Matt Colville’s Strongholds and Followers
MonkeezOnFire
Adventurer
This sounds neat. This product didn't really pique my interest but hearing how well thought out it seems I'll probably pick it up for reading over the holidays. My current group has established an organization of sorts to help the disenfranchised refugees living in the main city. It hasn't been a big focus for a while now as adventuring is busy work, but this might give me some ideas on where to take that.
I'm also planning on running a Ravnica campaign and I could very easily see the players wanting to build a stronghold in the name of their guild once they are powerful enough to do so. Founding your own Izzet laboratory or building you own Orzhov basilica would be really cool.
I'm also planning on running a Ravnica campaign and I could very easily see the players wanting to build a stronghold in the name of their guild once they are powerful enough to do so. Founding your own Izzet laboratory or building you own Orzhov basilica would be really cool.
hawkeyefan
Legend
Each of them is potent like that. I don't want to spoil the book, but to give one more for comparison, the Ranger gets Chosen Enemy. When used, the Ranger's favored enemy gains vulnerability to the Ranger's attacks. This can be used on a number of damage rolls equal to the Ranger's stronghold's level, and then requires an Extended Rest.
The other classes are all equally potent, but each will likely only happen a couple times per adventure. Matt even points this out in a foot note. He wanted the abilities to make players say "wow I want to build a Stronghold" but for the DM to realize "okay, this will only happen occasionally".
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
<SNIP>
I find that many people react strongly to opinionated people. Some people love them--find them more interesting and fun to listed to and argue with. Others find them annoying and full of themselves. When I moved to New York City, I fell in love instantly. Most Americans have negative stereotypes of New Yorkers. After moving back to the Midwest, I find I have to tone it down. Whenever I find myself conversing with someone who'll bluntly state a strong opinion on anything, I find it to be a breath of fresh air.
My wife, on the other hand, finds it exhausting to be around me and some of my friends. After a few drinks, when we are at the point of having heated arguments about garlic, she'll tap out.
And I don't think it is a millennial thing or a gen X thing as my grandfather and several of my uncles illustrate--especially those too-full-of-themselves uncles who moved to Los Angeles ;-)
Matt seems like a fun person to grab drink with and argue have friendly arguments about inconsequential details of pop culture.
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Well, at the risk of upsetting [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION], I mainly dislike them because I'm an opinionated Gen Xer who believes that only Fey creatures, not Vampires or Dragons, should sparkle.
Also, I don't like the idea of psionic dragons. Leave that to the aberrations and their twisted thralls.
Really. No good reason. The artwork for the gem dragons in Matt's book are awesome. They look cool and are probably fun to use in a game. But the words "psionic gem dragons" just turns my stomach a bit sour.
Now a Fey flower-petal dragon that has no physical attacks, that's cool.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Well, at the risk of upsetting [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION], I mainly dislike them because I'm an opinionated Gen Xer who believes that only Fey creatures, not Vampires or Dragons, should sparkle.
Also, I don't like the idea of psionic dragons. Leave that to the aberrations and their twisted thralls.
Really. No good reason. The artwork for the gem dragons in Matt's book are awesome. They look cool and are probably fun to use in a game. But the words "psionic gem dragons" just turns my stomach a bit sour.
Now a Fey flower-petal dragon that has no physical attacks, that's cool.
All these dang olds, having opinions, liking old things! <flips table>
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I am one of those opinionated people, and you’re absolutely right. MC probably annoys me for the same reason my friend Paul annoys me. He’s just as opinionated as me, but he’s wrong!
jk, obv. Not about Paul, tho. Paul is always wrong. Seriously, though, you’re right. That, and his complaints about new Star Wars included stuff like “feeling betrayed”, which immediately put me off, and that was my second introduction to him, after him talking about how important it is to kill PCs, which also put me off! Lol
Jester David
Hero
Don’t they date to 1980?Well, at the risk of upsetting [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION], I mainly dislike them because I'm an opinionated Gen Xer who believes that only Fey creatures, not Vampires or Dragons, should sparkle.
Also, I don't like the idea of psionic dragons. Leave that to the aberrations and their twisted thralls.
Really. No good reason. The artwork for the gem dragons in Matt's book are awesome. They look cool and are probably fun to use in a game. But the words "psionic gem dragons" just turns my stomach a bit sour.
Now a Fey flower-petal dragon that has no physical attacks, that's cool.
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
At my table they date to never.
But yes, according to Wikipedia, they date to Dragon issue #37, published in 1980, but they were not published in any D&D hard cover while I was playing (I switched to Warhammer in late high school and stopped role playing when I went to college.
Then I get back into D&D when 5e comes out and there are Tieflings and Dragonborn. Now you want me to adjust to gem dragons! An old man can only adapt so fast!
Last edited:
Similar Threads
