Legends of Excalibur: Arthurian Adventures HC

PosterBoy

First Post
Travel to a world of magic, nobility, and danger in RPGObjects’ first ever d20 fantasy series, Legends of Excalibur: Arthurian Adventures. Checkout out the Legends of Excalibur homepage for more details on this series of supplements.

This print edition comprises the material in the Knights Handbook and Arthurian Campaign Guide. Customers that have purchase these two ebooks can upgrade to the HC for a reduced rate.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Legends of Excalibur is a d20 take on the King Arthur Legend. It's largely still D&D, though a heavily tweaked (it uses new classes, a spell point system, and drops alignment). It started off as 2 PDF files (as most RPGObjects books do) and recently made it into book form. It's firmly based on Malory, and stylistically, like the movie Excalibur (i.e., people running around in plate mail), as opposed to a historical Arthur game.

There are two other d20 versions of King Arthur which appeared in print first - "I, Mordred" from Avalanche Press (which I have and reviewed) which came out in 2003, and "Relics & Rituals: Excalibur" from Sword & Sorcery/White Wolf (which I don't have, but plan on getting eventually), which came out about a month before this did in print (but after this appeared in PDF). Both of those provided a twist on the usual Arthurian Mythos. "I, Morded", changed things around so Mordred was the good guy. From what I've seen of it (flipping through it at the store), "Relics & Rituals: Excalibur" fits the Arthurian mythos into a D&D context (i.e., having Half-Orcs and Halflings and all the D&D classes and such), rather than changing the D&D/d20 rules to fit the mythos.

When I was young, one of my favorite TSR games was "Knights of Camelot". It was a boardgame, you would play a generic knight, and would go on quests and such, win the favors of ladies (and trade them in for better ones), and try to become a Knight of the Round Table. I've always wanted something like that, but more RPG based.

But there has really been a dearth of King Arthur based RPGs. Which always struck me as odd, given that it basically was fantasy fiction before fantasy fiction, and so such a big influence on the fantasy genre as a whole, and D&D in particular. Yes, there is Pendragon, but like many Chaosium RPG's, it had something of a pretentious attitude that turned me off. It also was too gritty for my taste, trying to be realistic, rather than legendary. I mean, the "real" Arthur wasn't famous, the legendary one was. So why play a game about the "real" one, minus all the fantastic stuff?

So, I was looking very forward to this, which as I said, is a more traditional take on the Arthurian legend, largely based on the most famous version of the tale, Malory's Morte d'Arthur (and a lesser extent, Tennyson's King Arthur poem, Idyll's of the King).

It is pretty much is the same flavor of d20 as D&D, but with different classes and a different magic system (one based on spell points). That is, more of a light tweak, as opposed to something like Conan, Spycraft, which is a moderate tweak. More like Sovereign Stone d20. It also drops alignment.

The new classes are:

Fool - Finally a class for me! Actually, Arthur had a fool named Dagonet. (Who despite the name, is not the god of the French Deep Ones)

Hedge Mage - Aka, the Lawn Wizard. Really, this seems a bit misnamed, it's more a general sort of magician or wizard. Hedge Mage is sort of an awkward name, anyway.

Hermit - More like a priest that lives in seclusion. Monks would also be this.

Knight - There have been a lot of other versions of the Knight, but this is probably the best I've seen. Their main abilities are to be able to fight with heavy armor on but with reduced penalties, and able to fight well on a horse.

Minstrel - "Just sit right back, and I'll tell you a tale...". These are actually meant to be Celtic/Druidic bards. They have a slew of magical abilities, and can cast Druid spells (at a a few levels lower than their Minstrel level, much like the normal Bard)

Noble - Sort of a souped up Aristocrat

Priest - Still somewhat combat orientated like the D&D cleric, the priest also gets to perform various religious ceremonies.

Robber Baron - Sort of a dastardly knight. I actually think this one is a bit weak. Basically, it gets the average base attack bonus, d8 for hit points, 4 skill points, and fairly mild special ability (most notably, sneak attack, maxing out at 6d6). Actually, I think a character would be better off simply being a multiclass Fighter/Rogue. I think the BAB should be like the best, IMHO.

Skald - Basically, the Saxon version of the bard, and again, not really magical.

Yeoman - Really, more of an woodsman/archer. Robin Hood would be one of these.

