As a GM, I would totally oppose what the players did. If the necromancer derro in question was for all intensive purposes unbeatable, than that might have to be addressed, but I don't think Turin would be that oblivious to those details, and would have addressed it were it necessary. I think it was an expedient way for players to rid themselves of unwanted characters with mediocre ability scores, and little more/else.
Allen,I have one munchkin player and you have inspired me. The journal was pure brilliance.
To Turin, do you still have the build for cleric 4.0. I am still trying to duplicate the 270d6(?) you and the bat army did.
I will have to check the boards to see how the STAP ran.
Allen,I have one munchkin player and you have inspired me. The journal was pure brilliance.
To Turin, do you still have the build for cleric 4.0. I am still trying to duplicate the 270d6(?) you and the bat army did.
I will have to check the boards to see how the STAP ran.
Concerro,
Craft Contingent Spell [Item Creation] and Death Throes (from Spell Compendium) are your preliminary requirements.
Then you go and take a little planar trip to the native plane of your Summon Monster I critters, make sure you name them - so that you can specifically summon them later - and stay a while glueing a Death Throe spell onto each one you name.
Later, you summon the Exploding Horde whilst you have Greater Consumption Field up (also from Spell Compendium), specifically with Twin and Maximize Metamagic - which will summon TEN of your named 1st level Monsters for a 9th level spell. Be sure to do so via Scroll so as not to waste perfectly good prepared spell slots. One Mass Inflict Wounds will send your critters to Dying, the GCF will slurp virtually all of them dry AND set them all off in a single go and presto - you have bucketloads of no-save, no-SR Force damage! I had several rounds of summoning and a LONG list of names for my squidbats (40 to be exact), all of which had big badda-boom contingent upon their demise... ^_^
I'm pretty sure that a well-enough prepared Cleric of Tharizdun can annihilate almost any foe, especially if they have a buddy with access to a Disjunction (or even if they have to toss one out themselves via Use Magic Device and a scroll first) to rip down the "immediate future sacrifices'" defenses...
Turin, even after nearly two years on these boards, your sheer destructive deviousness (and that of Alan) never ceases to amaze me.
|
Doesn't the whole 'Exploding Squidbat Army' rely rather too heavily on the assumption that these creatures from the Far Realm never have to compete with predators, resistant prey, or each other (courtship battles?), in potentially lethal combat?
What stops the whole lot going off prematurely, in a huge chain reaction?
Allen,I have one munchkin player and you have inspired me. The journal was pure brilliance.
To Turin, do you still have the build for cleric 4.0. I am still trying to duplicate the 270d6(?) you and the bat army did.
I will have to check the boards to see how the STAP ran.
Why thank you Concerro, and Calvangian as well. I'm glad you enjoyed the thread and saw the humor that I attempted to bring to bear in the game. Sadly, that was lost on some players, though I can comprehend why. Guess you can't please everyone. It was the longest campaign to date that I've gotten to play hard ball with my players. Only my brief stints of GM'ing the Tomb of Horrors were on par with the Age of Worms campaign, and the sojourns into the Tomb of Horrors seldom lasted more than a few game sessions, whereas the AoW lasted 13 months. These delightful types of campaigns sadly come along far too infrequently...
But what about the squidbats?
WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE SQUIDBATS?
*Laughs to the point of coughing up the smaller left lung*
Start a petition to add Squidbat as a new monster...
Doesn't the whole 'Exploding Squidbat Army' rely rather too heavily on the assumption that these creatures from the Far Realm never have to compete with predators, resistant prey, or each other (courtship battles?), in potentially lethal combat?
What stops the whole lot going off prematurely, in a huge chain reaction?
Pretty much the same assumption that permits characters to be able to summon their named monsters time and again without fear of anything they are able to give THEM should they undertake the necessary journey shields the Many Named Squidbats. And once summoned they are under the command of the summoner. ^_^
And, as an added bonus, if one is to be truly Malevolent, the well-prepared Divine Spellcaster has a healthy supply of a certain Prayer Bead of Karma and Incense of Meditation. An expensive habit to be sure, but a rewarding one when the time comes to deploy Doom...
