Search results

Tanis Half-Elven is basically a mix of Spock, Kirk, and Archie Andrews. :)

If you're a fan of d100/BRP/Mythras-based fantasy, the Design Mechanism just released their Unearthed Companion for Classic Fantasy.

The 3E sorcerer, the Greyhawk thief ... possibly the UA cavalier, although that wound up removed from the game. I don't recall the 3.5 warlock catching quite so much flack. (And the 4E warlord is obviously the one you think people are thinking of. :) )

He doesn't care much for the undead, and he got sick of the material.

He also contributed most of the interior art for the first six years of the 2E Ravenloft line, although he really didn't enjoy it.

There have been two strains in D&D from nearly the beginning--"D&D as fantasy toolkit" and "D&D as unique game experience." Appendix N can be useful for both, but its usefulness to the latter is primarily in identifying the sources that create the "D&D flavor." Since WotC is thoroughly...

Given Chaosium's track record, I expect Pendragon 1E next year.

I looked at the publicly available circulation numbers for Dragon back when they closed up shop, and the last published figures show a 20% year-to-year drop in circulation, IIRC.

I think the section on Infernal Hierarchy in the 2024 DMG states that he has the power of a lesser god, but I only glanced at it. Asmodeus has undergone considerable promotion since WotC took over the game, although they seem to have backed off from the "fundamental creative force of the...

Interesting, considering that Ravenloft launched a year before the World of Darkness. This is true. I can't lay hands on it, but there's a line in one of the vintage Ravenloft products about how PCs, for all their trials and tribulations, should be able to win in the end.

Are they still deifying him and/or suggesting he's Not That Bad and Has Good Reasons or at least a fundamental cosmic role?

So what does the lore dictionary (or the rest of the DMG) say about Asmodeus?

Like the introduction to the PHB? "Naturally, every attempt has been made to provide all of the truly essential information necessary for the game: the skeleton and muscle which each DM will flesh out to create the unique campaign. You will find no pretentious dictums herein, no baseless limits...

The impression I get of the current "official" style is "Seattle Swashbuckling & Socializing," but that could be a slanted view. :)

It was only Birthright, which was going to get repackaged as a hardcover, and based on what I recall of the planned supplements, have a greater focus on the Shadow World.

It was also one of the first victims of WotC's "One Game, One System, Two (at Most) Settings" philosophy of the late 90s/early 2000s, with a major relaunch planned for 1998 being scuttled at the last minute.

On reflection, based on the descriptions from the novels, it feels particularly addictive and seductive, prone to producing fanatical and idolatrous devotion to 'the magic.' That fits in with certain perspectives on Krynn. ;)

Dragonlance should have a more 'tidal' and/or 'theurgic' feel, given the moons'/gods' influence on High Sorcery.

At this point, I'm convinced that the only way to play D&D is to play it 'wrong', at least according to some authority on the subject. :)

My mistake; it's in his Red Box writeup (Domains and Denizens, pp. 46-47), which rewrites the Darklords entry somewhat: "In life Anhktepot was a 13th-level priest of the sun god Ra, and he still wields the power of that position (although it isn't Ra who grants his spells ...)."