Most the classes from D&D are tossed out, except the Fighter, the Rogue, the Barbarian, the Bard, and the Druid. The latter two aren't really changed at all, except for switching to a spell point system. I'm not sure I like this - both the Bard and Druid are a bit more magical than the other classes. Especially the Druid, he has some flashy lightning spells. (And the Bard has Shadow Evocation, which could let him cast pseudo-fireballs, I believe).

Other than that caveat, for the most part this seems pretty good, and the classes seem to be pretty well balanced. But it does seem odd that there are 3 types of Entertainer (Minstrel, Fool, Skald), but only one type of magician. I would perhaps liked to seen a witch. Also, the name "Hedge Mage" implies something of a charlatan or rustic. "Magician" or just "Mage" probably would have been a better name for the class.

There's a whole bunch of prestige classes. Alchemist, Berserker, Changeling, Court Mage, Crusader, Enchantress, Lady of the Lake (there was more than one in Malory, actually), Quest Knight, Saint, and Spectral Knight (that is, based on a color - Black, Blue, Green, Purple, Red, White).

The Quest Knight is one that is dedicated to looking for the Holy Grail. The various color knights are based on the various color nights of the tales. The Green is sort of a woodsy knight, the White is almost like a Paladin, a very holy knight. The Black Knight is dastardly.

I'm not really a fan of prestige classes, but this is how they should work, for things like this. I've never really seen them integrated so well into the source material before.

Also supported, are the rules for epic characters. There is info on how to make epic versions of all the core and prestige classes. Very nice - I think this is the first book I've seen that does this, despite the fact the epic rules were added to the System Reference Document ages ago.

Although there is the "Enchantress" prestige class, there doesn't seem to be anything specific for ladies of the court. I guess they would use "Noble", though I don't really think that fits in most cases. Also, it doesn't really address gender, though some of the descriptions of various Knightly classes' powers uses the feminine pronouns. While not found in Malory, there were a couple instances of female knights. Britomart and one other from the Faerie Queene by Spenser, and King Arthur's Daughter, Melora, from the Irish (or maybe Welsh) story "Orlando and Melora".

Actually, speaking of that, I think perhaps there should have been some sort of courtly romance system. While on the one hand, that is prime role-playing material, it's really the sort of stuff that is trick to do when all your players are male. (Much like my difficulties with HeartQuest, the game of Japanese teenager romance, except that evolved into crude jokes.) So perhaps rules are best for things like this. I think Atlas has or had a d20 supplement for this, called "Love and War", but haven't seen it nor have I read any reviews or even any mention of it anywhere. http://www.atlas-games.com/product_tables/AG3226.html But the preview seems like it might have something like that.


As mentioned, it uses a spell point system instead of the normal D&D fire and forget system, though it still uses D&D's spell levels and caster level. While I tend to like this, the implementation is a bit more complex than I usually like. Essentially, spells cast a variable amount of spell points, depending on the spell level and the caster level. You have to look it up on a chart. For instance, a 1st level spell costs 2 points for a 1st level spell caster, but only 1 for casters that are levels 2nd through 17th. Actually, the spell level seems to be the point cost most of the time, except at low and high caster levels. This does give spell casters more flexibility, but does complicate things.

Further complicating things is mana levels. Depending on what sort of spell caster the character is, where the spell is being cast will raise or lower their casting level, and thus costing them more or fewer points. The location also controls how many spell points they regenerate (this can sometimes be negative, causing some casters to lose points over time).

While this level of detail is nice, I think it's probably best suited for say a computer game. Too much record keeping for my taste.

It mostly uses existing D&D spells, but the spell list for the Hedge Mage and Priest/Hermit is pretty much stripped of any really flashy spells. There are something like 35 new spells, some of which are aimed at recreating Arthurian magic, but others seem just based on spell point system. For instance, there are various spells that suck or drain spell points from targets. These also have very un-Arthurian names, usually having "Mana" in the title, making them sound more suitable for Final Fantasy than King Arthur.


Besides the spell point system, the other big change from D&D is dropping "Alignment" in favor of something called "Nobility". Nobility is essentially a rating of 0 to 100 on how noble or virtuous a character is.

The nobility score often has an effect on class abilities - many abilities give a bonus based on how many nobility points they have, like a +1 bonus on a skill for every 10 nobility points, extra damage, etc, etc.

