ravenharm's page

here is the third try. walk among men was taken from the previous addition "heroes of the Feywild"

also thanks again to Smilo Dan and petty alchemy for the advice.

Satyr: Home Brew
Ability Score Increase: Dexterity +2
Age: 100-750 years old
Alignment: chaotic neutral or good
Size: Medium
Speed: 30 feet
Darkvision: 60 feet
Magic Resistance: MM page 267
Languages: speak read write Sylvan & common
Ram: melee weapon attack 1d6 bludgeoning

Subrace: Pan
Ability Score Increase: Constitution 1
Mask of the Wild: attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist and other natural phenomena
Sneaky: proficiency in stealth

Subrace: Faun
Ability Score Increase: Charisma 1
Cantrip: Friends (cha)
Revelry: proficiency in perform.

Racial Feat (Satyr) Walk Among Men: appear as elf, half elf, or human. your face and build are recognizable yours. illusion start and ended as a bonus action or until death.
Racial Feat (Satyr: Faun) Pan Pipes: MM page 267
Racial Feat (Satyr: Pan) Crown of Horns: Ram damage increased to 2d4 bludgeoning damage, and bonus action shove attempt on successful ram attack.

Or maybe allow the ram to be a bonus action?

strongly agree with that suggestion. =)

Increasing damage from 1d6 to 2d4 isn't really worth it. Maybe if it also gave +1 to Str or Con? And/Or a bonus action Shove attempt on a successful ram attack?

Caper is just Mobility without the other benefits.

The base race looks good. It has a good sensory ability (darkvision), a good defense (magic resistance), a good offense (ram), and the two sub-races provide a nice choice in utility: sneakiness or face.

I like it!

thank you for your insight as well, I'll take your suggestions and work on it, maybe throw some of my art up here =)

Okay, here is a second attempt to make the satyr.

Also my personal thanks to Petty Alchemy for his insight.
I took his advice in a few things.

of note: I added three feats that would complete my need to have a satyr as strong as the MM version.

Satyr: Home brew
Ability Score Increase: Dexterity +2
Age: 100-750 years old
Alignment: chaotic neutral or good
Size: Medium
Speed: 30 feet
Darkvision: 60 feet
Magic Resistance: MM page 267
Languages: speak read write Sylvan & common
Ram: melee weapon attack 1d6 bludgeoning

Subrace: Pan:
Ability Score Increase: Constitution 1
Mask of the Wild: attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist and other natural phenomena
Sneaky: proficiency in stealth

Subrace, Faun:
Ability Score Increase: Charisma 1
Cantrip: Friends (cha)
Revelry: proficiency in perform

Racial Feat (Satyr): Caper: +10 feet speed
Racial Feat (Satyr: Faun): Pan Pipes: MM page 267
Racial Feat (Satyr: Pan): Crown of Horns: Ram damage increased to 2d4 bludgeoning damage

the goal was to make a playable satyr that wasn't bard specific, and honestly balance isn't a thought that I ever entertain.

the reason I tried for the upgrade at levels, to match the entry in the monster manual.

ramming wasn't a magic specific attack, so I compared it to weapons that could be bought, and found that any pc could find a comparable weapon.

thank you for the advice, and taking the time to read it.

I'll try to tweak it later.

This is my attempt to make a viable satyr race that wasn't just a bard centric build.

this will allow the satyr to be proficient with nature themed classes as well as bards.

Satyr: Home brew

Ability Score Increase: Dexterity +2
Age: 100-750 years old
Alignment: chaotic neutral or good
Size: Medium
Speed: 30 feet (35 feet @ 3rd Level & 40 feet @ 5th level)
Darkvision: 60 feet
Fey Ancestry: as elf (replace with Magic Resistance @ 7th Level)
Languages: speak read write Sylvan & common
Ram: melee weapon attack 2d4 bludgeoning

Subrace: Pan:
Ability Score Increase: Constitution 1
Mask of the Wild: attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist and other natural phenomena
Sneaky: proficiency in stealth

Subrace, Faun:
Ability Score Increase: Charisma 1
Pan Pipes: page 267 MM
Revelry: proficiency in perform

thanks for looking =)

This is my attempt to make a viable satyr race that wasn't just a bard centric build.

this will allow the satyr to be proficient with nature themed classes as well as bards.

