Search results

Such as the creatures that appeared in the 2e Monstrous Compendium, Appendix Three: Forgotten Realms that had originally appeared in one of the core 1e monster books (i.e., Monster Manual, Fiend Folio and Monster Manual II). There's more than a small number of them. Why had these "core"...

Uh, Githyanki are in the MM (3.5).

Pretty much any of the critters in the Forgotten Realms books that used to be in the 1st ed. "core" monster books. I never understood why a lot of "core" creatures suddenly got dumped into FR as their "home" when 2e was published; 3e should have put them right back where they came from.

Just curious: where is the Antarctica office of WOTC located, exactly? :) (I can well believe that people currently living there would play a lot of stuff like M:tG and D&D, though!)

But what is it doing in a Forgotten Realms book?

Um, no; no, it's still very funny. The funniest part was the completely misplaced over-confidence of the team; Roy's grumbling about railroading is just icing on the cake, since Rich demonstrated that Miko's victory was neither implausible or impossible. Lots of funny stuff still to come...

In theory, by telling them that if the GM learns about it "after the fact", then it never happened in the first place. They had an interesting shared dream where, for some reason, they believed that they blew the place up ... but it was only a dream. That's the theory. In reality, I'd never...

I read somewhere just recently -- I think it's in the FAQ -- that the most recently published version of a spell (or feat) is the "authoritative" version. So if a spell is published in two (or more) books, whichever book has the most recent publication date has "the" version of the spell to...

There has never been, and never will be, a game company that will satisfy such an unreasonable level of expectation. At least, not one that will last long enough to publish more than a couple of books. Fortunately, such a game company doesn't need to exist, precisely because it is so...

I second the recommendation for Thieves' World, lots of potential for different sorts of characters. There's hardly any faction in the city that's "obviously evil" for everyone else to oppose; it's really more a matter of deciding whose side you're on -- if anyone's! I haven't had a close look...

Our playing area is covered with a sheet of transparent plastic, and we just write on it with erasable markers, setting up initiative lists on the fly, tracking spell durations etc.

Can we get an explanation for why you asked it?

For me, "old-fashioned AD&D with the worst flaws edited out" is D&D 3.5. ;) I have absolutely no interest in any system that begins with the assumption that a game more like AD&D used to be is a good idea. If it works for you, terrific. The point of gaming is to have fun. I could not have...

Well, it seems to me to be a highly pointless and arbitrary poll, and the real answer is that I have about another half-dozen or so fantasy RPG systems sitting on my bookshelves that I would use before I'd use any of the above. But, since you put a (metaphorical) gun to my head, I chose Ars...

Well, I wasn't paying that close attention to who was saying what; but since you bring it up, yes, aggressively denying that you're being aggressive is aggressive. :) What I don't get is why you (or anyone else) would be looking for reactions. "I won't buy Product X. Discuss." My reaction...

Do you have a relevant rules quote to disprove the statement in the FAQ, or do you just have a different opinion? If you want to know who's "right" for the game you run, the answer is "you", of course. If you want to know who's "right" in the sense of "conforming to the printed rules", then...

Oh, there's plenty of room for all sorts of settings. What works for one DM is poison for another. It's silly to think that one is "superior" to any of the others. What I think is weird in this thread, though, are the people who don't want to buy the Wilderlands set aggressively defending...

You missed an option in the poll -- I have played prior editions of D&D, but I've played other RPGs more (much more) than I have played previous editions.

You're joking, right? Gimli was all about the axe.

Put me up there with the "no way" crowd. Any group of gamers who I would feel comfortable and happy gaming with would already agree with me that AD&D2 is not a good choice of gaming system, and could suggest many other alternatives to use instead. I guess the question to ask here is "why...