Various actions or inactions will affect the nobility score, and this is also magnified by any "Allegiances" the character may have. Allegiances are basically things the character has sworn to obey or do. For instance, follow the Code of Chivalry, or be Celibate.

This is actually a pretty good system, because if you read the Arthurian tales, many of the knights were actually jerks. Even Arthur himself is almost certainly guilty of mass infanticide, he heard the prophecy that his son (Mordred) by his half-sister would doom him and his kingdom, so he gathered up all the infants born around the same time as Mordred and put them adrift on a ship.

The horse is an integral part of the Knight - in chess, a Knight is depicted by a horse. So it's not surprising that this book has fairly detailed rules for horses. Horses comes in several different qualities, and they can have any of a number of different traits.

I think this is where the first PDF ended, which was more sort of a player's guide. The second half of the book is more GM material.

It starts off with information on the legend of King Arthur, and knighthood in general. It uses the mythic history of Britain, that is, it was founded by Brutus, great-grandson of Aeneas. It gives a recap of the Arthur story. The telling is done is a very neat way, using excerpts from Malory or Tennyson or something else to provide flavor. (Actually, you get dozens of these things in little boxes all over the book, but in the history section, they are in the main text itself).


Many of the important characters from the stories get statted up, reminiscent of Deities & Demigods for AD&D. Besides the major ones (Arthur, Galahad, Lancelot, Gawain and company), there are . Missing is my old favorite, Sir Lamorak (which I used to use as an alias in my early days on the internet) and some of my non-Malory favorites, like Melora, King Arthur's daughter, or Britomart, from the Faerie Queen.

Curiously, though, several knights seem to have better stats than Lancelot. While he is a 30th level (epic) character, there are quite a few that are just a few levels lower, but have a lot more hit points.

There's a gazetteer of the Arthurian world. Including not just places in Britain, but other places Arthur is rumored to have gone or warred against. This is actually quite larger than most people might think. In some versions of the tale, Arthur conquered pretty much all of Western Europe, including fighting with the Romans.

It covers which monsters from the Monster Manual fit in the Arthurian world, and there's a small section of new monster, like the Questing Beast and White Hart. There's also a selection of Arthurian magic items, including Excalibur and a couple other swords, plus rules for Jousting.

What's also nice is the book is full of little details that makes it helpful to run games. For instance, you get stats for NPCs from levels 1 to 20. d20 is a stat heavy system, so this is really a godsend.

There are also entire campaign outlines for various periods in Arthur's reign. The first one, when he just comes to power, features a fairly well detailed description of a village (Caerleon) that can be used as a home base. There are a couple more, similar in content, but for later periods.

I really like this. Many supplements like this pretty much abandon the GM to doing all the work. This gives the GM a lot of material to start out with.



It's a very attractive book. In an interesting twist, it uses turn of the last century artwork, illustrations from old books on King Arthur. Some companies have tried to do this just to save money (Fast Forward), but usually used really lousy old artwork and generally had no connection with the text on the page.

This book very good old artwork, from artists who are apparently really really famous (besides being dead), and the illustrations are always tied into the text in the page. So it really sets the mood well. In particular the works of Eleanor Brickdale, Arthur Rackham, and William Russell Flint really stand out. You can find a lot of them at the Camelot project page, but a few are in the book that I can't seem to find online (though if you do a web search, you'll see that those 3 are very famous). They give the title of the work, the artist name, and the source, which is something I really like. There are a lot of maps, all by Clayton Bunce, who did the maps in Thumble and Oester, among other things, and is probably the best cartographer in the RPG business these days (though admittedly, I can probably only name 1-2 others).

The paper is fairly thick, making the book seem larger than 160 pages. The front and end papers are used to display color versions of the interior maps. Again, really nice looking. The net result of all this is a very classy looking book. Unfortunately, no index, but the layout is very straight forward, and there's a nice table of contents, so you don't miss it that much.


This is a very good book. A very solid A. It was meant to be a d20 book on the King Arthur of Malory, and it does that about as good as it possibly can. I think the only real complaint someone could make is the keeping of the Bard and Druid almost as is (just changing from the fire & forget system to the spell point system in this book).

While it's not the RPG version of "Knights of Camelot" I long for, this is pretty close to what I wanted. I think most people wanting a fun Arthurian based game will like this book a lot.
 



