Recent content by Bishmon

I'm not too familiar with the Dragonlance campaign setting, but are Dragonlances sentient and transient?

It's the requirement of those consequences that I have issue with. (Well, that's part of the issue.) I've got no problem with some artifacts being sentient, having personalities, being unreliable, disappearing, etc. I'm just not a fan of that being the basic premise of an artifact.

How about making it apart of an epic destiny then? Imagine maybe acquiring this artifact midway through the epic destiny, and then the final epic destiny quest thing could be to use that weapon to slay the BBEG. When that's done, it's over, the PC exits the campaign with his artifact and his...

I'm not sure where you get 'just some magic item' from. I'm not sure if you're merely misunderstanding what I'm saying, or if you're just mischaracterizing it to make a point. Ok, if artifacts should be part of a cool campaign arc, why does that necessitate sentience and getting rid of the item...

And your problem seems to be that you form opinions when you're woefully unqualified to do so.

I'm guessing you're not looking in the 3.5E DMG, right? Because I'm just seeing a lot about the elemental plane of fire on page 156. :) Anyway, the part you quoted, I read it as those effects being a result of a person being in possession of an incredibly powerful magic item that is desired by...

First off, I don't think that's anything like a middle ground. In fact, that just sounds pretty much like how it is in 4E. Secondly, I hate the idea of artifacts as plot devices. But maybe that's because I generally view things as a player, whereas others may view things as a DM. Because as a...

Ah, yes, didn't see the Sword of Kas. That certainly is intelligent, the DMG says as much and lists the relevant ability scores. Orbs of dragonkind, not so much. It mentions containing the essence and personality of a dragon, but they don't use any of the intelligence mechanics, so who knows...

Absolutely agreed. I'm just not a fan of going from "let's not simply make this a +X weapon" to "let's give it sentience and motivations and the ability to just get up and leave whenever it wants" I mean, there's gotta be some middle ground in there, right?

The warlord should have been my favorite class. A smart leader who is tough and has martial skill? That should have been right up my alley. Unfortunately, though, I hate the warlord. I can't stand the attack-something-to-buff-your-allies mechanic that pervades the class. As a result, what should...

I can't find any mention in the 3.5E DMG that even a single artifact was in any way sentient.

Huh. I never once considered an artifact to be iconic and monumental because it was sentient and would magically go away once it was satisfied or disappointed enough. I really can't understate my dislike of this. Both from a lore perspective and a gameplay perspective, it's just the antithesis...

Obviously artifacts are hard to balance. The 4E designers have apparently said 'screw it' and didn't even try, instead thinking the better solution would be to have them not balanced, but make it so they are little more than a fleeting mistress in the character's adventuring career. I can't...

The ranger class has virtually no 'ranger' flavor other than being forced to train in either nature or dungeoneering, so making an archer fighter is very easy -- it's just not called a fighter.

What has happened to artifacts? First, they're all sentient now, with their own goals and motivations and attitudes towards the wielder. And second, the damn thing goes away after a few levels once you've either satisfied it enough or disappointed it enough. They managed to take artifacts from...