the lords of the nine would have a vested interest in stopping it. I also suspect they would probably prefer demogorgon survive the inicident, as having a self-sabotaging maniac at the top of the abyssal heap helps keep more organized players (like, say, Grazzt) from getting too much influence - but stopping the Tide is the more important objective. However, the blood war being what it is, the Devils would have to be subtle (and perhaps a bit convoluted) in any direct response - and, happily, subtle and convoluted are what devils do best.

In my campaign, one of the PCs is an undercover diabolical agent helping the team combat "demonic interference on the Isle of Dread" - but (1) that isn't an option that works with every group of players and (2) it should be established pretty early in the AP in order to be effective. Other options might include planting an intelligent, diabolic magic item in a treasure heap, a "turned" hireling or henchman providing unexpected help in a real jam, casually suggesting the LN party member check out the nifty feats in Fiendish Codex II, or even a party of LE-LN-NE adventurers showing up once or twice as they tail the party. If the hells haven't made a move in your game yet and you're just getting to scuttlecove or divided's ire, both are great places for Hell to "pick up the scent" - just don't over do it. By keeping a low profile, the devils can get their due without wrecking the AP.

I may have to run this one myself. I hadn't actually looked to see if it would fit into the campaign timeline, but damn that's a fun adventure!

Especially for a rustmonster like you, huh? ;)

"War of the Wielded" is right up there with "Automatic Hound" in terms of really awesome adventures coming out of Dungeon lately. My only complaint is that it came out just a little too late. Aw well. Some day.

I'm all for an update of the ToH. I haven't bought any of the WotC Monster Manuals beyond the first because they're not remotely OGL. It would be nice to have a neat, "new" monster book - especially one that's got flumphs and dire corbies inside! Yipee!

I'm very pleased with this adventure, especially after my disappointment with Wells of Darkness. The powerful NPCs in this one have mostly reasonable demands, and they offer help that is actually useful rather than help that is actually flavor text. They are also mostly respectful of the near-epic PCs, and even though they are more powerful than the PCs the adventure makes it actually sound plausible that the PCs are real figures of power and not just observers while the NPCs do all the real work. I am undecided whether to simply skip or substitute Wells of Darkness entirely or to write a new solution instead, but Enemies of My Enemy looks well-worth running.

Seconded. Although, for the record, I don't blame anybody for the failure of "Wells of Darkness" - it just seems like the almost inevitable weakpoint on the campaign outline. Without the darn-near-undue levels of complication I intend to bring to bear on this adventure, it's basically glorified prep-time for bigger things to come, and makes sense in the larger framework - it's just a little NPC-heavy.

I fully expect that many groups will end up attacking Malcanthet ... Fortunately, unlike Wells of Darkness there are ways to get everything and give Malcanthet no satisfaction for her antics. Even a simple flat DC 20 Sleight of Hand check will let the party rogue run away laughing with her Iron Flask, offering nothing in exchange. The very thought is pleasing.

I have two players in particular I wouldn't put it past to fully suspect Mal's involvement before they get to her (and if they don't, Iggy's big hint will almost certainly clue them in), and one who will jump up and down with joy at the chance to not only slight-of-hand said flask but also lure a demon lord into direct eye contact. The fact that the party won't have much gear on them might be the only thing saving her from a trip to the wells of darkness ... and it might or might not be enough. It will certainly be interesting.

Planar politics can and probably should extend outside the scope of these adventures, and because dungeon has a page limit, we can't blame the designers. As DM, you can add in whatever other players you see fit - and it isn't hard to justify, given the scope of Big D's evil plan. If it is a gender imbalance in the proactivity department that bugs you, take a trip a few planes Law-ward for some scheming guys (and a few gals). One of my PCs (the "rogue") is actually a Mountebank in service to the lord of lies. The nine hells know all about this "Savage Tide" nonsense, and will take the requisite steps to make sure it doesn't come to pass, even if that means their agent helps a group of goodly adventurers.

As for Iggwilv, remember that as a chaotic evil human being, her ultimate reward is becoming a mane or, a lot less likely, a lump of dead god on the astral plane - so some degree of foresight is surely lacking here. It may take eons, it might happen tomorrow - but it's going to happen. In the game called Chaotic Evil, only the abyss wins.