Legends of Excalibur

Legends of Excalibur is a campaign setting resource for running adventures in Arthurian England, much as described by classical stories such as Malory's Le Morte D'Artur and Tennyson's Idylls of the King. The book is written by Charles Rice and published by RPG Objects.

A First Look

Legends of Excalibur is a 160 page hardcover book priced at $29.95.

The cover has a gold leaf color with various drawings of Arthurian era scenes on the front.

The interior is black and white. Interior artwork are reproductions of classical paintings of Arthurian stories and scenes. The paintings are classics that adorn many gamers' walls, but reduced in size and in black and white loses a good bit of the detail of most of them.

Cartography is by Clayton Bunce. Beautiful full color maps of the British isles and sites therein adorn the end leaves of the book, and similarly nice black and white maps are used in the interior.

A Deeper Look

The goal of Legends of Excalibur is to provide a campaign setting and rules for running an classic Camelot game in the d20 system. In doing this, the book espouses an approach that is more willing to alter the basics of the system to make it fit the feel of Arthurian lore.

The book is divided into chapters on character creation, magic, Arthurian legend, adventuring/GM resources, magic items, and creatures, and an appendix with NPC statistics.

The character chapter starts by (in a move reminiscent of Spycraft) re-utilizing the now unused level mechanic for something else, in this class, Bloodline. Bloodline runs approximately along the lines of social class, but assumes a bit of idealized "destiny." Like races, the bloodlines determines ability modifiers, favored classes (for example, knights for nobility and rogue for base/criminals), and other traits, such as bonus feats and skill bonuses.

Much like FFG's Midnight, Legends of Excalibur tweaks the class mix to get a more precise feel for the setting. Barbarian, Bards, Druids, Fighters, and Rouges are retained, though spellcasting classes are adapted to fit the new spellcasting system. Clerics, Priests, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Paladins are gone, though there are new classes that resemble some of these classes.

There are thee new classes that might be regarded "entertaining" classes (which, with the retention of the bard, makes a total of four): the fool, minstrel, and skald. These join the bard as classes that feature entertainment as class abilities. The fool specializes in distraction and banter, though features acrobatic abilities as well. I'm sure those who recall the movie The Court Jester could conceive some character concepts for this class. I hope someone does, for "a jester unemployed is nobody's fool". ;)

The minstrel receives many bard-like musical abilities, and even receives druid spells, which makes the class seem awfully close to the bard indeed. While the minstrel has the charming aspects of the bard abilities, the skald has more of the military morale boosting effects. Altogether, it seems to me the minstrel, bard, and skald are way too close to deserve separate core classes and could have been replaced by a more flexible core class to represent all of them, and possibly the fool as well.

The hedge mage is the main arcane caster of the setting. The receive arcane spells from a custom (less blast-oriented) list presented in this book, in addition to class abilities that let them fit the role of eccentric and feared mages. This includes evocative touches such as prophecy, appearing in the dreams of others, and intimidating common folk that fear magic.

Hermits and Priests are divine casters of the setting, following the One God, what the setting calls the Christian God. The hermit is more of a lay priest with abilities relating to folk cures, while priests are members of the Church, with class abilities relating to the rituals of the Church.

One note about spellcasters in this system: as they use the custom spell point system presented here, they defy being pulled back into a more conventional game, if that is your preferences.

Knights represent the archetypal military nobility of the era. The knight's abilities are related to mounted and armored combat, and oaths and honor. The Robber Baron is a counterpoint to this class, and represent knights who are less chivalrous. The also have abilities in mounted combat but also have class abilities that are quite a bit less related to honor - such as feint and sneak attack.

As nobility plays a big role in an Arthurian setting, the Noble is featured as a PC class. Most noble abilities stem from their authority and aura of leadership.

Finally, as the ranger is not an option in a standard Legends of Excalibur campaign, the book offers the Yeoman. The yeoman is a woodman, archer and hunter, sort of a non-spellcasting, non-Drizzt ranger. The yeoman receives wilderness and tracking skills as well as archery bonuses.

The book offers a variety of prestige classes appropriate to the setting as well: alchemist, berserker, chageling, court mage, crusader, enchantress, lady of the lake, quest knight, saint, and "spectral knights", a collection of specialized knight prestige classes associated with a variety of figures from Arthurian stories who claimed certain colors as their moniker. Hmmm, nothing in the black knight description about operating with limbs chopped off, though.... All of the prestige classes are ten level classes.

