Search results

I don't know who'd win, but I'd love to watch. On television from the safety of my own home of course.

That's an interesting thought but I would go a step further. You could have a small number of broad skills, and then specialty skills within them. When using a specialty skill you could use either your specialty skill modifier or 1/2 your broad skill. So if you have 5 ranks in the handle...

Unless your group has a house-rule, once you multi-class out of paladin you can't ever return.

I was once in a party that was done in by a 5' wide "chasm". The DM wouldn't let us take 10 and we all fell to our doom. Come on, I can hop a 5' chasm with no effort and I'm 40lb overweight. I don't play with that DM anymore.

I'd say that would be the campaign with the wanderer/fighter/duelist who managed to make 11th level before killing a NON-PC, a one-handed (thank you bag of devouring) human then bugbear then elf fighter (reincarnate followed by wish), a priest who spent 2000 years as a statue, a fat human...

Popular usage trumps technical accuracy. And in this case the popular definition predates the scientific one.

That's an extremely skewed way to look at it. By that same logic, a statement that only 6% of respondants were postitively influenced by the actual game is every bit as accurate and paints a far bleaker picture.

I was excited VERY early on. By very early on I mean when they announced 4e. My enthusiasm dwindled immediately when they started letting out the details. I think it's a bad system, and it's doomed. Look at the poll here: the haters still hating and the lovers still loving doesn't say...

Just throw out the whole cross-class skill bologna. The game runs much better without it.

That's what I normally do, but I find that most players still treat them as vague concepts. My hope is that if I create a mythology specifically for my campaign setting they'll give it more thought. That's the way I see standard DND gods. The only thing that makes them different from other...

To me that's patently boring. What purpose do gods fill if all the natural laws are the same as in the real world. I much prefer a godess' tears to precipitation. Besides, who says the gods answer questions directly.

I don't mind romance as long as it stays in the background. I will not roleplay a player's love interest. Creepy.

Most DND pantheons seem dead. Hey look, it's so and so. She's the godess of rain. That's as far as they really go. Gods are created and just assigned portfolios that follow a theme and we move on. I find this unsatisfying, and I have a hard time believing I'm the only one. Mythologies exist for...

I'm surprised there isn't a single vote for ranger considering the number of rangers I see in play. They must be everyone's second favorite class. I gotta go with fighter, I need feats.

This is a great idea. I'm planning on moving soon and clearing up my old RP stuff would also help make the move easier.

The problem I have with scholars isn't the variety of spells to choose from, it's that they basically know 1 spell per level. So I guess Thoth Amon is about level 500 according to Conan D20.

It's mainly about how worlds are presented. There's nothing about Dragonlance that makes it inherently a poor fit for 3e, but the 3e books were just god awful and often a radical departure. They especially fumbled the Solamnic Knights.

It seems like converting from Ars Magica to D20 would be a lot of work, especially considering the raw power that can be accomplished in Ars Magica. That system is very easy to break.

Conan is frickin awesome! There are a couple problems though. My group flat out banned crushing grip, possibly the most broken feat in d20 history with the possible exception of Swashbuckling Adventures' unarmored defense. One quibble I do have is the scholar. Thoth Amon is described as...

Oil isn't a weapon proficiency. Some classes either were or were not allowed to use flasks of oil or poisons, but there is no correlating weapon proficiency. I believe the oil rules are in the DMG, but I could be wrong.