Search results

My campaigns tend to meander the importance of those four things, depending on the capabilities of the PCsand he desires of the players. Early on its character first in order to cement the party, then later Action as they want to make names for themselves or simply kick some ass and take names...

It interests me ... I might buy it, but I want to check it out first. But I might.

I find it an interesting exercise to see if these things CAN be modeled in Dnd; but I prefer to use pre-establisehed rules, as close to core as I can get. But I guess that's neither here nor there.

I'm with you there. I own a buttload of cool GURPS support books, and never really had any intention of using them for playing GURPS. They're just neat to read.

First: are you suggesting that the holy deals damage to anything othere than lower-plane denizens and undead? I could see it hurting creatures from the plane of fire, and a reduced amount to those from earth, but not so much material plane folk. Savage species: there are arms of the naga on...

I would imagine that it would be reasonable for the same to be true, regardless of where exactly(planewise) the outsider is from.

That's cool. Tailor it to your taste. I'm just giving suggestions. Jhaelen's are pretty good if you've got the books.

Unless you're playing 3.0, in which case it's damage and does stack. So, 3.0 or 3.5? Edit: No, nevermind that. Apparently I'm an idiot, because 3.0 gives an enhancement penalty(??), not damage. I was sure I'd seen it printed as damage somewhere,though ... was it errata'd?

From your OP it sounds like this has(or will) come up in your game. I agree with your supposition of the officail ruling, and agree about it slighting the class. If you would like a fix, consider a marginally magical gauntlet that may be enchanted and would then transfer its enchantment to the...

30. Continue playing those 3.x campaigns because the PCs are on the verge of some uber-wierdness involving the aberrent stuff form Lords of Madness(woo!)

What's wrong with that? Personally, I find myself playing 1st level characters more often than epic level ones(10% - 20% of the time versus never), and I like them to be cool; or at least look it. Unless , of course, by 'cool', you mean badass in which case, yeah, you've got a point. But then...

I'm apprehensive. There's still so much I want to do with 3.x which won't get done if 4e turns out to be awesome; but then, if it sucks, then while sticking with my current version will be fine(I dont' buy new books very often anyway), it will no longer be supported. It will be kind of neat to...

How about 4sshat?

When I run I drop the idea of cross class skills. Too much bookkeeping for too little gain.

Many, many, more deaths in 3.x than either 1e or 2e.

I bet Patrick Stewart would throw down a pretty righteous paladin. Christopher Lloyd would likely play a pretty kickin' wilder. Queen Latifah ripping it up as a monk. Samuel Jackson, Bruce Campbell; clerics. I'd like to see Jeannine Garofalo play a rogue. For some reason I think to myself...

"Vengeance" - +2 unholy scythe "Defender" - +2 holy scythe, created from "Vengeance" "Dragonaxe" - originally +2 greataxe, over time was upgraded to a +3 Flaming greataxe "Numion" - titanium +2 unholy greatsword "Razorfang" - +3 dagger of wounding ... that's all I can think of right now

For a while I've wanted to make a wuxia-flavoured psychic warrior using feats like Up the Walls and Psionic Leap; or possibly an Elan monk would work better(psionic feats would still be available).

I agree. Me too. I also wouldn't mind a magic system that wasn't based on the idea of resource management(x spell slots of a per day/spell points per day) but instead risk or opportunity cost.

I think I have your answer Use the corpse creature template found on p185 in the BoVD after the pseudonatural template. It can be added to any nonundead, nonconstruct, nonplant corporeal creature. Outsiders are fine, and the resulting creature is undead. Is this what you're looking for?