A Very Merry Christmas to all you Fellow Peeps, Sick Freaks, and aspiring Killer GM's.
AS (KGM)
Concerro,Craft Contingent Spell [Item Creation] and Death Throes (from Spell Compendium) are your preliminary requirements.
Then you go and take a little planar trip to the native plane of your Summon Monster I critters, make sure you name them - so that you can specifically summon them later - and stay a while glueing a Death Throe spell onto each one you name.
Later, you summon the Exploding Horde whilst you have Greater Consumption Field up (also from Spell Compendium), specifically with Twin and Maximize Metamagic - which will summon TEN of your named 1st level Monsters for a 9th level spell. Be sure to do so via Scroll so as not to waste perfectly good prepared spell slots. One Mass Inflict Wounds will send your critters to Dying, the GCF will slurp virtually all of them dry AND set them all off in a single go and presto - you have bucketloads of no-save, no-SR Force damage! I had several rounds of summoning and a LONG list of names for my squidbats (40 to be exact), all of which had big badda-boom contingent upon their demise... ^_^
I'm pretty sure that a well-enough prepared Cleric of Tharizdun can annihilate almost any foe, especially if they have a buddy with access to a Disjunction (or even if they have to toss one out themselves via Use Magic Device and a scroll first) to rip down the "immediate future sacrifices'" defenses...
@#$%*&'n hilarious Turin.
I made good use of the Kharma beads, in the Styes, and earned my players scorn and contempt...
@#$%*&'n hilarious Turin.
I made good use of the Kharma beads, in the Styes, and earned my players scorn and contempt...
Well, if it had gone down in combat rather than out of it, that might have been different. As I still agree that the bad guys are thoroughly Evil and thus not subject (unless Lawful Evil) to such baggage concepts as "honor", "fairness", "morality" and "restraint" - given the scenario as I understood it at the time. Combined with their apparent resource apparatus, this translated into a handy TPK. One that did not sit well perhaps, but an understandable one nonetheless.
One would do well to note that the four "word" spells [Blasphemy, Dictum, Holy Word and Word of Chaos] in Pathfinder Beta now permit a Will saving throw to resist the cumulative effects. A significant change indeed...
Well, if it had gone down in combat rather than out of it, that might have been different. As I still agree that the bad guys are thoroughly Evil and thus not subject (unless Lawful Evil) to such baggage concepts as "honor", "fairness", "morality" and "restraint" - given the scenario as I understood it at the time. Combined with their apparent resource apparatus, this translated into a handy TPK. One that did not sit well perhaps, but an understandable one nonetheless.
One would do well to note that the four "word" spells [Blasphemy, Dictum, Holy Word and Word of Chaos] in Pathfinder Beta now permit a Will saving throw to resist the cumulative effects. A significant change indeed...
I Agree on all things you've just mentioned, Turin. How's Arkansas?
I Agree on all things you've just mentioned, Turin. How's Arkansas?
Well, if it had gone down in combat rather than out of it, that might have been different. As I still agree that the bad guys are thoroughly Evil and thus not subject (unless Lawful Evil) to such baggage concepts as "honor", "fairness", "morality" and "restraint" - given the scenario as I understood it at the time. Combined with their apparent resource apparatus, this translated into a handy TPK. One that did not sit well perhaps, but an understandable one nonetheless.
One would do well to note that the four "word" spells [Blasphemy, Dictum, Holy Word and Word of Chaos] in Pathfinder Beta now permit a Will saving throw to resist the cumulative effects. A significant change indeed...
Compared to northern Virginia, the weather is behaving wierd. It was colder than VA when we got here Tuesday night - yesterday the high was about 60 F, today it should be even warmer before plummetting below freezing in the wee hours of the night.
When both of you you ran AoW and STAP did you use the PHB rules for 1st level characters, or did you give them a few extra HP due to the difficulty of the campaign?
I stuck to the PHB only. I suppose such was in keeping with my 'killer gm' motif, but I've played for 25+ years, and at 1st level, you get greased frequently... So I stuck with tradition.
I'll let Turin answer for the Savage Tide, but I don't recall him tweaking much at 1st level. His "attack of generousity" kicked in about 6th level if memory serves...