Satyr: Home brew

Ability Score Increase: Dexterity +2
Age: 100-750 years old
Alignment: chaotic neutral or good
Size: Medium
Speed: 30 feet (35 feet @ 3rd Level & 40 feet @ 5th level)
Darkvision: 60 feet
Fey Ancestry: as elf (replace with Magic Resistance @ 7th Level)
Languages: speak read write Sylvan & common
Ram: melee weapon attack 2d4 bludgeoning

Subrace: Pan:
Ability Score Increase: Constitution 1
Mask of the Wild: attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist and other natural phenomena
Sneaky: proficiency in stealth

Subrace, Faun:
Ability Score Increase: Charisma 1
Pan Pipes: page 267 MM
Revelry: proficiency in perform

thanks for looking =)

Pretty sure that most here will say it better than I, but just going to throw this out there.

As a player, the alignment is more or less your burden/issue not other player's or the GM.
Your job to not only keep to your alignment, but also make sure it doesn't dip into and mess anyone else's fun. (PVP, and other antagonistic Richard-ry)

If you and the GM use your specific alignment to come up with other story hooks and interesting plot points, while taking the rest of the party through a fun and enjoyable ride, then congratulations.

You are doing it right.

sex, sexuality, and story is 40% of the games i DM in our long group.
(30% exploration / 30% combat makes up the rest)

funny enough its over the top violence that would earn the censorship.

we haven't just "kill monsters/ take loot" since 2004

I play a lot of elves, gnomes, half elves, and Fey (especially satyrs)

I rarely play humans for basically the exact opposite reason everyone else stated.

I can't do human in the real world right, might as well do the thing that feels most natural, and not be people.

also I can't shake the fact that human = boring/prey/victim in most fantasy settings.

I don't want to be a victim. I want to be a hero.

ravenharm wrote:

I still hope the movie fails, but only in the sense for it to go to another director who can do the movie better, and pick an appropriate lead.

This indicates you have little conception of how studios run these things.

If it fails to the degree you seem to hatefully hoping for, it will not "go to another director" who will then pick an actress you have less frothing hatred for.

It will be taken as a sign that the property "just isn't viable on its own."

It wasn't a presumption, estimation, or foresight, it was simply a hope. More then likely the movie will do just fine. Gal already has a strong following as per SDCC shows. Most critics seemed to like it.

You are correct in that fact i have little experience with how studios run. These days though, i am unsure as to how well studios know how to run their own studios. If we are to reflect back to how MCU has done, well Marvel / Disney/ Paramount is unique to its successes and not a standard.

ravenharm wrote:

i'm just going to say it again. not a fan. hope that film dies like fan4stic

Not all films, or superheroes, are beloved or enjoyed by all filmgoers. And that's fine. No one is forcing anyone to go see them.

But to hope the film fails just because you're "not a fan?" Maybe just accept that this film wasn't meant for you, and let those who are fans enjoy it? Me? I'm excited to finally see a woman lead in a solo superhero summer blockbuster. I wish I had young nieces or female cousins to take to it.

Ah. Your right, no one is forcing me to go see it. (because i won't)

Your also right on this; The truth is that the film is in no way meant for me. My biggest problem is that i like Wonder Woman, and wanted her portrayed accurate to the depiction in the Comics (as an Amazon Warrior) and my own personal head canon (based in amazonian Greek Myth). She will be the first Greek character in any comic cinematic universe that isn't an assassin, terrorist, goofy, or a villain. This movie was super important to me.

I also agree that its time we see a Female Lead in a Comic Movie, and Wonder Woman is iconic.

I still hope the movie fails, but only in the sense for it to go to another director who can do the movie better, and pick an appropriate lead.

Gal is a horrible fit for the role, and as much as others have attacked Gina's acting ability, Gal isn't winning Oscars any time soon on hers. (i only attack Gal on her choreography in Batman Vs Superman)

I would venture to say that Gina isn't a great actress, but certainly more believable than Gal when portraying an Action Role like this.

ravenharm wrote:

Not a fan. it should have been Gina Carano.

She can't act.

fair enough, the present actress can't fight.

at least not without tons of CGI

and i'm a fan of tons of CGI.

i'm just going to say it again. not a fan. hope that film dies like fan4stic

Not a fan. it should have been Gina Carano.

