Search results

Not that unusual, I don't think. The OSR movement picked up a lot of steam in the late 00's. Like I stated in my post, I went from ACKS, which is a B/X clone, to 5e, having played 4e and PF before that (and 3e before that, 2e before that, 1e, blah, blah, blah).

I did this when I played 3e. It made for a bit of a "death spiral" in the adventure paths I ran (RttToEE and AoW). In fact, there were a total of 32 PCs on RttToEE between the 6 players (1 player made 11 different PCs - he's risk averse :)) and "only" 19 in AoW. Now days, I don't count XP...

The system I "came from" is tough to nail down. Literally, it was ACKS (or OSR in the poll), as that was the D&D-style system I was running before I started my 5e game. But I did play 4e and PF (not a lot, but they were played in the time after 5e was first announced). As for why 5e, I agree...

Okay, that's understandable. I was just hoping the old "All D&D" link could have been made into an "All 5e D&D" link. If that's not possible, I understand. Also, speaking for myself, I don't mean to sound impatient. Just throwing out some ideas.

5 is my limit. Both my D&D and SW groups have 5 players. I've had requests to expand, but I've turned them down. 4 is preferable, though. More players means less focus on each player, which I'm not a fan of.

We seemed to get less unfortunate threads like this one when the boards were segregated. I have no problem with those that like to play that way, but I understand the frustration that leads to threads like these.

Rereading that, it is a tad confusing. :) Have an amalgamation board that pulls threads from all the other boards, the general board included, instead of using the general board for that purpose.

The real story is that Russ' phone never seems to drop below 90% charge. That's awesome! :)

Is it maybe possible to have the General board be it's own "sub board"? Then if someone likes everything all in one spot, they have a place, and those of us that don't want that have a less cluttered board.

3rd edition was Rokugan, right? Maybe FFG, the new rights holders to L5R, might work with WotC for a new version? Not that odd of an idea these days as it would have been in the past.

I wouldn't take that personally. It only takes a few rotten apples to make a place start to stink, despite all the nice, shiny ones. It would be tough to read anything here were that the case. :)

The MtG demographic is relatively young, so I can imagine there's more discussion for it on Reddit and other SM sites. My guess is this is the real reason for the boards shut down. Magic is 800-lb gorilla for WotC. If talk is going on elsewhere for it, why continue to expense a message board?

Files are one thing, but web pages never really die.

I've printed and laminated world/overland maps, and they cost in the $15-20 range. I can't imagine spending that for a few encounters. But I agree, it is a bonus to playing online.

Not sure why five are needed, but there is a one important one. The site has rules for posting, and they are quickly and strictly enforced. That is a big difference, and it shows.

That reminds me of this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aIfarMPmPQ

Mike is a freelancer. WotC is not asking for anything. They are being cool about leaving the rights for distribution if the maps with the artist, though. I don't know for sure, of course, but I'd imagine Mike gets paid less per piece to retain these rights, and who can blame him for selling...

I was surprised when mine showed up last week after I got an email saying I was only getting a partial shipping (my Scott Lynch book, but not OotA) on my Indigo order.

T'hat's no't qu'ite ho'w i't's sp'ell'ed..'..

Is it possible he made a mistake? If I knew for sure (which would be pretty tough for a player that hasn't memorized the MM), I'd bring it up, in case it is a mistake, but I wouldn't be argumentative about it. Like Tony says, the monsters don't have to follow the stat block in the MM by the...