Search results

Something I am enduringly curious about. My guys (even the best roleplayers amongst them) tend to stick to male characters when making PCs. On investigation, it seems that this is less because they are uncomfortable playing women, and more because they want to avoid the stereotype of male gamers...

I can't really see why you would need rules to play a non-powered (by whatever standards the system considers normal for player characters) character. Just grab a character, and take away all their special stuff, and have fun being a mechanical cripple. Is there some nuance I'm missing? Sort of...

I view XP as a reward for group success, which in itself is a bit vague. Usually it means "you succeeded at what you were trying to do", but that might involve lots of approaches - avoiding a trap rather than disarming it, negotiating a truce rather than fighting a battle, coming up with their...

Kind of horrifying how much you can "shake up" almost all of these just by involving a girl. When was the last time you met a fat knowledgeable bartender who was a lady? Used a monster that was female, other than "female only" monsters like succubi? Had the guard who came to arrest the party be...

I'd like to support my one local brick-and-mortar store, but RPG products suffer a crazy huge markup here. Between import, shipping and retailer markup, hardcover RPG books run me $70-$100 if I buy from a real life store, ad that's just not a realistic option. Hence I go after PDFs now whenever...

Chaotic Good hell yeah! Only if each individual person is good for good's sake, can we abolish the stifling laws and live freely! Hey, it's an ideal. Doesn't mean it has to be practical >3>; For antagonists I love a tasty lawful-neutral antivillain.

It's a sunken temple which I assume is part of the previous civilisation whose ruins remain around Seaquen - in practicality it's a way to get hints about the Aquiline Heart, and in my game I used it to dispense info a bout the Torch too (because I put myself in the difficult position of the...

He can't use all weapons either, but that's not a good enough reason to give him free proficiency with all Superior weapons. And it's not as if they put any new work into the PHB to replace it, those lazy bastards. Explain to me how Robin Hood is a guardian of the woodlands who commands wild...

If you insist on building it with the Ranger class, then yeah... but if you don't want to do any of those three things, you should be building your "ranger" with another class, and I don't see that as being a problem because the system is fine with you doing that. I know lol, just imagine a...

Oh, a bow Chaladin! That's quite a nice idea actually, and there's no reason it would be less mechanically-effective than your average Chaladin. If somebody wanted to play that in my game, I would probably make a "weapliment" bow for them, using the bard-targeted Songbows as a template, to...

Actually, you are being blatantly hypocritical, as we will see with basic logic. You make these claims: a) I can't be class A because my concept doesn't fit with its fluff. b) I should be class B, even though my concept doesn't fit with its fluff. Claim A is only valid if flavour is law. Claim...

It's great to see somebody say a thing like that :D I was pretty heavily invested in 3.5 myself, so I was really sceptical of 4e, but I made a point of trying it anyway because I wanted to be fair. But even now, as an advocate of 4e, I would still play a 3.5e/Pathfinder game if another player in...

As I said, one difference is that 3.5 pally's approach makes it unusable for anything that doesn't suit its flavour, and since the flavour and mechancs are one big pile it's difficult to sort out which is which. Thus, the 3.5 pally is only good for making the one exact one paladin archetype that...

Not a problem for me either. My opinion is that it's achieved better in 4e mainly because of the clear lines between mechanics and thematics; the system openly acknowledges that these two are not the same, and that the latter can be changed arbitrarily as long as the former remains constant...

Okay, that makes more sense. Valiant Strike doesn't require valiance per se, but it's only useful in situations where your actions seem to display valiance; ergo, it encourages actions that, unless you choose to impose some other concept on them, express the default flavour? I think you have...

Tell all you like, but I wanted to play a heavily-armoured divine tank warrior, not a hide-clad primal striker, so your orders are inadequate as well as pompous. Moreover, if flavour is a rule as you seem to think, you shouldn't have advised me to play a barbarian instead, because my character...

(Forgive the late response, I tried to send this yeasterday morning, but the site had gone down and I was not about to be thwarted by that >:\) Schwaaaaa? That's a totally made-up idea. You can roleplay your valiant strike however you dang well please, fluff or no fluff - this is sometimes...

Perhaps oddly, I'm glad to hear that. I loved that in book 3, especially, there were so many different sources for the heroes to get most of the same info from, and they all had somewhat different perspectives on it. It's all well and good to have an exposition NPC they're made to meet, but...

Hard to say, I've never read the 3.5 version so I have no way of knowing whether they're new additions ^^; Laurabec is the eagle rider who's sticking up for the refugees, might be 4e-only since she's self-contained in book 3, and her central connection is a skill challenge. The Lyre itself is...

This indeed. Compared to the old "subraces" list, elf and eladrin seem positively austere - and besides, I have always rather thought that "snotty magic socialite" and "unwashed foresty hippie" were completely at odds with each other, so I was quite pleased to see then become definitively...