Depending on the game, yes. our group; we play 3.0 and 3.5

I like my RPG with anime, and i'm pretty okay with mature/ sexual themes too.

this struck me recently.

old school nostalgia for second edition gaming which ended up in a hilarious sense of reality vs memory.

oh Baldur's Gate Enhanced, cant wait to try it i remember having so much fun of this. and this pc game based on second edition was easier then any table top

" oh crap, reload, oh crap reload, oh crap reload. now i remember why i was so happy 3.0 gaming came out."

My biggest thing is that I actually enforce the rules on spellcasters - I want to see your spell lists, you better have your material component bags, you need to actually buy your costly material components, I enforce the limitations written actually into the spells themselves, that sort of thing.

I do this, and I killed the 15 minute work day. finding a good spot to rest in my games is very difficult when your in a dungeon.

I also made sure that people understood that no man is an island. everyone does their job.

tips for running a successful DMPC.
Unfortunately our group is composed of 4 participants who have trouble scheduling weekly sessions. so as a DM, I had to get really good with the trick of a DMPC. i have seen the boards hate on them, but for our group they are essential. we have tried giving players 2 or more characters to use, and only 1 or 2 of us can do it.

here are some of the things i learned using a DMPC.

5 communicate:
explain the adventure to the players of what classes may see the most use but explain that all classes are welcome.

4 fill the gaps:
depending on the amount of players needed vs minimum requirements. with those gaps fill with secondary classes, BARD, rogue, Sorcerers and Clerics seem to be awesome for this, your job is not to eclipse the players but allow them to survive long enough to have their moment. this can be a bit harder with a cleric, in which he should turn to a heal bot/ buffer/ and off tank. the worst classes for this are paladins because by their very nature they tend to steer to leadership roles. with a little practice however it can be done.

3 stack the chips in the players favor for economy of action:
if they picked a rogue, place more traps in the dungeon. if they picked a ranger, more of the favored enemy type should tend to trickle into the adventure. wizard or sorcerer, have more magic in the game.

2 gloss over the accomplishments of the DMPC:
the players are the main actors, even everyone else is just a supporting actor. focus the glory on the players instead. a neat trick is to offer side quests that the DMPC offer to the players themselves. bonus points if you can turn it into a solo quest where only the players skills abilities and special powers can save the day.

1 keep a theme between all the DMPC:
if you have 1 it isn't that much of an issue, but if you need a second or even a third, a theme or mini story that keeps them related to one another is very good. team/ ally feats are excellent because it makes the party feel like they are old hands working together. it becomes especially potent if one of them dies in a battle, because even if 1 is replaced he will never be as good as the original party due to feats not matching up. it becomes a sobering experience and you might see your players getting attached to the DMPCs. if you see them going out of the way to raise dead on a DMPC just because they like them in the party, you've done your job right.

now the don'ts
5 don't overshadow the players by how awesome you can make a pc:
you are the DM, you know exactly what your players are facing and you are meta-gaming at its worst.

4 don't use them for major betrayals:
minor is okay, to teach them not to blindly trust just anyone. and major betrayal might be good for one part in the story, but anyone who has played Baldurs gate can tell you (if you played an evil party) Getting replacements for Xzar and Montaron was annoying as heck so close to the end of the game.

3 don't kill them off often:
they become red shirts and easily disposable.

2 don't use them to make the party look stupid.
sure it might be good for a single laugh (for yourself and that's wrong), but soon the joke wears thin, and now you have players harbor a dislike for what should be a background character.

1 don't use them in a passive aggressive way:
never use your dmpc to prove a point even if your right. you have just outsmarted your self in your own game

Depending on the god worshiped, yes it can.

we had a party themed after greyhawk's Wee Jas,

we had a cleric with power of death and to a lesser extent, undead,

a sorceress with a focus on fire,

and a paladin of Wee Jas.

pay no mind to the rogue. =)

Evil themed party of Graz'zt for a 3.0 campaign.

Party:

.
.
Female Human 1 rogue, 9 sorceress, Thrall of Graz'zt 10
Female Human 10 bard, 10 Demonologist
Female Human 20 Cleric of Graz'zt
Male Human 20 Rogue with several Demonic grafts.

the outcome, epic level and completion of the campaign.

the 8 adventure series of Ashardalon had very different ending after we were done.

