Search results

Crowning example from movies: Ghostbusters 1 had some "slime" in it. Venkman got some on his hand and wiped it off on library vards. Later a ghost puked some up on him. It was funny. Ghostbusters 2 saw that... and now there's rivers of slime. Oceans of slime. The entire NYC sewer system is...

I'm sold. I've got 2 close friends, now in their 40's who played 3E for a while (as their first RPG) and were like, "meh". Then I introduced them both independently to old-school D&D and they were like, "Wow! Now this is what D&D should be like!" Personally, now I can't do without (a) Feats...

Of course you're both right. To be narrowly technically correct perhaps Frank meant "The player however does not get the right to pick the NPC's Skills, feats, gear, domains, gods or Spells Known."

Love: The "points of light" campaign setting emphasis. Good idea. Hate: The collapsing of magical and non-magical classes. And most everything else.

Gygax presented full AD&D stats for Conan in Dragon #36 (April 1980), at a variety of different ages (15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70).

Had me... ... Lost me.

I got it. On tvtropes.org, this is basically the same as the "Power Creep Power Seep" problem: Power Creep Power Seep - Television Tropes & Idioms

That's sort of ridiculous. High-skill (or even moderate-skill, or anyone I've ever played with) players will not "sieze up or panic". Edit: Also, throw in some ear seekers and rot grubs while you're at it. Make sure the PCs are informed in advance that such things exist.

I agree, that's a great key game decision to make the players decide. Uh, what did you say?

Well, yeah, I'd agree with that. Or at least it's too complicated a game. Anytime a game wanders in a direction where people have to distinguish at great length between "in-game" and "out-of-game" terms and numbers having different meanings, it's gone more complicated than I care to deal with...

Wandering monsters are the solution to this problem. Make the players balance more-search-time vs. avoid-the-wandering-monsters.

Strongly agree. Also, I couldn't deal with the War Machine because it's got lots of wonky effects that don't resemble how normal D&D opponents would match up. Giants should herd any of the giant/dire animals that have appeared in D&D over time. I like giant goats.

And of course some of us would be happy to say you're returning to the actual core since you're recreating OD&D/1E hit dice and attack levels for giants. :) The real screwup happened in the 2E MM when they boosted the hit dice levels originally (whoever that was). 3E did overlook fixing that...

(Deleted)

Like all great gaming ideas, they are "both". Did not vote.

Obviously you're playing 3.5 with its even-more-broken Power Attack rule. There's part of your problem right there. ;)

Of course, you've picked on a particularly broken detail in 3E. Giant stats are pretty much broken powerful (if you compare them to other creatures of the same size; there's a history of 2E->3E sequential power creep to blame for that). If you fix giants and dragons in particular, there's not...

No-board has the advantages of being (a) quicker, (b) cheaper, (c) easier to get into. You should read the examples of play in Basic/1E. It seemed to work okay there. At the time, reusable battlemaps and cheap minis were not on the market, so I suppose you could say that such accoutrements...

Pesonally, that's about the strongest argument for exactly why I like the crafting rules as written. That's precisely the effect I would want out of them.

Yeah, if the table is the major problem then I'd go with just saying you turn a maximum HD of your level + (d20+Cha - 10)/3, which is effectively the same thing.