Search results

I don't know what you mean by "yet again," but your line of reasoning here doesn't pass the laugh test. Having a characteristic be part of what makes something what it is, and then saying that sometimes that characteristic isn't present, isn't something which can be taken seriously.

No, I think it's a good choice. Marlos Urnrayle was artificially transformed into a medusa via magic gone wrong, and so functions as an example of an exception proving the rule. Likewise, other instances of a "male medusa" were the maedar, which were a separate kind of creature with their own...

I think part of the issue (and, I want to stress, only part of it) is that there's a difference between changing things by adding to what's come before, and changing things by removing part of their definitional characteristics. This is something I saw during the debate around 5E 2024 giving...

So to be clear, you're positing a type of creatures that are recognizably human in their functions/biology (hence why tactics which can work on humanoid creatures, such as blinding them with a bright flash or drowning them will work), and which have the same basic psychology (including a sense...

Today's dystopias must be diverse and inclusive.

The problem with suggestions like this is that it rules out a lot of creativity. For instance, there are several "dirty trick" methods of fighting that won't work on zombies, ranging from blinding them with a bright flash to kneeing them in the groin. You can't flood a chamber to drown them...

Unto itself, this does not necessarily imply any kind of peaceful integration, let alone broad acceptance or cooperation between those different groups.

It's worth recalling that 3E explicitly added the often/usually/always qualifiers to creatures' alignments, in addition to continuing a decades-long tradition of stating in the introduction to its primary monster book that alignments weren't absolute.

Gun Metal Games is having a twentieth anniversary sale! For a limited time, you can get a bundle with all of their digital offerings, totaling over $650, for just $19.99! Grab it before it's gone! Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.

It's because the "pH" characters turned out to be... Basic. That's a chemistry joke, y'all.

As other people have said, they do not get the bonus feat that humans receive. I've heard similar arguments, mostly from people who (understandably) confused "racial traits" (i.e. the various mechanics specific to each race, such as humans getting a bonus feat, dwarves getting a skill bonus to...

I'm mostly curious about how the new edition would interface with some of the alternative subsystems for economics and governance from issue #3 of the Axioms (affiliate link) supplement.

DriveThruRPG is having a Cosmic Horror Sale! For the next two weeks, save 25% of thousand of cosmic horror RPG titles! Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.

How compatible is ACKS II with the previous edition? Is there a conversion guide anywhere?

High heels definitely have a place in the game; according to Macho Women with Guns d20, they give female characters a +1 bonus to Charisma, albeit with a -5 foot penalty to speed and being unable to sprint. There are plenty of builds that can help with. Oh, and since Poe's Law is a thing:

<laughs in mystic theurge>

If you have the urge to rage-post about how everyone who disagrees with you are haters, and you're going to get some sort of symbolic revenge on them by spending money on and evangelizing for the things you think those people wouldn't like, my advice is the following: Re-read this thread's...

No, I think @Crimson Longinus has a point even without art having mechanics.

This is making me nostalgic for the days when elves, dwarves, etc. were all known as "demihumans."