Training actually worked out very well in our game.

It worked out perfectly in Forgotten Realms/ Ravenloft because there was a heroic figure nearly a days ride away in almost any direction. and it gave purpose to having such heroic figures, who were always some sort of quest giver/ trainer/ lore dump.

to find them it was a simple skill check.

diplomacy, bluff, gather information, knowledge local, knowledge history, knowledge politics, or knowledge war w/ variants.

You then found an impressive hero you may have read about in the novels and you paid the time and gp cost as appropriate. If the adventure was an impending threat or time sensitive event, we simply gave the feats and skills as appropriate, then had the person then go to the proper trainer after the adventure was complete.

In 3.0/ 3.5 we used the training cost and time in the dmg, but with a twist. we had the option to relearn feats and skills as well, so it allowed an adventurer to take the best feats/ skills for survival at low levels, retrain to something better at mid levels, then take the best skills/ feats at high levels.

Also of note, we did use craft/ profession/ leadership heavily in our games. we were all shocked when we logged into the forums and saw several feats and skills considered as broken/ unplayable.

our games basically went the route of adventure which could take several days to a month to complete, then nearly a years worth of down time in game. (poor half orcs)

(wrath of arshardalaon would take neary 8-12 years to complete in game time and about 2 months in real time)

We also had skill challenges that would gain them roleplaying experience. but thats kind of off topic lol.

this is a very personal subject for me.

Avalanche.

i wish he were never killed off in uncanny avengers.

i hope he comes back soon.

Quite a few folks mentioning that they believe fighters and rogues need some loving and some tweaks - but no mention of how that would be achieved. I have nothing to offer myself, but I'd like to see what others would suggest for those two classes, if they believe they need fixing.

specialized fighter only feats that allow them to:

special rogue only feats that focus on:
a feat for 'rogue only' weapons to get full warrior bab
a feat that allows them to use stealth to prompt at least one sneak attack every round
a feat tree that allows for instant poision effects
a feat that tricks magic items/weapons/armor/wand/staff to work without issue without use magic device for a single item/weapon/armor/wand/staff. this feat should stack.

None.
I feel no class is out of balance, the players/GM are.

This is a co-op game and if the GM is not in touch with his player base or, is suprised by his players too often, then there has not been enough communication between the table, occasionally getting suprised is one thing.

Sure, some classes are not balanced to the math, but I've never thought of this game as hard lined math balanced in the first place. As a player or GM I'm not looking for balance. I'm looking for for balanced communication between party members and the Gm to tell a story through the use of the game mechanics.(and ignore them if it furthers the story)

The Avengers is the best example of this:
Hulk is OP
Iron man is OP, but not as much as the Hulk
Thor is OP, but not as much as Iron Man
Captain America is balanced
Black widow is the poor rogue
Hawkeye is the poor Zen archer?
... Nick Fury is the Gm ;)

They are able to work as a team both in game as characters and out of the game as players.

No one under the age of 18 allowed at the gaming table. Ever.
Seriously i have sent players home who have brought their kids, or younger siblings.

Politically?
Think bioshock 1&2 with a dash of Game of thrones for heraldry.

Regarding sexual matters?
Sex, sexuality, and sexually driven story lines are common, about as common as combat.
Regarding irregular ideas (to other gaming tables) GLBT issues are handled with respect to the players and are used to improve the the game in a productive way to progress the story. They are treated as story points and are never thrown in there just to diversify or without purpose.

Grittiness/mortality?
Death is common. Of note: violence and sex have a strong dividing line down the middle that I as a DM will never cross. Sex will never steer into death. This isn't a slasher flick,and it will never be up to negotiation.

Any other aspects?
I didn't know I had this revulsion, but after an episode of game of thrones where joffery has one prostitute beat another with a heavy wooden thing, sex will never merge into violence in my games. Game of thrones had more violence against females then I could stomach, and i have since stopped watching the show.
I have also never been a fan of slasher films for a same reason, but it was while i watched the GoT that it came to light.

These must be on any of my computers at all times!

Baldurs Gate & Tales of the Sword Coast.
Baldurs Gate 2 & and Throne of Bhaal
Icewind Dale & Heart of Winter
Icewind Dale 2 *favorite*
Planescape Torment.

