[D&D 3.5] Paths of Legend: Paths of Madness (OOC)

[crazy_monkey1956]

Actually, in regards to Mind Flayer gender, they do have a gender of sorts since they reproduce by injecting their larva into an adult human. So, whatever gender the human was, the mind flayer has some vestigial physical and personality traces of.

Also, Cerebus2099, be sure to have a look through the Campaign Setting, specifically the information for Clerics. There is no Thor in my setting.

All, if I have time, I will try to start looking characters over on Monday, but Thursday is still the definate day.

 

[pneumatik]

Jemal: So my PC's math is fine?

/me does a tentative dance of success.

 

[Shayuri]

Hee hee

The funny thing, Jemal, is that I don't really like psions either from a pure mechanical stand point. They steal a lot of thunder from my real favorite class, the sorceror.

I'd considered making this character a sorceror too, in fact, but we already have one...and astral constructs are so much better than summoning spells. And then I got an idea from Crazy Monkey's campaign specific psionics origin, and things just mushroomed into a concept that really needed to be a psion.

Hopefully you can forgive me.

Thanks for doublechecking my math too. Your kind words aside, I do have a bad habit of making careless errors.

 

[Rathan]

I hate to throw this term around as most people put a negative cogitation to it but a rules lawyer to me is an indifferent term... Jemal seems to fit the description yet to be honest he finds the little stuff *I* didn't really want to bother going over again.. and honestly how many of us really want to double check our own master pieces? lol.... keep doing what you're doing jemal... good work and kudos to you for taking the time to help us all out...

 

[Jemal]

[sblock=Vertex/Monkey]

A) Like most of the other instances, the writers were most likely only taking into account standard two-armed humanoids when describing it, and I think by TWO they meant more than one natural attack, to differentiate from other templates. Like how when a critter becomes undead and it loses all regular natural attacks and gains a single slam instead. Only adding claws to 2 of a beings upper appendages doesn't make any sense logistically.

B) As claws are considered a light weapon, I chose to go with the N-weaponfighting feat tree as opposed to the multiattack feat tree. The multiattack tree doesn't go anywhere like the N-weaponfighting tree does.

I strongly disagree with both of those interpretations, but you know what? It's not my game. If Monkey chooses to allow it, there's nothing I can do.

D) The way I'm reading "Dirty Fighting" is that it can only be used when making a full attack, and not when only making a single standard attack.

Dirty Fighting is a full round action that allows a single attack, a lot of people misread that, which is why they clarified it Here:

Q. Does Dirty Fighting give me a bonus of 1d4 damage on each hit with multiple attacks in a round?

A. Dirty Fighting takes a full attack action and therefore can only be used once in a round. Nice for low level characters, but loses effectiveness once you gain multiple attacks in a round.

[/sblock]

 

[Ambrus]

I have trouble understanding the bad rap that many ascribe to the terms Rules Lawyer and Power Gamer. RPGs are very complicated games and it takes a good mind and dedication to get really familiar with their rules. In general, I believe, most games benefit from having one or more individuals who know the fine intricacies of the rules and how they properly apply to the diverse situations that crop up during game-play. Those who senselessly deride such players do themselves and their group a great disservice I think, in addition to just being plain rude. That's my two cents at least.

Oh, and I also think that Psions are what sorcerers should have been.

 

[Jemal]

Actually, in regards to Mind Flayer gender, they do have a gender of sorts since they reproduce by injecting their larva into an adult human. So, whatever gender the human was, the mind flayer has some vestigial physical and personality traces of.

Huh.. I stand corrected.

Rathan - Yes, myself and my roomates all proudly refer to ourselves as rules lawyers. People go to university for years to become lawyers, I fail to see any negative correlation, our skills are just focused on a different area.
Though as you pointed out, people are much less adept at rules lawyering their own creations, so anybody who feels like it can feel free to double check my own character. (Though this character concept is a relatively straight forward one. Less-than-optimal, but still very entertaining.)

Shayuri : I'll try to forgive you, so long as your psion eventually dies a horrible death.

Pneumatik - I only went back a few pages, I referenced the names of all the players whose sheets I went over (Or specified why I didn't in the the case of the monsters). I'm all for helping with the details, but it IS a large thread.

Ambrus - I understand that, I just don't feel comfortable nitpicking something I don't have any experience with.

 

[Shayuri]

Ambrus...in a very real way, I agree with you. I guess that's why I have a sort of antipathy towards psions. In my mind, they mugged the sorceror and took their stuff.

Or at the very least, they represent the counterpoint to all the arguments that sorcerors, as written, are balanced with other classes.

And yet, I still play them. I love me some sorcery.

 

[Ambrus]

The only thing I don't like about psions and psionics is the psychic nomenclature. To me, psionics represent a great alternative magic system that's ideally suited to having whatever eldritch flavor you'd care to ascribe to it. In one campaign I had psionics be a new magical discipline derived from medieval alchemy; its practitioners calling themselves Philosophers. In my current campaign psionics is a little understood form of Oneiromancy. So, if I wanted to play a sorcerer I would simply make a suitable psion build and then call what my character does "sorcery".

 

[shadow91178]

hi

r u taking new players