Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takasi" data-source="post: 2841635" data-attributes="member: 20194">What was it about the article you liked?You may have thought it was cool to play a rogue where all of the minute details are taken into consideration, but it's really up to the DM to decide the role of religion and rogues in the campaign.  He can work with you, but what if these things don't make sense in the table's game world?I think the utility of the article could have been retained (and possibly improved) if it was titled something like "Core Beliefs: Luck and Trickery".  Would it have been as interesting to read?  No.  However, look at the most useful books in D&D.  The PHB, the DMG and the MM aren't as captivating as a novel or even a campaign supplement.  There are much better books to entertain you while you curl up in front of a warm fire.  Even so, they're still the core resources for D&D.I would find it incredibly odd if WotC or Paizo produced a Faiths of Greyhawk sourcebook right now.  I would expect a new world overview book, followed by a races or monster book and maybe a few regional supplements first.  You've summed up two of my dislikes of this series: "eventually" and "assuming".I disagree with this to a certain degree on the Demonomicon.  A significant portion of these articles go into history and backstory that defines setting specific absolutes.  Contrast this with the Creature Collection, which generally presents less detail on how the creature fits into the world and focuses more on the mechanics and encounter descriptions.The ecology articles are also frequently presented in a world intrusive manner.  Don't get me wrong, I still find a great deal of utility in the crunch presented.  I like seeing stats for the demons, their aspects and their monsters.  Most of the flavor presented isn't as useful though.  I still read it though, just like I'll read Silicon Sorcery, Cities of the Realms and other fiction that I'll probably rarely refer to after the first read.I can understand.  Despite what hardcore fans may believe, Paizo's magazines aren't staples for many gamers.  In fact, for some DMs the options presented in Dragon are anathema and banned from their tables.  In these cases the magazines may only interest buyers if they contain setting specific flavor because the crunch, regardless of its adaptability, is useless to them as players.For example, if I'm a player in a Forgotten Realms game how does the Creature Catalog help me?  I can tell my DM these creatures are neat, but generally the DM decides what the players will fight.  How does the Demonomicon help players?  I don't see how either of these features would make the magazine more appealing to this player, but I can see why he would want to pick up an issue that provides some info on the Realms.I believe the same can be said of Dungeon too.  Some DMs may skip Dungeon issues if they don't see adventures tailored for specific settings.  The editors said they're considering this, but nothing has been decided yet.</blockquote>

Verification