Neverwinter Nights, Shadows of Undertide, Hordes of the Underdark
Neverwinter Nights 2, Mask of the Betrayer, Storm of Zehir *favorite*

The Temple of Elemental Evil
The Witcher

For emulated dos games:
Ravenloft:Strahds Possession & Stone Prohpet.

MMOs
Age of Conan

I don't often take the time to complete games, but when i do... i prefer RPGs.

...

Keep rolling my friends. =)

as a dm i do not treat homosexuality any different than any other element in the game world as i would another character trait.
thats good because it doesn't have any more significance than normal fluff a pc or npc would have.

but my long term gaming group may be a special case, because we don't "fade to black" when sex and sexuality become an issue. there is equal parts sex & story as there is violence in our games. as a group, are quite comfortable in our own skins for sex not to be an issue and that includes homosexuality.

i do remember a dm at a hobby shop who would use homosexuality as a "sex wall" for his games.

want to charm the noble as a female bard with diplomacy?
he's gay.
want to win the affections of a princess as a male fighter as a story plot?
she's gay.
playing a dashing male gay rogue?
every npc you will meet from then on, is as straight as a long sword.
that is, until the female bard comes around, then they instantly change to gay.

2 sessions in, he lost his whole gaming group.

The same way Conan, HP Lovecraft, Michael Morecock, and Fritz Lieber handled homosexuality.

when you referenced conan, maybe you ment Robert E Howard?

also of note, lovecraft and Howard handled sex and race very differently.

So everyone is a bard then?

Usually we had an even spread of character races and classes.

in 3.0 & 3.5 it was the bard that was the "rogue" of pathfinder, so the group felt the bards needed the extra push.

(english is not my first language, please excuse the mis spellings and grammatical errors.)

I've been playing D&D since second edition 1994, and when 3.0 came out, it was good.

but since 2000 till present time, i kind of feel like i'm out of the loop.
in our gaming group, we have experienced nearly none of the issues commonly presented in both the D&D and Pathfinder forums. Namely overpowered classes, feats and balance issues,

one thing our group does that is different from most others is we conduct a strict point array system all the classes.
i have discalcula, so i needed a fast and easy system to look at a character sheet when i DMed and at a glance either confirm or deny an action. and point array stuck from that.

the break down is the common one used in the 3.0/3.5 dmg. every class got:
15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8
with the exception of rogues, monks, and bards. They get:
16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10

players were allowed to place said abilities as they saw fit.
It gave far more importance to race, age, and ability mod bonuses earned through levels.

my question is this, has anyone else opted for point array? and if so was it favorable to your game?

Conan raged all the time. He would recklessly charge headlong into fights using renewed or untapped strength. I think our conception of rage is warps by the Hulk or other "mindless rager" archetypes. Rage does not make you stupid. It has no mechanical effect on your mental stats other than you can't use INT based skills while raging, i.e. reckless.

In "The God in the Bowl" Conan displays all the signs of rage while fighting the snake god. At the sight of his dying companion, he screams, activates his rage (free action), and charges into the room which the god is hiding. The others warn him against attacking, but he recklessly ignores them (penalty to AC). He was injured from a previous fight, but his anger has renewed his strength and constitution (bonus to STR and CON/ temporary hit points). The god tries to hypnotize him, he overcomes it (bonus to Will).

Yes, he's not the Hulk when he rages, grunting or speaking in broken English. But, really, no barbarian (save the True Primitive or the Wild Rager archetypes, and even they don't suffer penalties to mental stats) should be played that way. I don't know how it started (probably 3E with their Half-Orc Iconic Barbarian and their illiterate ability), but Barbarians aren't mindless juggernauts. They're Conan.

thank you vindicator! i've been saying the same thing for years.

conan d-20 from mongoose publishing has the most accurate depiction of conan.
and depending on what time line you set your game in conan could be different levels or at different parts in his life.

of note: the book of stygia has him in his late 30s in age.
barb 14/ thief 1/ soldier 1/ pirate 2

the possible equivilant is:
barb 14/ rogue 1/ fighter 1/ ranger 2

yes robert e howards conan constantly raged.
a few of his most famous rages in his stories include
the frost giants daughter
the death of belit
and red nails.

