Search results

Same exact feelings here. I find the fact that it follows me and obscures text pretty annoying. I can live with it, obviously, but just giving feedback. (It doesn't help that I'm not at all interesting in mixing websites and strongly dislike cross-contamination, so I don't like the social...

Alrighty, we got another session in. We played for about 5½ hours, with some minor interruptions, but the session was still very substantial and productive. Since the player of the Wizard bowed out, I did transition the PC out this session, and worked in the new NPC until we get a fourth player...

It's two pages in the combat section. They basically learn the ones important to their character concepts (shield users might know Block inside and out), and only reference the rules when they really need to do something specific ("I wish I could blind him," "I need to push him over the edge...

I agree with this. In my RPG, everyone gets a certain amount of TP (technique points) to spend each round based on their base attack. So, somebody like a pure sage and many mages will have about 0-1 per round, while a high level warrior might have 7+ (up to around 13+/round if they're max level...

No, it's not. Yes, it does.

If I understand answer number 3, it's is still immensely disappointing. It's such a low bonus ("I'm specialized, so I succeed 10% more often than you do... Whooo....") that it's almost meaningless. Is it a start? Yep. But I'd much prefer more than a 10% difference between people of similar...

Haven't read the thread. Can anyone tell me when it became another 3.5 LFQW thread? I have a mild interest in reading everything before it, and no interest in any part of it.

I've done this with a couple solos that I've homebrewed in my campaign. The first one was from the first session. It was an orc necromancer / ice wizard, who had set up four ice mirrors that he could use to attack through, summon minions, or teleport to. The PCs destroyed one (since he kept...

Wow, how cool is it that this campaign was enough to make you finally register? That's awesome! Makes me feel like I'm running a good game. Also makes me wonder who else might be keeping tabs on this, out there, in the real world... And to think, I've expressed many concerns and critiques of 4e...

Cool stuff. Epic tier sounds so different in PC capabilities than Heroic tier (my PCs are only level 6). It'll be interesting to see the progress. Again, it was a nice write-up of the fight. How do you think they would have done without the escalation die? I know you don't use the expertise...

The Monk was saying that the spell was obviously faulty, as he, as a person, "obviously is not evil." The PCs (and players) knew that the spell wasn't faulty, and they knew that this Monk acted in a way which earned him the Evil alignment. However, the debate for whether or not what the Monk did...

Ha, I guess?

Saw that coming, but heard it from one of you guys before, too. So, ha, I guess?

I really dislike those actors, so the second movie would probably be better, in my opinion (never saw the third). You never know, though. Not that it's happening anyway.

Sounds good to me. I basically picked skills that I thought would complement the party, while also not stepping on any PC toes. I think the damage is good, the control is pretty decent, and the side of leader every encounter will be appreciated by the party. All typed up as a monster so it's...

As much as I like Community, this movie sounds terrible. It doesn't help that I dislike all the actors he named, but the premise just sounded terrible, too.

The Lawful Evil Monk I gave as an example did almost exactly this -though he dismissed the spell more than argued about it. To him, the magic was obviously faulty; he lived his life tracking down murderers, rapers, thieves, etc., and punishing them. He hurt those who hurt innocent people. In his...

That makes sense to me. I see alignment as a distinctly D&D thing, and when I'm not playing it, I don't want it. When I do use alignment, I also tend to do the "is Good actually good?" thing when I'm running the campaign. Yeah, you'd think that it'd go one way or the other. Either you play as I...

That was how my campaign handled it, yes. And if groups want this type of moral debate, then awesome! They still get it. If the group doesn't want that debate, then alignment could potentially facilitate that sort of play, too. Just say "it's agreed that in this D&D campaign, good and evil...

I don't want to wade into this... clustermumble of a debate, but I did want to say that while the alignments played a big part in the latter half of my long-running 3.5 game, dealing with alignments caused no debates (though it did cause people to ask for clarifications). However, on a number...