Search results

I have to admit that I forgot what they did to the Tiefling race which created the necessity of creating the "Planetouched Tiefling" as a word. It's the reason I don't like the appropriation of terms to mean something different from the intention of the original meaning.

And this prevents them from writing up Aasimar as a playable race in the PHB how? [Edit: They got them all in, nothing prevents them from adding another 1 or 2 is what I'm saying]

Also known as "My Favorite Book of All Time Ever". The original one, at least. I also think that the Inner Planes and demiplanes influenced by "classical" elements are underutilized. But I know that's not a popular opinion. :D

Why I'll force YOUR symmetry! *fishes out his Stick of Forceful Symmetry* It't not just the symmetry for me. I would really like for them to be there! (Or any other Planetouched. I don't think something has to be evil to be cool, dagnabbit!)

Which backs up my claim that WotC should re-package 4E as a Magic the Gathering RPG. On topic — Ever since the article came out in Dragon Magazine #106 entitled "A plethora of paladins" by Christopher Wood I have been pro non-LG paladins. I especially like Monte Cooke's Champion class from...

They aren't my favorite (And why isn't Aasimar a base race if Tiefling is one?), but it's just fine since they didn't exclude former base races to include them.

I would like for the only thing to have Planescape-heavy jargon to be Planescape adventures and a book (or section of a book) about Sigil. I much prefer the rest of my planar reading experience to not have that pseudo-cockney slang all over it. As much as I like the flavor of that, I don't need...

And we're back up!

Our web guy is on it.

That sounds very much like "simple" templates. Which is very cool!

Thank you, Zarithar! So are we!

Hopefully this blog post from Frog God Games will help to clarify some things. http://froggodgames.org/blog/about-legal-questions

Tuxgeo - And I disagree with you that "invasion of privacy" is an act of evil on any level.

Yes they do. Google "White Necromancer". Tuxgeo - I don't see "being nosey" being on par with "animated a corpse".

Since they mention it specifically in the Basic Rules (my quote above is straight out of that PDF) then I think it's safe to say that animate dead made it into the final rules. :D Why would speak with dead be an evil spell? For disturbing the rest of the departed? (Serious question).

It has been stated that we intend to support the 5th Edition so yes, you will need the WotC books as well. Also, while I can't speak for Steve Winter (the developer of our 5th Edition line), I am sure that he will be working diligently on making the monsters compatible with the 5th Edition...

That it has! There will now be an extra 20 monsters in Fifth Edition Foes which brings the total to 220.

On zombies and skeletons. It says in the Basic Rules that... "Necromancy spells manipulate the energies of life and death. Such spells can grant an extra reserve of life force, drain the life energy from another creature, create the undead, or even bring the dead back to life. Creating the...

Speaking of which... We are very close to meeting our second stretch goal!

I think that there will be Archetypes that change the save type for fighters. (If they do both or not, I'm not so sure).