Search results

Thanks guys. It makes sense now. I never really dug too deep into this part of the game. We'd always treated immunity like resistance but after reading this thread, and looking at relevant sections in the books, I tend to support DS's view.

Actually, I own the entire original Transformers series on DVD. They so rocked. It's been a few years since I watched them. PS - Sorry for going off topic guys. This was just too cool to ignore!

That's awesome! I never pegged you as a Transformers fan! Edit: IIRC, that episode had something to do with a knight and planar/time travel didn't it?

DS, Not sure if this is relevant but if you take no damage (because of immunity or somethign else) you still suffer additional effects. Also, I'm not sure that effects are classified the same as damage. Taking poison damage and getting pushed does not mean it is a poison based push. Edit...

DS, You are getting far too Sci Fi for this thread. Let me fix your quote for you: That's like saying Devastator isn't scary enough to Rodimus Prime, while forgetting HE JUST DESTROYED UNICORN. :D

RW, Just to add a comment to you MTG artists. I think that D&D has a lot of baggage with it - particularly how monsters should look. Even with MTG artists, the powers that be, likely would limit the changes to the monsters and prevent them from making something really cool. Plus, the MM's...

Cool pics RW! The first one is from 2e IIRC. I actually prefer that one and have not been a fan of the updated looks since then. Since then its lost it neck and looks like it needs to turn its whole body just to look around. Silly, I say, just silly. The coloring has been attrocious and it...

Interesting concept! I might take that as a start to rebuilding the Tarrasque.

Meh. As far as I'm concerned there aren't [B]enough[B] creatures that are threatening. If it doesn't work for your group, well thats where DM perogative comes from in not choosing it or at least using them liberally.

How about named portraits of people the succubus has impersonated over the years? The PCs could take the initiative to do a bit of research and learn that all the people have somethig in common - could be wealth, could be a particular habit, could be just about anything.

I don't know about that. The 2e monster manual (compendium?), which is where I remember it from was pretty cool. It was pretty basic, but what monster wasn't back then, but still had some interesting things you had to do to kill it. The Tarrasque needs someone to take ownership of it and...

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Tarrasque. I've wanted to use one of these - mainly because I never have - and now that I am at the point of being able to use it, the Tarrasque is craptacular. Incredibly boring. I will be redesigning it from the ground up before I use it.

Not funny for some! Funny for others! But, definately bad for the game! :D

Correct! Only damage stacks. Conditions do not.

Thanks for the insight Moridin!

Moridin, I remember reading a blog or a post by Mike Mearls a year or two back regarding his desire to see resistances changed. IIRC, the creatures implemented in MM3 are along the lines of his original design musings. Can you confirm if this change was directed by him or more of a team...

I strongly prefer the escalating DCs to the DM saying no more uses of a particular skill. It really goes in line with 4e's mentality of saying YES. Basically, you as DM are saying you can use the skill again, its riskier than last time but if you decide thats your angle then all the power to you.

This!

Fantastic Weem! I can't XP you but thanks for all the info. I knew bits and pieces of this, and heard about programs like Tweetdeck but haven't seen how they work. This fills in a lot of knowledge holes I have. I will definately be looking into this some more. Thanks again!

D'oh. I hate it when that happens!