Gm- "what's your course of action "
:quickly pull out your phone, pick a loud annoying app game like agnry birds:
Player 1- " i swing my sword at-"
gm-" hol-hold on a sec... there!: celebrate a win on your app game for 10 seconds:
" i'm sorry what did you say?"
Player 1- " i swung my sword at the ghoul"
Gm- :silence:
Player 1- ...
Gm- :silence:
Player 1- ... uh.
Player 2- "so what happens?"
Gm- "what happens with what?"
Player 2- "did he hit the ghoul?"
Gm- "oh yeah, the ghoul. so what did you do to the ghoul?"
Player 1- "i swung my sword at the ghoul!"
Gm- "oh, ok." :turn to player 2: "what's your course of action?"

... thats when you can break out the house rule of no electronic devices at the gaming table. =)

Grey Lensman wrote:

shallowsoul wrote:

I'm just not understanding the whole "Class A can do X better than class B" argument.

I think the problem is when Class A has X as a secondary thing, yet does it better than class B who has it as a primary.

Grey Lensman summarized the main point of the rogue and fighter threads. This is not saying the rogues and fighters are unplayable, but other classes can outshine rogues and fighters in the primary roles of rogue or fighter, and still have cool class features in addition to outshining the fighter or rogue.

Fighters are much better in PF than in 3.5 D&D, but rangers, barbarians, paladins and some monk and cleric builds make a better tank. The fighter has a lot of builds available, but it's easy to make a more powerful melee build with a barbarian or paladin, and easy to make a more powerful ranged build with a ranger.

IMO the rogue suffers from the increased versatility of other classes. In 3.5 the rogue was the skill guy and the sneaky guy and the sneak attack guy. A rogue could do all three as well or better than any other class at the same time. Because of 3.5's overly complicated skill system, the rogue was best able to put skill points into lots of skills. Other classes could sneak, but the rogue had an easier time specializing in sneaking. And sneak attack did more damage than other combat class features; smite evil was a lot less effective, favored enemy and rage were good but didn't give the damage output of sneak attack. Now generally speaking a ranger, barbarian, fighter, monk, cleric, and gunslinger can contribute more in combat. And some of them can outsneak and/or outskill the rogue at the same time.

The skill system is improved by orders of magnitude, but rogues benefit from this less than other classes. The flaws of the 3.x skill system worked to the rogue's advantage. Useful skills for the rogue included hide, move silently, spot, listen, search, disable device, open locks, sleight of hand, tumbling, climb,...

the rogue could possibly make an excellent base class to throw rogue only feats that augment basic priciples of a rogue.

so in effect its not so much erratta rather then creating the right feats that make possible 3 different versions of the rogue you want to play. they basically do it with the fighter in ultimate combat.

The chain mail bikini is stupid. It is also sexy. And that in the end is what sold comic books to teenage boys including me. Enough said!

i give up. =/

ravenharm wrote:

so there is reason for she devil with a sword to dress in the chain mail bikini, its just very fashionable to trash on it.

No, there's still no reason for the chain mail bikini, other than the obvious. The others you mention are reasonable. They are clothing. Minimal sexy clothing perhaps. The chain mail bikini pretends to be armor, but isn't.

The complaint isn't that Red Sonja doesn't wear armor, it's that she wears stupid armor.

for red sonja, that particular set of armor has an exact purpose.

that being said, bringing a dagger to a long sword duel would be stupid, unless of course the proper circumstance allowed the dagger to be used as it should, a killing blow when one least expects it.

the chain mail bikini is not a stupid armor, but an armor of circumstance. by pretending to be armor, it serves its exact purpose.

yep i had to look back on my collection, and most of the leading ladies regarding conan are infact half naked. none of them are wearing armor.

belit: a shash and belt, and topless. pirates queen. her skill is leadership.

valaria: a shirt, shorts, blet, and shash. she gets naked later in the story red nails. the art from pre-frazetta has her naked on a sacrificial alter. pirate and mercenary. she is faster with a blade then conan and nearly a match.

my guess is since both women have some sort of nautical background, it would have been silly to put them in armor. but what about land?

zenobia: slave turned queen of aquilonia. mostly naked except for silks and chains until she becomes queen of aquilonia.

