Search results

i would never tell a word against the ol' fella, you know... :cool: funny, apart from the treasure table comment, that is exactly what i felt when i managed to put my hands on the 3.0 Monster manual... :) "WHAT?!?!? there's a typo!!! they forgot to include the ecology section!" seriously, i...

well, monsters tend to be much more "mundane" in the Old World. no flashy dragons, or demi planar half liches, but orcs, chaos cultists, some undead... you have the idea, i'm sure. that said, i cannot recommend the bestiary more, for two reasons: 1. as i have already said more than once in this...

that's quite possible. in fact, if you have the statistics of the opponents that the PCs are going to face (human or otherwise), and the adventure, i think you could run a fairly smooth CoC game. sure, the rules are useful to get information on weapons the PC might want to get and similar stuff...

go with the last edition, if you can... even though, if you don't care for the update graphic, and some very minor additions, you could save some money and try to locate a 5.5 edition book (or even a 5th) which is very similar to the current edition (well, as a matter of fact, the system didn't...

the book was supposed to be in support, not in response. chaosium would be rather dumb to conced the use of its own license to wizards, if they wanted d20 cthulhu to do bad. having said that, i do agree that possibly the chaosium tried to jump on the d20 bandwagon only to interest new D&D fans...

follow this link http://www.drivethrurpg.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=74_79&products_id=830 my opinion is that the choice of the system really depends on what you and your players are looking for and what your style of game mastering is. Chaosium's CoC is great is you want a relatively...

wait a second here! are you telling me that THAT was not our point?!?!? :)

to be fair, the name calling started elsewhere... i would point that in PM if i could! :) thanks for not closing the thread, though! :)

well, if you have the army books, and know the background, it shouldn't be too dificult to mess a bit with the WH system and start playing in the WH40K universe today. my advice is: buy the warhammer book again. you can then choose between a fantasy world and a loosely sci-fi one. :)

alright, i should've been clearer then :P oh, but i know. that's why i don't waste my time trying to eradicate an anti-d20 crusade that really don't exists... :) i think very highly of him, too! :) i think there should be more topics about old designers, and how good they are/ were. :)

i never bothered to actually check their local chapters because i feel i would find people that is willing to play only "by the rules", and since i have some problems with the rules as they stand...

yes, because i could use the new settings. not anymore, because i don't really like the system that much, and it requires some serious conversion to make it work with older matherial (in this regard, i wish it was much more derivative...) yes, because the new system was derivative from the old...

thanks for clarifying that. having said that, no offence, but you should really pay more attention to your phrasing. that alone will eliminate many many flaming attempts. (and, besides, i still think the bestiaryrocks, but that's my opinion, of course... :))

sorry, nonsense cut away... :=)

i agree completely. that why he could have done much worse than taking that in account and paying more attention to the way he was making his point... the funny thing is that i feel the same up to a point. after all, if the head of one of the leading d20 publishing houses writes a revision of a...

amen... whe i was using another alias, i dared to suggest to a guy that was a bit unhappy with the d20 system to go and try GURPS... some people (who clearly had never played GURPS, or whose style was not catered by that system) went out of their way to smash the game down, as if it was the...

yeah, some stuff was hilarious! i would have laughed if they were talking about ME!!! :D

this is your opinion, and you are very well entitled to it. i, for one, would never buy a book that is "derivative" form another. so, we can do two things: we could argue until the end of times about whose opinion matters most, or we can discuss the merit of the review and its phrasing, and...

well, since i'm not active of their boards, and i only lurk there form time to time, i can't really debate on your "anti-20 boards" label. from my experience, though, it seems that there are d20 haters, gurps haters, wod haters, new wod haters... your idea of comparing a doughnut to d20 doesn't...

i'd say: "the man writes a review that doesn't really review the game, willingly or not manages to get a lot of people angered with his (at best) ill phrased compliments, and gets public flogging for it" granted, some of the posts were rather extreme... but still, the post from grumpy, below...