Search results

I have everything on that list. From this selection, my vote goes to Ptolus.

I never heard of any conversions. I think the power curve doesn't quite match. With more than 100 published adventures for DSA, there doesn't seem a need for conversions, either. Keep also in mind that nearly all DSA players use more or less the same world, depending on the edition.

Funny enough, that's just a repetition of the role of humans in a dangerous world, just one size smaller.

You can also play a human child _with_ all the groovy cultural crunch bonuses. If you use cultural bonuses.

Humans don't need an archetype. Humans are humans. No need for a definition or an archetype. Hobbits were the personification of some kind of child-like innocence in LotR. That's fine for a novel, but doesn't really translate that well to a game with ever changing characters. To have a strong...

I guess the problem is that this looks specifically human. If there isn't any additional twist that we don't know about, halfings as riverfolk is a non-niche.

Here, from the day of the announcement. Yes, disappointing, indeed.

Sneaky, those WOTC designers! Living under a hill and smoking weed as halfling rebellion against the boring life on a river! Brilliant!

Well, they are bigger now. They don't bite your ankle anymore, but rather your butt.

Cool. I love the Player's Guide. It gives a good impression of what the setting is about.

Middle of page 3 ;).

Just a note: Dawnforge is nothing like Morningstar. There isn't even any remote resemblance. Dawnforge is more like a "best of your favorite campaign settings" thing. Doesn't help you with the history aspect, though. There are several Scarred Lands Gazetteers, and they are only short...

Weird statement. "I don't know what I'm talking about, but I trust in my uninformed opinion, anyway." Then again, that's probably human nature. Nothing against Eberron, of course. Even though it's not my cup of tea, I concur that it has its moments.

Yup. Even more kender than before.

Whatever I think of the rule itself, I don't think that teaching it will be difficult. Actually, it's very simple to mark the threatened fields, because they are all in a straight line.

Perhaps, thumbscrews will help :D? One reason I can imagine is that he doesn't want to experience any rules confusion. If he continues DMing 3.5, he might be afraid of mixing up rules when playing 4.0 at the same time. On the other hand, wait till you are actually playing 4.0. Things might...

Well, Wolfspider quoted the rule. It's basically the elimination of diagonal movement. You would get the same result by only taking straight steps.

The (Complete) Book of Eldritch Might was also groundbreaking. And Malhavoc Press has usually better editing than WotC - a rare trait in 3rd party companies. His stuff is not always completely balanced, but it's playtested and usually worth looking at. And that's important to me :).

That's also the abbreviation used on the website for the cover illustration (BOXM_Coverart.jpg). I have more problems with the name per se. Experimental Might? So, maybe might? Maybe failure? I hope this is not a sign of a lack of self-confidence regarding the contents of the book ;).

Now we know it. 4e is the revenge of the gelatinous cubes! Down with circles! j/k Funny that it's the opposite solution to the one in SWSE.