Recent content by Bryntryst

Ha!

Think of it like the nerdy guy that you grew up with. Once you hit high school, you're "too cool" to hang out with him because all the jocks will laugh at you. But as soon as that bell rings, it's straight over to his house to work on your LARPing costume.

So do I. That should have been Rich Baker. So I would vote yes, let's include them both.

You forgot "Keith Baker killed the D&D logo".

I disagree. The Core Rules should be the vanilla ice cream. The campaign settings provide the toppings (nuts, as in FRs case) to add the flavor.

Unfortunately, those that lean toward the extreme are the most vocal. I have all but abandoned the FR forums on the WotC site. I started visiting when I heard that FR was going to be the flagship of 4E (for lack of a better term). My experience with FR was comparatively limited; having played...

Dark Sun, hands down. If there ever was a setting with a 'points of light' feel to it, that was it.

I object to the insinuation that anyone trying to unlock a door, disable a device or slight a hand is labeled as a thief and has illicit intent. I officially throw my guess of 'roguery' into the ring.

A-friggin-men.

These threads never fail to deliver. People complaining about things they have no idea about solely because no information has come to light. "Holy crap, armor hasn't been disclosed!!! Another nail in the coffin?!?!"

This is like the remora bitching because the shark hasn't eaten yet.

New elves.

I voted for 3.5 mostly because I really enjoyed Reynolds', Prescott and Weis, but I really don't care as long as they put Baxa's art where it belongs...in the toilet. EDIT: If you really want to see horrendous Baxa art at it's worst, try and find a copy of Truckin' Turtles. So bad I almost...

I'm soooooo hoping that the static saves didn't make it into 4e. The above example would make me cry.

I remember when the 3.0 preview pamphlets came out, there wasn't much in the line of playable rules included. Doubt they'd deviate too far.