September In the Works is up

[interwyrm]

Have a dryad character bound to a wilden? They're trees, right?

 

[Raikun]

Almost certainly. There is one exception to this: if the dryad gets a message ahead of time and has the realisation that they need to get home RIGHT NOW. (With just enough time to do that, of course.) That is, if the DM makes an adventure of it, it's okay. But if the dryad simply drops dead one day, that sucks.

Kinda like if you find out your planet is about to be demolished to make way for an intergalactic highway. It's poor form to let you know at the last minute, but if you give warning in plenty of time (so you can at least grab a towel), it's not so bad.

 

[Dire Bare]

I believe they are referring to older edition baggage. It used to be that way in 2e, according to the Monster Manual / Monstrous Manual.

That said, I was in a game once where a PC died and got reincarnated as a Dryad. The DM allowed it by giving the reincarnated dryad a sapling in a pot. As long as it stayed safe, she could go anywhere and do whatever. Probably the coolest thing (i.e. the only cool thing) that DM ever did.

Yeah, which is kinda funny, as hamadryads are old edition creatures too. I just can't remember the difference between the two.

 

[MacMathan]

What an odd thing to do. I mean, I get why they're doing it, but it's kinda too little, too late. And regardless, hobby stores are like any other business and need to adapt to changing markets or die. It's not up to publishers to prop them up.

Hasbro should look to Apple's example and open up Hasbro stores with a dedicated gaming area in them for playing ANY Hasbro game. Once a week, host Encounters. The rest of the week, MTG, Yugioh, board games, etc. That'd kick ass.

I miss the WotC stores too but I don't see them repeating that experiment again. The only company that seems to pull it in my area is GW.

 

[I'm A Banana]

There is a difference, though. The ring of humanoid influence appears to make the diplomats better at what they do, rather than providing a way to bypass Diplomacy or Bluff entirely.

Well, the effect is the same. And the old spell still had a saving throw, so while it bypassed the caster's Charisma, it certainly didn't automatically work.

And it's not like a 4e wizard (or anyone trained in arcana) can't take Arcane Mutterings or Instant Friends and ignore their Charisma anyway, if that's what they're going for.

Main difference is that this is ALSO useful to Cha-monkeys who don't happen to have access to wizard spells, which is Good News, but also par for the course for magic items. Anyone can use a Necklace of Fireballs. Boom!

What would be Really Neat is if you had that power as a Skill Power for Diplomacy, but I suppose any creature that is Helpful and Peaceful is already this and then some, so they might not really need it...still, the more precise language of this effect appeals to me greatly, while all the DM Judgement Calls involved in the usual Diplomacy checks turn me off of it more.

Anyway, I'm mostly glad to see that they're continuing to branch out into noncombat effects. A little sad that it's not a very attractive item, not being combat-focused, that it's so high level (kind of a weak effect for epic level!), and that it's an item instead of a character-defining ability, but eh...quibbles. Mostly just happy to see the effect back in the game.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Yeah, that's a winning sales strategy.

If you're in the DC area, there's Dream Wizards in Rockville, and Game Parlor out in Chantilly (Woodbridge location is closed, sadly), and Compleat Strategist in Falls Church. I think all three should be able to get it, hopefully soon.

Of those, DW is the most Metro-accessible, though the "walk uphill both ways" part of it is, ahem, unpleasant. CS is walkable from one of the Falls Church metros, I think, but it's been a while.

Of course, given your signature, I suspect your location isn't DC right now.

Brad

 

[Drammattex]

Yeah, which is kinda funny, as hamadryads are old edition creatures too. I just can't remember the difference between the two.

In mythology, dryads and nymphs are pretty much the same thing, and they could go where they wished, though they had an association with trees ("drys" = "oak"). Hamadryads, however, were nymphs/dryads attached to a particular tree.

In AD&D, nymphs and dryads were split, and dryads took the role hamadryads had had in mythology. There's an entry for "hamadryad" in the AD&D Monster Manual under "H," but the listing simply reads "See Dryad." There's no mention of the hamadryad in the Dryad entry, however; so in AD&D, dryads = hamadryads. It's interesting that Gygax found it important enough to include mention of hamadryads in the index just in case someone went there looking for them specifically.

In 4th Edition (MM3), the nymphs were once conceived as dryads. In their MM3 entry, each is associated with a specific variety of tree, with the wood nymphs as the hamadryads. When they were termed "nymphs," the 4e nymphs ended up being closer to their mythological roots than their prior game versions.

As for Heroes of the Feywild, I really hope the author thought about these story aspects in consideration of how such creatures might work well as a D&D race.

 

[Dire Bare]

In AD&D, nymphs and dryads were split, and dryads took the role hamadryads had had in mythology. There's an entry for "hamadryad" in the AD&D Monster Manual under "H," but the listing simply reads "See Dryad." There's no mention of the hamadryad in the Dryad entry, however; so in AD&D, dryads = hamadryads. It's interesting that Gygax found it important enough to include mention of hamadryads in the index just in case someone went there looking for them specifically.

Ah, you seem to forget splat from 1st and 2nd Edition! I was pretty sure that hamadryads were written up separately from dryads (though obviously closely related), and I was right! I dug through the infamous Echohawk's Complete D&D Monster Index (well, through 2007 anyways), and found that various Lankmar products had hamadryad entries, as did Dragon #101, and most importantly, two Monstrous Compendium appendices (Forgotten Realms MC11 and Annual 3). Each source was probably a different take on the idea, but I don't have access to all that old-school fun stuff!

In the MC Annual 3, the only real difference between dryads and hamadryads seems to be that dryads must stay near their tree, and hamadryads do not. Which, if carried over to 4th Ed, makes sense. Of course, if you just remove the silly limit on dryads, then not sure what's left to make one "hama". I may be misremembering, but I think in one of those old sources I no longer have access to, it was suggested that hamadryads were essentially "half-dryads", which explained why they weren't as closely bound to an individual tree.

 

[Dice4Hire]

This game has more history than some countries.

 

[Peraion Graufalke]

I dug through the infamous Echohawk's Complete D&D Monster Index (well, through 2007 anyways), and found that various Lankmar products had hamadryad entries, as did Dragon #101, and most importantly, two Monstrous Compendium appendices (Forgotten Realms MC11 and Annual 3). Each source was probably a different take on the idea, but I don't have access to all that old-school fun stuff!

The Forgotten Realms MC11 states the following:

Like their cousins the dryads, each hamadryad is linked to an individual oak tree; however, a hamadryad can leave the vicinity of her tree.

They dislike non-forest environments and almost never willingly leave the woodlands.

Like dryads, hamadryads are attracted to comely males. However, they are not possessive of males who succumb to their charm abilities.

Nothing too unusual here, but the next bit cracked me up:

They give all treasure they find to their dryad friends for safe keeping.