races of destiny --has D&D 3.5 jumped the shark?

[3catcircus]

Why should WoTC handle this? Mongoose has their Slayer's Guides, Goodman Games has their Complete Guide To series, and of course we have Dragon Magazine and it's Ecology of.

I hear what you're saying, but apparently more people prefer crunch.

The reason is *because* a lot of the information we want expanded *isn't* OGL, but is WOTC IP.

 

[JoeGKushner]

The reason is *because* a lot of the information we want expanded *isn't* OGL, but is WOTC IP.

A dwarf is a dwarf is a dwarf.

I'm not yet so lazy that if a fortress of dwarves comes out that I can't add that to my Forgotten Realms of Eberron campaign.

And next, the people who don't player Eberron or FR would complain that the book is too specific no?

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Well Merric,

you can have your opinion on railroading, and I'll have mine.

I say that it's railroading when the success of the PC's adversaries and the failure of their allies is pre-ordained, to contrive a situation where the bad guy gets to steal the PC's stuff while they sleep. It certainly doesn't sound like an adventure I'd like to participate in as a player. And yes, of course I can change things if I don't like it. Is your point that I shouldn't complain about bad adventure design?

I can accept a small amount of railroading when it's necessary to preserve a large and grand plot. But there isn't any large and grand plot in Andy Collin's example. It's one of the lamest ways of introducing a race (a potential PC race at that) that I've ever seen.

Ken

 

[MerricB]

I say that it's railroading when the success of the PC's adversaries and the failure of their allies is pre-ordained, to contrive a situation where the bad guy gets to steal the PC's stuff while they sleep.

The PCs get three Listen rolls to detect the illumian when he's stealing their stuff. They have every opportunity to stop him. The write-up even takes that into account.

A DC 23 Listen is not that hard. If the party is in the wilderness, isn't someone on watch?

Assuming 1st level commoners have fallen prey to a charm person spell seems extremely reasonable. (And if they make the save, how would they know it was the illumian that was responsible?)

 

[Acid_crash]

Isn't shark jumping a dangerous sport?

 

[Remathilis]

Not if you have a high enough jump check...

 

[3catcircus]

A dwarf is a dwarf is a dwarf.

What about Dragonlance's Gully Dwarves? Are they the stereotypical generic dwarf? What about Duergar or Derro? *This* is the crux of my statements - that each campaign world (published and homebrew) will add certain specific twists to the generic information presented in the core books (I don't consider the token Greyhawk information in the core books to provide any detail into the Greyhawk campaign world...)

I'm not yet so lazy that if a fortress of dwarves comes out that I can't add that to my Forgotten Realms of Eberron campaign.

And next, the people who don't player Eberron or FR would complain that the book is too specific no?

Which is why I originally stated that I'd prefer a "Forgotten Realms" book vice a generic D&D book. Likewise, if I played Eberron, I'd want a book detailing all of the dragon-marked houses (don't know if this is the right term since I've only thumbed through Eberron at the FLGS and haven't bought it.)

I see this as no different than "Sharn, City of Towers" or "Races of Faerun" - something that zeroes in on a single subject and goes into minutiae.

 

[Nightfall]

Should monsters stop after Creature Collection III?

NO! They should keep making CCs until I say stop.

Especially if they revise CC2.

*thinks six pages on shark jumping is silly...*

And I STILL hate this phrase!

 

[Eremite]

Yeah, it's a good thing we have stats for the archer bush, the flail snail, and the wolf-in-sheep's-clothing again.

I don't think I've ever been as disappointed in a book as Tome of Horrors. I was hoping for 3e-ification of the wealth of cool monsters from Dark Sun, Mystara, Spelljammer, and so on. Instead I got a book full of Fiend Folio rejects. Good thing I didn't have to pay for it (I won it as a prize in a chat with the Necro folks).

You mean, I AM NOT ALONE!!!

And here I was afraid of voicing a contrary opinion on this steaming pile of turgid dreck (IMO) because everyone else seems to love it so much (and so irrationally, IMO). You've made my virtual day....

 

[Eremite]

Fiend Folio had prestige classes (cool, effective, campaign enhancing prestige classes I wouldn't hesitate to use for a second, I might add. I thought it was very clever to parse out the Vile Darkness possession mechanic into a prestige class.)

The thing I liked about the fiendish prestige classes in FF was that it was the first time that WotC had designed anything for fiends to actually make them, well, fiendish.

Personally (IMO/YMMV), I find the fiends to be randomly designed grab-bags of various abilities and qualities that seem to have no bearing on the actual role of the fiends in any sort of campaign with the exception of possibly the succubus. The PrCs from FF, however, address this fairly well (although there is still no logical explanation for why tanar'ri are immune to electricity).