I stuck to the PHB only. I suppose such was in keeping with my 'killer gm' motif, but I've played for 25+ years, and at 1st level, you get greased frequently... So I stuck with tradition.
I'll let Turin answer for the Savage Tide, but I don't recall him tweaking much at 1st level. His "attack of generousity" kicked in about 6th level if memory serves...
Do you have players that accept death graciously(well as much as possible anyway), or do you make it entertaining enough that they don't mind to much. I am about to start a new group, and I don't care to much for dice fudging, but some players are whiney(sp?) when they die.
Most of my old group moved away, and other issues are abound with the current group. I would like to warn the soon to be new players up front, but I dont want to scare them off. My old group had no problem accepting death. I doubt I will be so lucky this time.
I stuck to the PHB only. I suppose such was in keeping with my 'killer gm' motif, but I've played for 25+ years, and at 1st level, you get greased frequently... So I stuck with tradition.
I'll let Turin answer for the Savage Tide, but I don't recall him tweaking much at 1st level. His "attack of generousity" kicked in about 6th level if memory serves...
Do you have players that accept death graciously (well as much as possible anyway), or do you make it entertaining enough that they don't mind to much. I am about to start a new group, and I don't care to much for dice fudging, but some players are whiney(sp?) when they die.
Most of my old group moved away, and other issues are abound with the current group. I would like to warn the soon to be new players up front, but I dont want to scare them off. My old group had no problem accepting death. I doubt I will be so lucky this time.
To answer both queries:
I believe Allen's "Attack of Generosity" is in reference to equippage for crew 2 (Saturday), which had to conclude rather early on. The Sunday crew saw the Savage Tide through to its conclusion.
Many players nowadays are rather poor sports when their characters get planted six feet under despite the availability of reincarnate, raise dead and more powerful "bring your carcass back to life" magic in most campaigns.
The players I've found to be most accepting of character death are fairly often - definitely not always - also the ones who won't have their characters raised or equivalent. That having been said, when a campaign comes across as a "character killer" - for what ever reason - it will more often than not translate into sour players who up and leave / just find something else to do the following session (s) to blow off steam / do not return to the table.
It strikes me that character deaths are accepted most often when (a) they at least vaguely come across as fair or 'within the rules' and (b) when the player has otherwise been having a good time at the table, especially over the course of a campaign. It does generally go a LONG way to taking the bitterness out of a particularly nasty character death when the option for the character to return to play remains viable as well.
Age of Worms ran "as written" introduces a PrC in the accompanying issues of Dragon magazine that gives characters a fighting chance against the mini-onions of Kyuss - with out it, they're all dog food barring access to the Spell Compendium due to the staggering plethora of ability draining / damaging critters that infest the latter half of the campaign. That attack mode (or multiples thereof) coupled with a high rate of non-crittable foes translates into a very, very rough campaign.
Savage Tide has its own rough moments, but nothing that really requires "non core" to deal with effectively. I had one player repeatedly threaten to up and quit because that player felt that certain elements of the big-bads were BS. In retrospect, I probably should have called that player on the issue the second time of such utterance at the table and dealt with the matter then.
Do you have players that accept death graciously(well as much as possible anyway), or do you make it entertaining enough that they don't mind to much. I am about to start a new group, and I don't care to much for dice fudging, but some players are whiney(sp?) when they die.
Most of my old group moved away, and other issues are abound with the current group. I would like to warn the soon to be new players up front, but I dont want to scare them off. My old group had no problem accepting death. I doubt I will be so lucky this time.
I probably heard about equal amounts of Whining and "gracious concessions" during the AoW. From whom was largely determined by the player in question. Specific players would most often make a scene when their character bought the farm (deservedly or undeservedly), others seldom, if ever did (deservedly or undeservedly as well).
I've previously lamented in this thread about the "players' attidudes concerning character death" that many players approach the game these days. 3.0/3.5 edition has been a 'player's game'. In the "old days" of 1st edition, character death was so common that it seldom raised an eyebrow. Now days, it seems like it can be a deal breaker if not handled wisely and sensibly. And as you allude to, it is something of a tight-rope act to walk.
