Search results

Dear Gary, (And thanks for the permission to use the familiar; I'm something of a formalist when it comes to addressing those I consider my betters.) A minor question regarding something I recently uncovered while researching an article on how to get the most out of DMing the D1-3 series. In...

I must concur. And, in the process, reinforce the point that the two terms are by no means mutually exclusive. Just because I played OD&D doesn't mean I gave up 15 mm Napoleonics or War In Europe. Thulcondar "SPI Died For Our Sins"

I was wondering how many of the DMs here used any of the "named" NPCs from published campaign worlds, and if you did, how? Tenser, Mordenkainen, Dalamar, Elminster, etc. They have relatively set personalities and histories. Has anyone brought them into play with their PCs? I'm curious how it...

I assumed he was talking about the conflicts with the Horned Society, Bandit Kingdoms, and Iuz, with the Shield Lands standing as the bulwark, supported by Furyondy and Veluna. Sort of a Cold-War-era Balkans, with neither side willing to commit to overt aggression, but enough covert action and...

The Amazons of Greyhawk were well described in "Artifact of Evil" by our own EGG. I found Gord's attitude towards the men of Hardby somewhat interesting; kinda reminded me of the John Norman "men are natural dominants" stuff. But of course that was a reaction to the Hardby "women are natural...

Good lord... I have a dozen pristine keyboards in my closet. Contact me in PM and I would be honored to ship one out to you post-haste. Well worth not making the mistakes between "not" and "hot" when talking about the Amazons of Hardby. Such ambiguities we don't need!!

Oh, just busting your chops. Hence the smiley. :-)

Dear Mr. Gygax, Another couple of niggling Greyhawk questions, if you don't mind spending the time. Thanks in advance if you are able to do so. In the original folio edition of the WoG, in the timeline, there is a reference to the "Age of Great Sorrow" commencing in CY213. Can you give any...

I'll have you know it is the inalienable right of every grognard such as myself to grouse.

Except when they change the original in the process of upgrading. New levels, new rooms, etc. Do try to read the posts before you respond.

I am objecting to changes in the setting. Greyhawk, and its places, and personalities, and peoples, is cohesive no matter what rules set under which they are described. What I object to is the idea that because there is now a new set of rules, there is now somehow a license to change those...

There are several different points here (great response, btw), and I will address them separately... That's a fine objection. I will respond by saying that: a) I have indeed done many a home-brew campaign (one or two entirely on the fly), and b) There is a difference in using a cohesive...

Nor, apparently, decline an adverb. ;-)

Since I don't play 3.5, I haven't much seen the point. But I shall take your advice and take a look (although converting it all BACK to AD&D 1E is going to be a bear, methinks...).

If they were truly nothing more than updating the modules to the new rules set, I don't think I would have a problem with it. Changing some monster stats and magic item descriptions. No problem. In fact, it could probably be done in something the size of a Dragon article. But we all know that...

I disagree, to an extent. I am not a fan by any stretch of spoon-feeding the DM every scrap of information he or she might ever want; that's my major complaint about supplements like "Iuz the Evil" and "The Marklands". However, I think there's still room to fill in missing information that...

Oh, yikes, not Nitescreed... Ugh...

Google is not my friend this eve. Got a link? I would love to read that essay.

Oooh I like that. Consider it Viked.

Feh. I have most of the original mags.