Search results

Exactly! It's just like Shadowrun predicted!

I agree. Probably as many people will play with Epic as played with the I in BECMI. The rules were fun to read and all, but we never really used them, although I'm sure there were groups who did. And, if I recall, they weren't in RC when it was released, so it must not have been a great seller.

Hmmm. No Simon Templar? I'm not sure what kind of rogue (based on the two samples) he'd be, but definitely a rogue.

I doubt it. It's very simple and easy to pick up stacking or other kinds of beads (such as those found at BeadsAndSupplies.com/) at any craft store or WalMart and you really don't need all *that* many different ones. Lets face it, there are a whole host of players who use Tokens in Iron Heroes...

I want the books, but my FLGS sells games at 30% off cover price. I really hate paying more than 70% of retail.

Uh huh.. I'm not all that old and I'm well aware of BECMI and RC... And, what you say is so fallacious as to be almost ludicrous, especially as BECMI was being released *concurrently* with AD&D and 2nd Edition, not to mention RC coming around when 2nd Edition was still out.. And a *whole...

Uh, yeah, whatever. 3.5 wasn't a 'new' version of the game, but an update of 3E. If 3.0 didn't have Barbarians or Monks in them *nobody would have known the difference* if they weren't in the 3.5 core books. According to your "argument", people *should* have been up in arms when 3.5 was...

Gee.. How about if the party was using, oh I don't know... teamwork? I know it'd be a stretch for most groups (it would be for mine, anyway), but, the characters should have *some* idea of how to work together even if the players don't.

Sorry, but it's not. Chess 4.0

Um, Merric. Chess has *always* been Anime: Shogi and Xiangqi.

Wow. I know I'd be finding a new game after the first example. I'd probably be finding a new one after the second too.

I can see being Pinned not allowing a Reflex save. Of course, that goes for the Pinner, too...

People seem to be getting *way* too hooked on 'alignment defining the character' than even the rules portray. If it were that way, there'd only be 9 different character types. Aligment is a guideline for a character's personality. Alignment shouldn't *be* the character's personality.

So, the offspring are bald security chiefs for neutral territories?

I can't agree that Paladins didn't shine in earlier editions, such as 1st and 2nd, mainly because the entry requirements were fairly steep. And lets face it, the better the stats you rolled were (making the character better overall to begin with), the more powerful classes you could choose for...

Heh, just like Brian from KoDT and the "Lotus" family...

As has been said, same thing that's always happened. Many times I've been in a group missing one of the 'key' roles, and well, the party just has to deal with it.

It makes much more sense to combine all perception skills into one, then have modifiers because of feats, talents, or other special situations. As it is, in 3.x, PCs can't smell *anything*, unless one has the Scent feat. And, forget about taste. All PCs (and monsters) can't actually taste...

The BoEF goes pretty well into detail on how to do *that*.... ::cough:: What?

Gloombunny isn't asking why it shouldn't work in heavier armor than light. Gloombunny is asking why it doesn't work *without* armor. Using your example, no armor should be more 'flexible' than light armor is.. after all, no armor allows more freedom of movement than even leather.. That said...