Ruzak
First Post
That's what my mother told me at the time. It was not helpful.part of a barrel?
hehe...
That's what my mother told me at the time. It was not helpful.part of a barrel?
hehe...
In other news, I'm happy to see my question was answered. (Admittedly, it was a softball). Red dragon eh? Least we know Basic isn't going to have balors, tarrasques, or Orcus in it.
Why not balors? In 3ed they were a notch lower than the oldest dragons...
What dismayed me about that is he said there will be "a" dragon in the basic rules, and that "the" dragon will be the toughest monster. His reasoning: "Hey, the game is called Dungeons & Dragons!"
My rebuttal: Yeah, but it's not called "Dungeons & Maybe One Dragon If You Make It To Level 20."
All-in-all, I'm pleased with what I heard about Basic. I do wish they would have included one multi-class option to accommodate the old Elven Fighter/Magic-User (er... Elf) class.
I GET why they didn't; multi-classing is optional even in the PHB and its an awful lot of rules to introduce for one specific character type, but... yeah. I kinda miss the old "elf" class too.
(Luckily, come August we'll be able to use the full rules to do that).
And yet you're several hours behind us!
The "most mighty of demons and devils" are Demogorgon and Asmodeus respectively. Below them are any number of demon lords and archdevils. Balors and pit fiends are just the top of the regular hierarchies; the most powerful fiends that don't rate unique statblocks.Dragons seem more a tad terrestrial than the most mighty of demons and devils.