I certainly did endeavor to make the game (and character death specifically) entertaining to reduce the ire of the players. Sometimes I succeeded to good effect, sometimes I was not so successful. If I failed, it was not normally through lack of effort on my part. I attempted to paint a picture of "old school gaming" for the group to give them some context of how I ran the game and why the potential for PC death was always looming on the horizon. In hindsight, I probably "hammed up" the "killer/adversarial GM" approach a bit too much. It is fine to have a game with significant PC fatalities, but I've grasped the notion that a wise GM should appear more sympathetic and not heavily "out to get" the PC's.
Thus, DO go ahead and waste your Player's Characters: BUT don't laugh too much when they die; don't appear too eager to waste them; and DO commiserate with them after their characters perish horribly:)
...and if you are blessed with a player who can lavishly illustrate your villains for you, consider not putting shiny star stickers on the back of said illustrations, which honor said villain according to the number of characters he/she/it has obliterated previously...
The players I've found to be most accepting of character death are fairly often - definitely not always - also the ones who won't have their characters raised or equivalent. That having been said, when a campaign comes across as a "character killer" - for what ever reason - it will more often than not translate into sour players who up and leave / just find something else to do the following session (s) to blow off steam / do not return to the table.
It strikes me that character deaths are accepted most often when (a) they at least vaguely come across as fair or 'within the rules' and (b)...
I agree with Turin on basically all of his points in his post, save the last, which not being a part of the Sunday group, I had no knowledge of. I, being one of the players who does not raise characters (with one notable exception) believe that while survival is of optimal importance, PC demise is part of the game, and should not be a cause for problems in the game/group, unless it is patently unfair. Frequency is less of an issue for me. If I am given an encounter (as a player) that I have a reasonable chance for survival or fleeing from, and I fail to do either, than there's really not much room for griping.
The Age of Worms was a character grind for the reasons Turin stated. I did not purchase the corrosponding Dragon Magazines, and did not have access to the prestige class in question (which I believe was called the 'worm hunter'.) The high number of undead with various ability draining powers were very formidable obstacles for the players, and accounted for a substantial percentege of the PC casualties sustained.I admit that I made the situation more difficult by altering the villains spell lists (using the Spell Compendium) in an effort to keep pace with my Power-gaming players, many of whom were gleefully exploiting every Splat-book, every overpowered item or spell, and every loophole in the rules that they could find.
In short, if you as the GM, and your players are all committed to a reasonable and balanced game, all should go well. If you or the player(s) are aren't on board with that concept, it will be a rough ride.
Agreed Sir Allen. I think my ultimate point is that the AoW campaign is essentially untenable with a "core books only" character group UNLESS that Prestige Class and anything remotely similar are injected into the campaign - if that is done, then you can have a fun campaign that retains the significant risk of character death. Most often from good old-fashioned massive trauma (hp loss).
Even with those abilities it is still a pretty lethal campaign due to being "core only" whilst the monsters most certainly are NOT "core only" (mainly the various mini-onions of Kyuss), so I believe that is an inherently flawed arguement to use.
Only when a campaign is truly "core only" on both sides of the screen is that then a valid arguement. Not one to hash out in hindsight save to argue for the sake of the arguement. :)
Note that "core only" is not the same thing as "book stat block only" - the core MM is chock full of nastiness to unload on a group. Just examine the sickness contained within the modules Pathfinder produces to get an insight into what can be done with the core-only creatures...
...and if you are blessed with a player who can lavishly illustrate your villains for you, consider not putting shiny star stickers on the back of said illustrations, which honor said villain according to the number of characters he/she/it has obliterated previously...
LOL, I can definitely see this upsetting a player.
You don't happen to have any of those illustrations to share, by any chance?
I do not believe Sir Al of N has scanned in any of the illustrations, permitting internet sharing. Seeing as how he has over 100 of them (all laminated), the amount of work that would take would be ... rather extensive I imagine.
Agreed Sir Allen. I think my ultimate point is that the AoW campaign is essentially untenable with a "core books only" character group UNLESS that Prestige Class and anything remotely similar are injected into the campaign - if that is done, then you can have a fun campaign that retains the significant risk of character death. Most often from good old-fashioned massive trauma (hp loss).
