Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 5548481" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dragon Magazine Issue 232: August 1996part 3/8A flurry of swords: More new swords? Do we not have enough variants as it is? Apparently not, as Greg Detwiler gives us a full 26 new variants, well and truly affirming the sword's place as the supreme weapon throughout the ages and continents. Polearms? Pah! Piffling by comparison. 17 of them have some distinct benefits when you're proficient in them, and more when specialised, rather than just being another endless tiny variation on damages. So whether you want to slice through armor, massacre small creatures or parry better, you can find something to suit your needs. Happy twinking. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Yeah, I'm not very interested in this. Sorcerous six-shooters: Here we go again, following in the footsteps of issues 28, 57, 60, 70, 124, 176, 199, and lots more non D&D ones over the years. It's not an unfamiliar topic. Thankfully, this isn't one of those annoying starting from scratch reboots that forgets everything that came before. Instead, it's an examination of the place of firearms in all the various settings, including the inactive ones. Apart from Greyhawk & Athas, they have a place in all the worlds, even if it's a rare one for various reasons. (oh, poor poor krynn, made distrustful of technology because the species that uses it most is completely nuts. ) So not only is this pretty pleasing because it has something useful for the casual fans of every world, it's also nicely in continuity, and has some nice new bits of crunch for you to play with.  Magical guns may be an abomination to the purist, but as we already know from Shadowrun, they can do some pretty awesome things. And if you try fighting against someone optimised, you lose. Call it natural selection. I think this article manages to draw and fire fast enough that I don't get bored. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> The ecology of the roper: Aw. Poor little girl. Now this is a very different ecology indeed. The story of a little girl suffering from uncontrolled attacks of clairvoyance, and when she jumped into the body of this month's monster, and had to experience it killing and eating things from the inside. Now that's a narrative device I've only seen once before (ahh, the joys of rugose cones) The writer gets in character, and stays there all the way through, before ending with a heart-wrencher of a final line. Absolutely brilliant, this even makes the classic Ed ecologies from the 80's seem tame. The footnotes are merely average, but hey, you can't have it all. This is still a classic article, managing to make more impact on me than the magazine has managed for quite a while. Much kudos. Floyd still hasn't twigged why the little boy has massive magical powers, the twit. How telegraphed do these things have to be?</blockquote>

Verification