Search results

This vague outline sounds vaguely like the AP put out by EN Publishing. I think I am being Vague. I can comprehend absolutely no link between the first tier adventures, they sound very much like stand alones. The same for the second tier ones, which seem like "specific missions" to gather...

If a setting has been "milked dry" why work with setting and try to rehash/retrofit it than come up with something new? For that matter, why try to retrofit it with elements that have never been part of the canon (which tends to be awkward and non sensical for the most part) when those elements...

None. Creating a "time line jump" and "reinvisoning" a setting has no real benefit other than trying to sell a new setting under a recognizable trademark. Just create a new setting and call it something else rather than trying to retrofit/blowup/add random elements to existant settings.

Thank you for making me a better GM. Your story hour and the related threads has kept 10+ individuals gaming and enjoying DND for the past 8+ years. Also, you are quite a stand up guy and one of the most helpful individuals around (shameless peg legged cat love).

Having sat through the financial statement disclosure company meetings for some of the largest financial companies as well as being on analyst calls numerous times, I can guarentee that the question of the ROI (return on investment) has absolutely been asked in ten different ways and answered...

I thought it pretty clear that you cannot modify what's in the SRD hence my reading of it that if Wotc were to publish anything titled Xx and put it in the SRD and a third party had previously done xxx the third party product would be in violation.

Here is my question. If a third party was to publish a product with a Druid class and then Wizards were to come out with their own Druid, and updated the SRD to reflect this, the third party product would automatically be in violation of the GSL correct ??

What is the point of this?

If I may, might I suggest buying Ad Space here on EN World so that Pathfinder stays front and center? Even if it does not directly increase sales, it will still increase visibility and if possible, you can provide updates (Version 1.1 released!) etc.

That's what I think will happen. Those that pay the licensing fee of 5k will be able to be licensees for D&D (maybe limited to adventures or MM's that don't infringe in anyway on future WOTC products; i.e- creating your own bards, druids, monks or whatever as those PI's will be key in selling...

I am not sure what the point of this poll is other than to polarize. People have likes and dislikes and 4E is yet to be released for anyone to fully opine on anything.

Without the GSL or some other licensing agreement you might enter into, the announcement might be jumping the gun a bit. Best of luck either way; heroforge is pretty helpful.

"Betray?" It's a game.

Part of the marketing strrategy to spread "core" so as to increase sales of future products. ( No reason, if they were done months ago, not to have it included in the PHB).

The use of any term in a derogatory manner ultimately reflects on the poster. It's quite simple.

I am on the fence and was very excited when i got a first glance today at the rules and character sheet. Then I looked at the details and the mechanics a bit; the game is too gamist (personal opinion, not an argument or anything else) for ME. Also, reading over the Rouse/Collins interview about...

Characters and monsters have powers that shift foes/allies and there is more proximity based effects, there are also "immediate actions" that might be triggered based on where you are against a foe; as such it is more mini centric.

Are you sure you can publish these books you are planning before seeing the new license? (unless you have seen it already). The announcement seems a bit premature?

I thought most people had issues with fighters not doing enough damage at higher levels in 3.5e? And now the position seems to be that criticals did too much damage - one of the few ways a fightr could do lots of damage at higher levels with the right feats...

This is the analogy I think about. With a car, you might have tested a new clutch, a new chasis, a new transmission etc. and they might all be fantastic. But it is most important to see how all of the above work together- if you don't test that enough, possibility of a mechanical brakedown will...