jenna: mostly naked, armed with a dagger. her skill was bluff, diplomacy and the occasional stabby stab.

conan himself only wears amor when he preps for combat. and most of his "adventure" combat comes on the fly.

the only person that wore armor constantly is paladinus, the leader of king conans elite guard the black dragons.

so there is reason for she devil with a sword to dress in the chain mail bikini, its just very fashionable to trash on it.

back to the red sonja movie. its campy but i like it. i got a few issues with it naturally, namely the actress. but its entertaining.

ravenharm wrote:

red sonja. shes one of my favorite characters because i kind of see her as the first barbaric paladin. no. really.

she was a simple farm girl from a no where village. raiders came and murdered her family. she was raped and nearly beaten to death. on deaths door, a forgotten goddess arrived to her, and asked her to become a holy warrior for her. she agreed and the goddess brought her back from deaths door with a blessing and a "paladin" code. she could not bed a man who hasn't beaten her in combat is the main part of that code, protecting other females from a similar fate as the one she endured is a seldom shown second part of that code.

she used the "chain mail" bikini not for protection, but for bluff. its not supposed to protect her from anything, her powers brought on by the goddess actually protects her. barry and roy wrote it in that most men underestimate her. she doesn't stand as is she knows how to fight, she just simply fights. her injuries are always minor.

she doesn't wield a sword with any skill, its again... brought on by her goddess given powers. if her goddess took away her powers from sonja, she would not know how to use a sword.

i always pictured her as aconduit to her goddess and whatever weapon she pics up moves itself more then she actually moves it, as if the weapon was possessed and moves itself in her hands.

she isn't supposed to be strong or muscular, she actually starts a a waif then turns curvy in her middle years.

shes tough because shes similar in many ways to solomon kane. his will and resolve gave him the great powers to do many of the things he did.

i don't think the movie cast the right girl, or made the costume correct. i don't know why hollywood at the time felt it needed arnold in the movie to carry it.

tbh, i am very pro chain mail bikini, frazetta, boris & julie bell art. and i want that look in my rpgs.
i also am aware i am in the minority.

That character has nothing to do with REH's Red Sonya, Some talentless...

your observation doesn't change my opinion that i like "that" one, as much as the "original"

I'm going to disagree with your observation regarding the majority of "reh fighting women as armored"
not in conan, not in solomon kane, not in kull, not in bran mak morn.

Most of the characters went about unarmored. men and women alike.
conan famously wore whatever clothing was common to the region he was in at the time and picked up whatever weapon he found on the battlefield at the time.

red sonja. shes one of my favorite characters because i kind of see her as the first barbaric paladin. no. really.

she was a simple farm girl from a no where village. raiders came and murdered her family. she was raped and nearly beaten to death. on deaths door, a forgotten goddess arrived to her, and asked her to become a holy warrior for her. she agreed and the goddess brought her back from deaths door with a blessing and a "paladin" code. she could not bed a man who hasn't beaten her in combat is the main part of that code, protecting other females from a similar fate as the one she endured is a seldom shown second part of that code.

she used the "chain mail" bikini not for protection, but for bluff. its not supposed to protect her from anything, her powers brought on by the goddess actually protects her. barry and roy wrote it in that most men underestimate her. she doesn't stand as is she knows how to fight, she just simply fights. her injuries are always minor.

she doesn't wield a sword with any skill, its again... brought on by her goddess given powers. if her goddess took away her powers from sonja, she would not know how to use a sword.

i always pictured her as aconduit to her goddess and whatever weapon she pics up moves itself more then she actually moves it, as if the weapon was possessed and moves itself in her hands.

she isn't supposed to be strong or muscular, she actually starts a a waif then turns curvy in her middle years.

shes tough because shes similar in many ways to solomon kane. his will and resolve gave him the great powers to do many of the things he did.

i don't think the movie cast the right girl, or made the costume correct. i don't know why hollywood at the time felt it needed arnold in the movie to carry it.

tbh, i am very pro chain mail bikini, frazetta, boris & julie bell art. and i want that look in my rpgs.
i also am aware i am in the minority.

i'll be honest, i have never seen a player-made diety/homebrew/anything for that matter that was better then any published book.

especially if i'm a player, the last thing i want for my divine class is a homebrew deity.

but i would buy this book in a heartbeat as per i adore divine classes.

i would also like to see other divine options for fae lords, demon lords, devil lords, angelic counterparts, and class variants that twist the cleric class similar to a sorcerer based on the god/lord you might choose.