Even with those abilities it is still a pretty lethal campaign due to being "core only" whilst the monsters most certainly are NOT "core only" (mainly the various mini-onions of Kyuss), so I believe that is an inherently flawed arguement to use.
Only when a campaign is truly "core only" on both sides of the screen is that then a valid arguement. Not one to hash out in hindsight save to argue for the sake of the arguement. :)
Note that "core only" is not the same thing as "book stat block only" - the core MM is chock full of nastiness to unload on a group. Just examine the sickness contained within the modules Pathfinder produces to get an insight into what can be done with the core-only creatures...
There are different ways of defining "balance". The GM and the players need to be able to agree on just what type of balance they are going for. How easy should it be for the characters to get killed? How powerful should the enemies or the players be?
In the game I'm running I've found the balance that both the players and I like. In my game you are pretty much only going to die to stupidity or once in a very, very rare while bad luck. It is hard to die in my game unless you go and court death. On the onther hand it is fairly easy to get beaten up. This is what the group of players enjoy.
Not liking your character to die does not make someone a bad player. It just means that the game you might want to run is not in the appropriete style for the players you have. This means that you either have to convince them to adapt to your style, or adapt to the style of game they enjoy.
To give an example, Sir Al of N is an excellent GM. He can make a game fun and exciting and it can be a lot of fun, if you like his style of game. His style of game is Hack&Slah high lethality with him out to get you (or at least acting like he is). Much as I respect him as a GM if he offered me a seat at one of his game, I would turn him down. His style of game does not appeal to me. I want more role-playing and a lot less death than he is after. I also want more of a feel of building a story with the GM than that I am trying to survive his machinations.
Learn your players and what they want/need out of a game. In a game where the goal is to do a lot of RP and build a storyline, deaths can be a big set back. I don't want my players to die often because that would screw up the storyline we are building. If I was running a more hack and slash game I'd probably kill them more often. Still I want it as an option in case someone does something like "I jump into the lava" and to add some drama to the fights.
If the GM and the players can find the style and balance that they can both enjoy, the game will be fun. If not, everyone is going to suffer. It doesn't make one style of GMing better or one type of player worse. It just that everyone has their preferences and what they enjoy.
You don't happen to have any of those illustrations to share, by any chance?
I would be happy to do so. True, I don't have a scanner, but I will work on that. The mighty Resident Artist talked to me about Photobucket dot com, but I haven't figured out how/where to post the illustrations once I have scanned them.
Any suggestions?
Cap'n Jose stated: To give an example, Sir Al of N is an excellent GM. He can make a game fun and exciting and it can be a lot of fun, if you like his style of game. His style of game is Hack&Slah high lethality with him out to get you (or at least acting like he is). Much as I respect him as a GM if he offered me a seat at one of his game, I would turn him down. His style of game does not appeal to me. I want more role-playing and a lot less death than he is after. I also want more of a feel of building a story with the GM than that I am trying to survive his machinations.
I'll offer a few thoughts on Cap'n Jose's comments and something of a clarification. Thank you Cap'n Jose for your comments, I'm glad you enjoyed the prior games.
My affinity for Hack'n Slash d&d (as presented in Age of Worms) is heavily related to several things. First, I can't abide sitting in a 6-hour game session (as a player particularly, but also as a GM) where there is only 1 or 2 (or none) combat encounters, and the rest is spent "role-playing". I am ALL FOR story line development, and in any 'home-brewed' campaign I've run, I've done very well in that area. Plot & story development IS different than "theartical role-playing", (as I define it). I have a diverse plethora of NPC's that the Saturday crew have interacted with over the last 8 years in my 'home brewed' campaigns, all of which did NOT make it into the prescripted Paizo Age of Worms. Another thing which drives me crazy is "heavy RP oriented GM's" who DON'T stick to the rules, because it interferes with their story or hampers their plans as a GM. I've played under GM's who didn't even have the Statistics of the day's main villain Written up because he wanted the final blow to be dealt just when the players were down to their last few HP, to achieve some sort of cinematic effect. So that GM would just "wing-it" as he went. If the villain needed a higher AC or lots more HP, then the heavy RP GM would just give it to the villain to achieve the cinematic/RP effect. That is lame and destroys the coherence and continuity of a game that is defined by rules.
