Raven Crowking
First Post
Rechan said:Well that's a great statement, but that's not my hypothesis.
Please state your hypothesis, then.
Rechan said:Well that's a great statement, but that's not my hypothesis.
Doug McCrae said:1e PHB page 16:
Whatever man. You're right, I'm wrong, people have never had a problem making D&D do anything it wants to. D&D is perfect.Raven Crowking said:Please state your hypothesis, then.
PeterWeller said:I want you to know that I don't think your formula is faulty in any way. It sounds like it works really well for parameters you set out. I was just pointing out that it does cut out a lot of the "end game."
Rechan said:Whatever man. You're right, I'm wrong, people have never had a problem making D&D do anything it wants to. D&D is perfect.
Rechan said:I'm not trying to prove anything. You're obviously right. I was trying to make a point, it's pointless to continue. Yes, I'd rather throw my hands up. I'm dropping it.
Raven Crowking said:Only because "end game" in this sense is "high magic stuff". And, yes, you cannot do low magic without cutting out a lot of high magic stuff.
RC
PeterWeller said:I don't think dragons, greater demons and star gods are high magic.
Also, sorry, but I can't for the life of me recall any specifics of Conan fighting a really nutso demon.
It's been a while, but I can recall him working over some "dragons" and Xaltotun (sp?).
Also, the Elephant/star-god thing always struck me as being something very, very high level.