Search results

And incidentally you can do pretty good with Love, Insulin and a Good Knife.

Those bins were something else man, and the Lego models were impressive enough, but if you think I liked you for any other reason that SandwichCon, you are delusional ;)

Agreed. With the exception of a very few products (Ben Durbin's stuff pop's to mind) most 3pp "players options" books in 3e were little more than list of power-ups. I don't know how many of your recall the latter part of 3E's time, but a large chunk of DM's just flat out refused to allow 3pp...

I've been getting a blank screen "Database Error" for about a week now.

10 years!? Good lord I'm old :eek: Well, thanks for everything Eric, my life would be very, very different if you hadn't set up shop here. I've met some of the best people here that I've ever had the privilege to know. Strangely, many of us started off as enemies ;) Go for 10 more Russ.

I totally disagree. Making a map is my first step when creating a new setting and, for the most part, it triggers my imagination rather than limiting it.

That's me as well. I've never really done more than the following... Prepare a setting fairly extensively Play a session. Review PC actions that would affect the setting. Adjust the setting accordingly Repeat from step 2 The vast majority of the work of DM'ing is (for me) done before we ever...

Yeah, that's not going to happen.

Ok, I don't really need to post nbow other than to say that I agree with Malkav. Though honestly, most of my bad RPG experiences revolve around Vampire LARPers playing Malkavians ;)

I've had a couple of players like that in the past, and thought they were really valuable resources to the game. But as with any gaming resource, I take what I want and leave the rest.

How did Kyrie--an apprentice Baker--get to Vaarsuvius' master's domain in the 20 or so minutes since V left?

How did Redcloak "recognize" what he was right away in Start of Darkness then?

In my case, because I have no clue what archetype from fantasy fiction /Myth they are trying to emulate.

I've only played a Fighter and a Barbarian and of the two I prefer Barbarian. Fighters just don't seem to have much "Fight" in them.

I'm not sure how O-Chul manages to run around so agilely with those giant brass balls

No, I haven't. The original post posed that situation, and I was addressing it...as I have already mentioned. I'll need to see a link for that as I did nothing of the sort. I said that I didn't feel a game that was enjoyable to the players needed to change for the sake of new players. It's...

And you chose to do so by quoting my post. In much the same fashion as I I did. Except I was addressing the quote I used. You were talking about something else. You pretty clearly understand why a person would quote a post he was addressing so i find this odd. I intend nothing of the sort...

Sure you can ask, but if you read the OP, you shouldn't need to. Here's the relevant quotes from post #1 So I I don't think it's fair to say I was "reducing"anything by addressing the OP's own commentary. Hey, by all means go on and keep your back up if you think that's what's going to get...

If I have to change my game of Cops and robbers into Tea Party to get certain people to play, I think I would prefer they didn't play. "Building the Hobby" isn't my job. I've got a waiting list for my game that's in the double digits. Enjoying the hobby is my job. If it were to change from...

Agreed 100% One of the few things that held my interest in the lead up to 4E's release was that the new design would make characters more important than their gear (which hadn't been the case for in 3E since it's inception). The "problems" that the OP lists are, to me, features.