I will concede that as a GM, I am not inclined to do "theatrical role-playing" where I alter my voice and 'speak in character'; or have 'self-discovery sessions' with my players, where they "really get in touch with their characters."
Much of all the Northern Virginia groups that I have played in become bogged down with endless side conversations, lunch breaks, and players having their characters go on "shopping trips" to purchase new magical gear, which ends up taking HALF the game session. This is lame. In an effort to prevent those issues and move the game forward, I use combat encounters to help move "the story & RP along". Most of the players who don't play with me anymore DO like the combat heavy game; what they don't like, is dying frequently. The thing is, INTELLIGENT players like Turin and Cap'n Jose die alot LESS frequently than most players (assuming most/all characters are roughly equal in terms of their 'power curve'. Thus, I believe, it's not the heavy combat, but rather the fact that some players experience frequent demises (for many reasons) that is the real issue. And there is no easy answer for it.
I will occasionally spare characters, and did so in Age of Worms at times (yes, truly folks, you can pick your jaws up off the floor now); but I don't make a common practice of it. I think the 'Killer GM' persona ultimately has worn thin with many, and the humor of my gleeful slaughtering of their PCs only lasts so long. It may well be time for a "different hat." Turin kills nearly as many PCs as I do, and everyone thinks he's the best GM they have ever played under (which is probably correct, incidentally Turin:)
And ironically (& sadly), my next homebrewed campaign scheduled for 2009 contains far too much RP for my stomach. Guess I'll bring the barf bag...
And ironically (& sadly), my next homebrewed campaign scheduled for 2009 contains far too much RP for my stomach. Guess I'll bring the barf bag...
|
|
You don't happen to have any of those illustrations to share, by any chance?I would be happy to do so. True, I don't have a scanner, but I will work on that. The mighty Resident Artist talked to me about Photobucket dot com, but I haven't figured out how/where to post the illustrations once I have scanned them.
Any suggestions?
There's quite a community of Paizoans on deviantArt. This is a link to my page (sadly, still rather bare, but click on some of the commentators, like butterfrog, and you'll see some great Golarion-themed work, or at least what's not covered by the mature filter, which you need to register to lift).
I didn't realise they still needed scanning, I was hoping they may have been electronic images already. It's perfectly understandable if it's too big a job. I've still got a pile of my wife's art to post, after persuading her that her stuff is good enough to display, but which I haven't got round to.
Snorter, you might want to get a crack in' on that - call it a Valentine's Day present if you get all of it up by then. ^_^
I'd love to get it up by Valentine's Day, no mistake!
<arf, arf!>
*Chuckling before proceeding to slap Snorter around with a tuna for the horrid pun.* ^_^
Something is fishy here!
Something is fishy here!
^_^ I'm thinking the itch to rub out player characters is getting rather profound for poor Sir Al of N. Also, he's waiting the same almost-three-week span between the last session and the next one he'll be able to participate in (barring participating in other campaigns O.o) come 10th January '09... And even then his character might join the ranks of the messily deceased... mwahhahahahhah!!
Something is fishy here!^_^ I'm thinking the itch to rub out player characters is getting rather profound for poor Sir Al of N. Also, he's waiting the same almost-three-week span between the last session and the next one he'll be able to participate in (barring participating in other campaigns O.o) come 10th January '09... And even then his character might join the ranks of the messily deceased... mwahhahahahhah!!
It would be three weeks if we play on Saturday Jan 3 (last game on December 13). If we aren't playing until the 10th (I don't know, so clue me in) than it's a solid month:(
What gives you the idea that I am getting the 'itch' to rub out PCs Sir Turin? I'm turning over a 'new leaf' remember:)
AT LAST FOLKS, SOME OF The ILLUSTRATIONS FOR THE AGE OF WORMS CAMPAIGN HAVE BEEN POSTED.
Check them out at Deviant art.com. I will attempt to post a link. As I am rather inept at most-things-computer, if you can't access them directly from the link below, just go to deviant art dot com, and look for Killer GM; and be a pal and post an actual link that works for me on this thread. Thanks, all, and especially to the Resident Artist, who's work helped bring the campaign to life and to memory for all to see.