"The idea that a spell's casting time eliminates it from use as a CdG seems a little odd to me... it's not like you're getting to cast the spell any faster "

Actually if you try to deliver a Coup de Grace with a spell you are trying to do exactly that.
A coup de grace is a full round action, casting a spell is normally a standard action, so doing both things in the same round is acting faster. You get a free attack in the same round in which you cast the spell but that isn't the same thing of a full round attack.
That would remove casting a spell and delivering a a coup de grace in the same round

We are left with:
- held touch attacks spells. Those can probably deliver a CdG;
- spells that create weapon like effects, like flame blade, that are wielded exactly like weapons and so can make CdG.
Both can't deliver a CdG in the round in which they are cast.

that actually sounds awesome in a cimematic sense:

1994 i cut my teeth on ravenloft, ad&d 2nd edtion. very complex setting.

the only male of 5 females, all aspiring writers, actors, and enthusiasts. i spoke broken english, and knew how to draw naughty pictures. they were very patient.

they weaved complicated stories where they had few battles but plenty of: skills and save rolls. plot twists. character development. dramatic trajedies, and over the top endings.

lots of online rp through chat rooms and dice rollers.

1999 i then became a dm 3.0-3.5. culture shocked hit me when the first time i dmed for males. it wasn't pretty. i learned alot in that decade.

couch, love seat, and the coffee table for every map and mini.
people hold their own books and they know not to place drinks on the coffe table when a game is in session.

a separate smaller folding table is for drinks and snacks, away from the action.

thus, no cheetoo smears on the pages, and no whoops moments on the maps.

going to be at mega con with the wifey. while shes costuming, i'm going to stop by and peek.

Yeah, I don't get why the dwarves get hate. They were pretty much what I expected of dwarf adventurers, who are ( if you care to read the race entries ) normally the dwarves who conform least to the norms of their races life. The ones we saw in Erebor appeared very much to be the more stoic lawful people they also are.

If I have complaints about them, it would have to be that they really could have gotten more than one personality (outside of Thorin and "the fat one") and that apparently they come with a racial +2 bonus on Perform: Juggling.

The stone giant scene was superfluous and seemed to be just there to add a "big monster" moment.

dwarves really don't get much hate at all. =)

i'm not a fan of the dwarves who barge into a home, eat, soil and break things in a strangers home, contribute to mass burping, then sing a stupid song about it. twice.

i will admit, i am biased against that type of dwarf, and even a hint of that style of dwarf was enough to taint my full enjoyment of the movie.

again its a good movie, and i think people should see it.

Why Dwarves are awsome

NSFW language. They should show that before each showing of The Hobbit.

:throws up: this is the crap i'm talking about. my gaming table is 2.5 of these guys.

more of this, and i'll quit the hobby.

i actually loved the trilogy of the movies, and consider this trilogy as one the few times the movies are superior to the books.

if gimli was the only dwarf to act plucky and silly, i would be completly cool with that. hes a king who deals with humans, he would have to be more light hearted then the average dwarf.
but if gimli (in the sense of acting like a fool) is to be the standard personification of the race, then i would enjoy the movies a little less.
i had to look for the "cool moments" in the original trilogy to justify gimli as more then just comic relief.( like when he benchpressed 2 warg bodies and a dead orc as an amazing feat of strength, or when he asked the elf maiden for a token in the form of a lock of her hair becuase he thought she was beautiful)

but i would envite you to see the movie for yourself. its totally worth the 15 dollars. i loved thorin.

super slayer is right i was expecting more lotr.

what i'm afriad of is this interpetation of dwarves will entitle future players to "gully dwarf" it out on my gaming table. the movie solidified the stereotype.

there is alot of new found species racism at my table that leans heavy towards pro dwarf, and in particular they dont play as honerable, stoic, loyal, and productive dwarves.
they are more inclined to play drooling, spitting, stupid, burping, farting, and disruptive dwarf.

i'll say no more on the subject however, as per i do want people to see the movie.

yes. tolkien was not perfect.