Search results

Too old? Dunno...I used to say that the average of being older is that you only have to keep up, the rest has to catch up. :lol: A bit silly of course...who would want to catch up on the fantasy literature such an old fart as I used to read. ;) Like Count Mouseferatu, I started with the Red...

Huh? Come on...there's plenty more in there. :) - Monsters not using the same rules as the player characters? Classic. - "Points of Light" setting? Very classic. - The whole "chaos vs. order" dichotomy you can see in the new extraplanar setup? Classic. - Astral Sea with Domains floating around...

Uhm...not to be snarky or anything...but 4E is all about making people change how they play D&D, and so far nobody chalked that up to a failure if the rule..hard to do since they aren't in print yet. ;) (Friendly tease :) ). The thing is, for some reason the "basic assumption" that was built...

Well, how about not slaughtering those goblin guards that roam the perimeter, or those goblin raiders left behind without their wolves, but capture them instead and interrogate them about the Bone Hill complex in order to gain more recent information about what you are going to face? Bribe them...

One funny thing about those "standard assumptions" is that they don't tend towards this whole "very high magic" setting that somehow is painted in this thread (as well as those about magic shops and other weird things). Lets take a look at the lowest real [Death] effect I could find...Slay...

Wow...thanks for those answers. Seriously. They explain quite a lot about this hobby of mine, and the people who play it.

About to the same extent that you consented to facing this wizard's other spells, I'd say? Or not?

Well, you know...you CAN be kicked to the curb by somebody and hence stop using that somebody's products, but still care for that somebody and be hurt by the whole process. Okay, maybe not you you, but general "you" can. And apparently, a lot of those yous are posting here. I think that is...

Well, you definitely made me curious about those two games. I heard some things about Dogs in the Vineyard and am not sure the setting really draws me in, but Burning Empire is a blank slate for me. Thanks. :)

Ah, right...so if a DM pulls out a save-or-die enemy for his adventure..oh let me just quote, your words are better... ...but as soon as I use my "DM powers" to offer the players ways to protect themselves before the encounter, or reward them, e.g. for luring the opponent into an area where...

Me? I don't really give much of a damn about what WotC is doing. I'm on this board, and in this forum especially, because I like to discuss D&D as a whole, which includes the direction it will be going in the future, and my opinions on that. If nothing else, it gives me a deeper understanding of...

The point in this context is probably that the players actually have to get a chance to be able to choose to face the save-or-die threat, or not. Which in turn means, of course, the DM having to give them opportunities to hear about that threat first, either by research, rumors, insider...

Irrefutable logic won't sway anybody here, mostly because what is perfectly logical to one is only a subjective point of view to another. There you go again, assuming stuff about people you simply don't know. That joke gets old quick. There's plenty people here arguing in favour of save-or-die...

That a trick question? :lol: Come on, I'm not saying WotC shouldn't behave like a capitalistic corporation. All I'm saying is that the disappointed customer might not take solace in the fact that the company that he has bought stuff from in the past and that has (in his eyes) left him behind...

Well, basically that is one (of many potential) ways of shouting "Hey WotC, I was once your customer, but you're going in directions I don't want to go and producing stuff I don't like, so here I'm telling you you're losing my money! Care, dammit!" :)

Hah, that's actually funny, seeing that a LOT of those gamers that once were active customers and then stopped buying WotC products did this because they felt WotC stopped listening to their opinion and making products that THEY want...and that feel even more ignored now, because WotC doesn't...

Maybe because the point discussed (and that he related to) was the question of the (current and future) success of WotC as a publisher, and he posted as a grumpy and dissatisfied customer of WotC to point out that there are customers like him who are disappointed enough by the recent products of...

Uhm..is this the WotC message board here? I thought that was renamed "Gleemax" and had some weird color scheme now? Damn, must have taken the wrong turn, I thought this was a board for D&D discussions. :confused:

Thanks Nifft..is pretty insightful, and a nice and easy to remember system. :D Funny, it overlaps with an idea I had about Fate and Luck points, with Fate points essentially granting a character an automatic success on one action they wanted to attempt, and Luck points either adding 1d6 to one...

Heh, I know what you were trying to do, and that your numbers are just an example for what you mean with "equal probabilities" of deaths from damage vs. death effect..and I agree, as I said. Same goes for special treatment of certain monsters and effects. :) My post came out of my own...