DDM Preview 6 Cyclops

[Wolfspider]

It's not a cyclops, it's a guy squinting trying to hold a maraschino cherry in place with his brow muscles.

LMAO!

 

[pawsplay]

Uh, by whom, exactly?

White House military advisors.

 

[Tewligan]

FIFU FIFY

FIFY.

 

[Pazu]

That and telling the cyclops his name is "Nobody" so that when the other cyclopsi asked him who had blinded him, he replied "Nobody", to which they assumed that he was stricken blind by the gods.

The plural of cyclops is cyclopes.

 

[Kunimatyu]

Uh, by whom, exactly?

http://www.calacademy.org/exhibits/skulls/diversity.html , scroll down

I've seen some occasional news articles on "cyclops skulls" pop up from time to time, usually from third world countries, and they get corrected a few days later.

 

[takasi]

I like his pose.

"They're cyclopes alright. I see one of them now..."

 

[gizmo33]

Complaining about how DnD doesnt follow the myths is a bit silly at this point, isnt it?

No. DnD doesn't have to follow the myths but I think the designers should at least by half-way familiar with them. Then if they choose to ignore them it's a matter of choice.

In any case, considering we dont know how blindsight is going to work in 4th, accusations that WotC isnt doing it right is a bit premature. If it's an ability that's lost if you stab it in the eye, there's nothing to complain about, is there? This just lets it see in the dark.

Blindsight should have been called darksight then. I think the parameters for what blindsight could be pretty well fit the criticisms in this thread. Claiming that because we don't have the book in front of us that we don't know whether or not the core rules will be in English is a bit disingenuous IMO. Maybe blindsight causes you opponent to go blind when you look at him? I'm not going to wait for 4E rules in order to apply common sense.

 

[Fifth Element]

No. DnD doesn't have to follow the myths but I think the designers should at least by half-way familiar with them.

May I ask how you know they're not?

 

[Mad Mac]

Maybe blindsight causes you opponent to go blind when you look at him? I'm not going to wait for 4E rules in order to apply common sense

Of course not. Just keep in mind that what you are looking at is:

A. Rules for the Skirmish Game, which are always only vaugely in-sync with the RPG version of a monster.

The Skirmish rules do not have "Darksight" Darkvision, See Invisiblity, Truesight, or any perception related powers at all except Blindsight.

B. The 3rd Edition version of the Monster, which is also not identical to the 4th edition monster.

So basically, you're looking at the statcard for a monster in a different edition of a different rulest than 4 edition D&D. Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions. We really don't have anything to go off of here except overall flavor, and the quote on the bottom refers to the Cyclops Uncanny Vision not it's radar ability.

 

[Green Knight]

However, I'm willing to bet that blindsight ability is lost once the Cyclop's eye is destroyed (loath as I am to introduce called shots and organ-targeting into a combat system as abstract as D&D).

Usually I'd agree. But with the way they're talking about "exceptions based rules" for monsters, I'm hoping we'll see a couple monsters who have called shot rules just for them. For instance, it'd be nice if the Cyclops had a rule that states that a PC can attempt to strike its eye. If they inflict X amount of damage, then the Cyclops loses X, Y, and Z abilities. If they don't make the roll, then they miss.

Something similar would be cool for vampires. If you have a wooden or silver weapon, then you can attempt to hit their heart with your attack. If you make the roll, then the vampire is dusted. If you fail the roll, then you miss.

So while I wouldn't want to see generic called shot rules, it would be nice if certain monsters had specific called shot rules relating to them only. I think it'd make fighting creatures like the Cyclops and Vampires more fun. But then again, I just thought of this right now. If I sit and think about it for another 10 minutes, I may end up finding 10 different flaws in this idea. Oh well.