Search results

I've been thinking lately that many people experienced a very strong, gut level "Do. Not. Want." from 4e, and it seems to not always be just a reflexive "anything different is bad!" response. The uncanny valley makes some sense -- to me, at least.

Best to Fru and his loved ones.

I was initially looking forward to 4e. I had had a great time with 3.5e, but there had been enough very handy innovations and advancements that it seemed time to consolidate everything back into a revised core. I was a huge fan of the announced design team. I liked just about everything I had...

I had the exact same idea when I read Mike's entry. To me, this approach is a far more elegant solution to what's really a pretty simple problem.

Let's say you're a vampire, head of a large vampiric household. And you just know that a bunch of nasty adventurer types are on their way over to crash your bloodsucking party. And you're pretty sure they'll be packing lots and lots of death ward spells. What do you do, short of running away?

So based on the section "Wizards and Treasure" in the Treasure chapter of the 3.5e DMG, it appears that a wizard's spellbook value should be included as part of the total treasure value. But should a spellbook really be included in calculating NPC gear value? I thought there was a specific note...

Bingo. Thanks, Edheldur!

What I'm thinking of was an NPC rule. Otherwise, why ever give any NPC item creation feats?

I seem to remember reading a rule or suggestion somewhere that NPCs with magic item creation feats should get a discount when calculating the total value of their gear. A wizard with "Craft Wondrous Item," for example, should have an amulet of health +2 at 1/2 market price. Or something like...

That's a great freaking analogy.

I think, depending on how hard people were "testing" the system, they got very different results. Here are a few examples. Organized Play vs. Home Games. I haven't belonged to the RPGA in a l-o-o-o-n-g time, but based on the accounts I've read, it sounds like RPGA games play *very* differently...

I would suspect you'd see pretty different results on different boards. I don't know about the Gleemax boards (haven't been there for years), but RPGNet, for example, seems very bullish on 4e.

If you make a poll, make sure you allow for multiple responses, because no 1 reason really fits for me. It's the cumulative effect of a bunch of things -- inlcuing 1, 2, and 5.

Caveat: my thoughts are based only only a very cursory skim of the 4e MM. I really like how the gargoyle works now -- its ability is much more interesting than the old "only hit by magic weapons" or "DR 10/magic." I had the same response -- the cyclops were very disappointing. It's strange...

I think some people are missing the key point of the O.P. by focusing on optional/core distinction, which is really just a red herring. There are several fundamental problems with the core 3.x rules that can be fixed with a few relatively simple patches from optional sources. For me, here is...

"You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Wulf Ratbane again."

Thanks to Psion for the heads up -- I snagged it last night. What a great product, well deserving of all the accolades.

For me personally, my decline in interest was attributable to three separate factors: Price. For some reason $10 is a significant psychological inflection point for me. Anything $10 or less makes for a great impulse buy; anything over gets considerably more scrutiny. ($20, $50, and $100 are...

So far it looks like all the suggested starting adventures are set in the 1920s. Are there any recommended modern starter scenarios?

Actually, I don't think a list of "Complete XX" books makes a compelling case for your argument. Most of these books are terribly shoddy and well deserved their infamy. Now, I need to back up a little bit: I am not a 2e hater. I think it is easily the most unappreciated and unjustly hated of...