Search results

Don't forget: taking their stuff. That's sometimes even more important.

It happens, don't sweat it. In the 60 or so levels of D&D I've DMed, there's only one instance where I felt sorry for a TPK. I played the opposition intelligently, they sent a couple of assassins with an Ogre Mage to scout where the party went for rest (it was a big dungeon, so they assaulted...

Harry Potter is good D&D PC material; much more pissed of for losing his stuff (Wand in this case), than he was for losing Mad-Eye, a party member. Sounds like a D&D character to me :cool:

That was a nice touch in the series. Voldemort is a pretty grand name; I always wondered how wizards end up with such names. Is somebody born 'Saruman' or 'Voldemort'? It's much better explanation that Tom took it from somewhere. BTW, before his wizarding days Gandalf was Buck Johnson, and...

I answered probably not. If people who eat it didn't know it was once a human, then no. Just mix em up in the general chicken population and you're good to go. Or better yet, make nuggets. "Can you show us where the human is in this nugget?"

Oh. That makes it all right. NOT! :p

I didn't see redemption for any of the Malfoys; they only changed tune because they fell on Voldys bad side, due to repeated failures as Death Eaters.

Strawman much? :confused: Hussar was just saying that a player might not be interested in campaign world beyond what his character experiences. You somehow go off on a tangent that then the player wouldn't care about anything. Nobody was arguing that. As for Eberron and FR, well, the thing...

In more generic terms most DMs aren't great DMs. A bit like driving a car: everyone thinks they're better than the average driver, but actually aren't. (So, it's a good thing that D&D can be great fun even with a below average DM.) And that's so true what you said about the prose. Anyone...

IMO that article wasn't even that bad of an advice. Great for a beginning DM who might've missed some key social dynamics in roleplaying games. I don't agree with all that was said in the article, but acknowledging player expectations can't be bad advice. The 'sad' fact of life is that players...

I understand what you're saying, that's realistic etc.. but I can imagine that it would get tiresome pretty fast. I wouldn't advocate players knowing the MM front to back either, but somekind of compromise. Make assumptions about centaurs, yes, but probably don't blurt out their dietary choices...

"Um, the cleric casts Remove Blindless on you, but you still can't see the 'nymph'. In MY campaign the 'nymphs' blinding beauty is not actually blinding per se, you just can't summon willpower to watch a 560 year old transvestite in full drag. Am I cool or whut?" "Okay, you move behind the...

That's actually a good rule, IMO. I don't even know any more why I came to the Shar worshippers 'defence'. Those who play evil characters (okay, that's not a given, you could be neutral and worship Shar) and worship evil gods usually just use it as an excuse to play jerk characters. I don't...

Practical to certain degree. If I describe a herd of centaurs approaching, I wouldn't punish players if they assume them to be peaceful sylvan creatures. The characters have probably lived in that world for their lives, and it's not unreasonable to know about centaurs. Would anyone expect...

That's that silver platter thinking I support in no way, shape or form. PCs in my games get zip without suffering for it. Even potions of healing. :p

There are ways to keep something secret from your enemies, while accessible to those "in the know". It might take a little work, but should be doable. RL is full of such examples. If somebody creates a resistance fighter for a WW2 game, it would pretty much suck if he couldn't find the...

If the question was reversed, I'd reverse my answer too. And smack the player for good measure, too :cool:

I wonder how it really went down. We've only heard one side. People usually don't express themselves as strongly as they're told to have done in secondhand accounts. My philosophy applies to situations where a player says "Can I do X?", not when he asks "Can I not do Y?". It just feels stupid...

What kangaroos have to do with religion?

Wasn't there a trick in a RL religion that was persecuted almost 2000 years ago that followers identified each other by scribbling something on sand with their foot when talking? Just sayin if above is true (my memory is hazy), identifying likeminded people discreetly wouldn't even require...