A number of new feats are available in the book. Many of the new feats act to emphasize the feel of the setting or certain character concepts. For example, if you are a character of great faith (having the faith feat), it can assist you in some cases, allowing you to reroll one save at a bonus once per day, and dark heritage (such as Merlin's supposed demonic heritage) gives a character a bonus to their spells and makes hedge mage a favored class. Many old metamagic feats appear here, tweaked to fit the new spell system.

A new feature of characters in Legends of Excalibur is the nobility score. This score is, appropriate to the period, supposed to represent general worthiness of the character, but starts out merely as a reflection of their social class. A character's actions can affect their nobility score, for good and for ill. A high nobility is required for certain classes, could lead to advancement in social class, and may make a character easier to recognize.

Legends of Excalibur uses an allegience system instead of an alignment system, much like d20 modern. Like that system, a character selects up to three alleigances, listed in order. The list of alleigances is primarily composed of oaths (often to specific entities) or a code of chivalry.

Though nobility and allegiance are concepts that we have seen before in games, there is one that is a bit different than what has appeared before, fate and destiny points. At first glance, they appear similar to action points, but closer examination reveals differences. A character acquired fate points every time they level. The only acquire destiny points when they use fate points.

The player chooses a "fate" for their character, such as "to rule all England." The character can spend fate points to gain bonuses (larger than would be afforded by action points) towards that goal. However, the DM assigns the character a secret destiny like "to be slain by his son", which the DM can spend point to see the fulfilment of.

This is a fascinating concept, one previously little explored by RPGs. However, it needs a little more support to help it bear fruit. A page each on potential destinies and fates, for example, would not be unwarranted.

Other information in the character chapter includes knightly orders, equipment, and support for epic level characters.

The second chapter cover magic in the setting. The magic system uses the normal 9-level spell system, allowing you to use the existing system if you prefer, and allowing you to use existing spells with this system. There are spell lists for each of the spellcasting classes included in the book, which are somewhat less flashy than those in the core books, though they still go up to level 9.

The spell point system bears some similarity to the ones based on psionics that seen ubiquitous, which give the character a spell point total and spell costs vary by level. However, the major difference is that spell costs vary by class level as well. At higher levels, not only do you get more point to cast spells with, but lower level spell costs less. Conversely, casters can cast spells above the level that is normally available to a character of that level, but at great cost.

The specifics of the spell point system vary by class. Though some aspects of spell point recovery are common to all classes, different classes seem to derive their power from different sources. As such, certain conditions can help or hinder the spell point recovery of certain classes. For example, priests recover spell points faster on hallowed ground, but hermits recover spell points faster in the wilderness.

There is a short selection of new spells for the setting. Some of these take advantage of new concepts, such as the nobility score, or draw from concepts of the period, such as a spell which allows a priest to call out sinners with very real effects.

The third chapter is entitled Guide to Arthurian Legend. It contains historical perspective on knighthood, and a timeline of Arthurian Britain. The timeline is drawn from traditional sources and contains many direct quotes from Malory and Tennyson.

The book also has briefs on locales and major Arthurian characters. Theses character (much to the joy of some who criticized this book's main rival, S&SS's Relics & Rituals: Excalibur) have complete d20 system statistics. Though thorough, one thing that took me aback was the level attributed to these characters. As an example, Galahad is a 30th level character. Though many Arthurian characters are legendary, I think that levels 10-20 are legendary in any fair sense of the word and sufficient to handle most of Arthurian figures. I feel that the over-the-top and oft-times cumbersome epic level system is not appropriate here. (Fortunately, some characters like Arthur and Morgan Le Fey see more reasonable "younger" versions in the next chapter.)

The fourth chapter, Arthurian Adventuring, provides a rich mix of material facilitating the running of Arthurian games. This include direct GM advice (such as how to deal with issues of canon, such as working within it or skirting around it), sample locales to run games in, and sample quests involving Arthurian characters.

The fifth chapter is brief and covers magic items that appear in Arthurian lore. Many such items are artifacts of varying levels of power (such as the famed Excalibur and the Round Table), though there are a few items that fit the traditional mold of D&D magic items.

