Search results

Only on the first round.

I kind of like the idea for the invisible stalker and water weird (although I still want some room for the oracular version from 3E). They really missed the boat on the elemental archons, though (and I'm not fond of the new name). An important part of elemental archons was the fact that they...

What, too much oregano for you? Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk 2

I voted for 4E slots; that said, I could work with a rule that said something like "you can attune X items, provided you can actually wear/use them all simultaneously".

You had best make the most of your 1E books before my enforcers show up to take them away. :P

I still think he wants to impose his playstyle on others.

As far as this thread goes, you're the only one who thinks ghouls are fine; in fact you (and *ONLY* you) seem to think they should be even more deadly. Where does that place your playstyle?

Well excuse me for not being a killer DM who judges a game's quality by the number of PC corpses it generates. "Wimpy ghouls"? "Any other padding of walls and dulling of blades"? And yet you insist you aren't guilty of "one true way-ism". I wonder if you even comprehend just how hostile you're...

...did I understand that correctly? Do you really consider yours the one and only legitimate playstyle?

No. That is how 3E worked. 4E actually called this out as an example of where the rules should give way to common sense. Edit: ninja'ed by TwinBahamut.

That's fine as an option. Not as mandatory, nor even as default.

Nope. TPK bait as a common foe is most definitely *not* a feature.

And if it does work that way, it fails to support *MY* playstyle, where such foes are dangerous but defeatable. (edit: and I see Paraxis beat me to it. D'oh.)

Personally, it would make more sense to me to have "Ravenloft" be pockets (or one large region) within a 4e-style Shadowfell. Of course, I'm more concerned with whether or not this new/old cosmology is built into the mechanics or not--I hope not; that was one complaint I had with 3.x.

It's not a case of despising magic. It's a case of despising the idea that magic is the source of all awesome--that only casters and supernatural creatures should be capable of epic feats. And correspondingly, the idea that anyone without magic should be a mere lackey or sidekick.

Nobody should be reduced to sidekick. Choosing to play one, fully-informed? Fine. Tricked into it by a ruleset built around some classes being inferior, but pretending that they aren't? Badwrongfun, IMHO.

Did you read the same writeup I did? The first page (detailing the dragon itself) has 1/3 of the page dedicated to a detailed description of its motivations and outlook, and about half of the second page (the lair and environs) is dedicated to exploration-pillar stuff and more interaction (who...

Because nobody should be reduced to being the sidekick. And what you recommend (ignoring class balance) does exactly that.

Alternatively, have the actual entries in alphabetical order, with each critter having a number of tags (humanoid, demonic, undead, shapechanger, silly, trap, whatever). In the front you have a series of tables by tag, each giving the name and page for any monsters with that tag.

On a more serious note, I would gladly be rid of the "gotcha" monsters (ear seeker and throat leech). Many of the rest have a reasonable place as environmental hazards. Also, I'm a little surprised that they didn't include mimics. Of all of the "trap" monsters, they seemed the most interesting...