AS
http://killer-gm.deviantart.com/gallery
AT LAST FOLKS, SOME OF The ILLUSTRATIONS FOR THE AGE OF WORMS CAMPAIGN HAVE BEEN POSTED.
Check them out at Deviant art.com. I will attempt to post a link. As I am rather inept at most-things-computer, if you can't access them directly from the link below, just go to deviant art dot com, and look for Killer GM; and be a pal and post an actual link that works for me on this thread. Thanks, all, and especially to the Resident Artist, who's work helped bring the campaign to life and to memory for all to see.
AS
http://killer-gm.deviantart.com/gallery
Here you go.
Most excellent preview - cannot wait to see the remaining 70 or so posted Sir Allen. :)
The Resident Artist may protest certain pictures, but I'll see if I can't get the green light from him on most if not all of them. I'm considering omitting some of the pics (those that are slated for the LK's Campaign), but maybe I'll go ahead and post them anyway...
Okay Folks, an idea.
Let's have anyone who's so inclined VOTE for their favorite Age of Worms illustrations on the Deviantart.com website.
Vote for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place, and identify the drawing in question by name if you would. The Resident Artist Might find it interesting to get a little feedback from all of you who as to which one(s) you enjoy the most. Granted many of these were more or less drawn to my specifications... so blame it on me if you don't like 'em...
Thanks in advance. ~AS
I have a small request Sir Al of N. For the pictures that have earned themselves those lovely gold stars could you possibly list how many stars they have? As well as possibly a short description of their personality/tactics?
I think at some suitably dramatic point the players in my campaign may run into a few of these beauties. Especially if they get too uppity and I decide I need to remind them of their mortality.
Cap'n,
I'll work on the tactics of the villains ASAP. As for a list of the number of stars, they are as follows:
(Note: a 'star' indicates that the villain in question delivered the "killing blow" to a player character, irregardless of what may have happened prior to that blow being dealt. an 'Assist' indicates a situation in which a designated spellcaster (usually) had incapacitated a player character but was unable to finish off said player character before another villain did so, but his incapacitating the said character made his dispatch by another villain possible).
'Hextor Cleric' 1 Star
Karn the Terrible 1 Star
Duncan the Red 1 Star
Aleera 1* Star
Bruno, Sahuagin champion 1 Star
Gnome Illusionist 2 Stars; 7 Assists
Necros 3 Stars
Dark Druid 3 Stars
Jack Mangler 4 Stars
Wilfred Death 4 Stars
Cowardly Lion 4 Stars
Cardinal Devious 4 Stars
Scorch the dragon (not shown) 6 Stars
Praetanis 6 Stars; 8 Assists
Sir Laughsomore 7 Stars
Sir Sean 20 Stars
As an aside Cap'n, you regretably were not a casualty of any of the listed villains... alas...
As an aside Cap'n, you regretably were not a casualty of any of the listed villains... alas...
My heart bleeds for you. Thank you for the info, I shall definately have to have at least one of them show up at some point. The players shall have to do something truly special for Sir Sean to show up. Egads that is a brutal total.
Yeppers, Sir Allen's illustrated baddies have racked up ~70 character kills, nearly a third from Sir Sean. ^_^
An important designation of the 'Star Villains' is that the villain has to be illustrated before he goes into combat, so I (as the GM) run the risk of him getting killed, and hearing my players laughter the rest of the afternoon (and in some cases, for years after... ask Haru & Turin about some of their exploits at my expense...)
I've had notable villains that have killed numerous PCs, but I don't award them stars, if I don't have the illustration present, and announce them to some degree at some point in the encounter.
A few additional Star Villains, who's pictures I have not posted yet...
Sir Laughsalot 1 Star
Sir Grynn 1 Star
Bandelaero 1 Star
CrushSkull (Cleric of Nerull) 1 Star (Killed in action by Turin)
Calibos 1 Star (killed in action by Turin)
The Bone Collector 1 Star (killed in action by the Resident Artist)
Drow Cleric 1 Star
Sir Bertilach 1 Star
Pagliacci 1 Star
Trickshot 2 Star (killed in action by Turin)
Mulder the Brute 2 Star