The sixth chapter, Bestiary, is also somewhat brief, and covers creatures appropriate to Arthurian lore. The chapter provides a list of creatuer from the MM appropriate for the setting, some entries merely explaining the role of the creature in the setting, others providing tweaks to fit the setting. A few new creatures are provided, such as legendary beasts like the white hart and questing beast.

Finally, an appendix provides NPC statistics from levels 1-20 for all of the new classes introduced in the book, in the same format as those in the DMG.

Conclusions

Legends of Excalibur is a great resource for those interested in using the d20 System to run a faithful campaign set in and Arthurian lore style England. Most of the changes are appropriate and well done, and the settings, quests, and NPCs provide great support for the GM of such a setting.

The classes are generally well written, and the use of typical convention makes most of them appropriate for use by those looking to borrow elements for a more typical campaign. However, the classes could be a little tidier (especially the bardlike classes), and the use of the epic system strikes me as unjustified and even (given the general perceived unwieldiness and feel of the epic level rules, and the barrier it creates for players to actually make characters like those in the legends) even unattractive.

Overall Grade: B+

-Alan D. Kohler
 

I think the use of the Epic rules was very apropriate - I mean, if not for King Arthur and his knights, the greatest knights in the history of the world, then who?

And it was really only used for the very top knights. Galahad & Lancelot, the best of the best, are 30th Level, with the other top ones (Arthur, Perceval, Gawain, Tristam, Ulfius) being 25th. That doesn't seem out of line at all.
 


Both points are valid (that you would use the epic rules and that you would not). Beyond saying that both viewpoints are valid, let me say we played it both ways and I made the decision I did for a reason. Allow me to explain my view.

I knew when I made the decision that some would *really* like it and some would really *not* like it. The ELH rules seem to be a love them or hate them rule set.

Ultimately the decision came down to this as I saw it:

Pros:
1. Not many books use the epic rules so that gives the setting a slightly different feel mechanically.

2. I did not like the sheer number of characters who, imo, would be 20th level without the ELH in effect, namely: Galahad, Lancelot, Arthur, Gawain, Merlin, Morgan le Fey, Kay, Dagonet, Dubric, King Mark... well you get the idea.

This "logjam" of characters at 20th level meant that King Mark was about as tough as Lancelot was about as tough as Kay. I had problems with that. Some workarounds were tried in playtesting such as using ability scores, but ultimately characters of the same level felt much too much like peers.

I just didnt like the fact that Kay felt like Lancelot's peer.

3. Removing the "logjam" at level 20 left the PCs with more room to develop and expand their own characters before they suddenly were expected to but heads with characters like Lancelot.

I *liked* that PCs could adventure for a long time, getting up to 15th level, and Lancelot was still a figure to be dreaded as a draw in the lists. You like hearing high level characters say things like "go easy on me and try not to *accidentally* kill me".

To me this made Lancelot feel like... well... Lancelot.

Merlin was another character that felt much more natural this way. In other words the epic level rules seemed to better represent the "big guns"... you know... the epic characters.

I know it sounds silly that 20 levels wouldnt be "enough"... but in playtest campaigns where we tried to cover a lot of the story... characters ran out of levels, and lost a big reason to play (levelling is part of the fun of the game).

4. It delayed for quite awhile the non-epic level metagaming conversations that tended to go like this "oh heck... we're 3 15th level characters, Mordred is max 20th level, he's standing right there in the Camelot courtyard, let's get him before he gets Arthur".

When the epic level rules were instituted suddenly the PCs weren't quite sure who was what level any more. The sense of mystery was back. Knowing a character is somewhere between levels 15-30 is MUCH dicier than knowing he is somewhere between levels 15-20.

5. Some people really like the Epic rules.

Cons:

1. Some people really dont like the Epic rules.

Chuck
 

Cons:

2. Some people will be put off because they'll have to buy the ELH in order to use the book.

I was looking at Legends of Excalibur in my local game store this lunch time and was very impressed but didn't buy it there and then because I'm a little short of cash this month. I decided to come back to work and check the reviews first - which are all wonderful. It would have been a definite purchase but as I'd have to shell out for the ELH as well that effectively doubles the price.
 

Epic rules are now in the 3.5 DMG (and the SRD) so onmme really does not need the ELH anymore. If it wasn't in the SRD they couldn't use the rules.
 

Remove ads

Top