The Romance of the River Kingdoms
- Thread starter Dr Simon
- Start date
Dr Simon
Explorer
I'll add it. I was tooting up "general" loot rather than anything specific to each person. There were some healing potions from the Vashti that I've missed off, too.
I haven't done a Mist Spirit bloodline but its a potential one, probably with cold and (in)visibility related powers. I'm trying to keep them quite generic, so there wouldn't be any swordsage-related abilities, I'm afraid!
Walking Dad
First Post
IMHO, giving a bonus to the Initiator level (something the ToB classes share) would not be less generic than a bonus to the spellcaster level.
Dr Simon
Explorer
Well, there's room to argue that a "+1 spellcasting level" bonus could also apply to Initiator level, or Manifestor level, or any other system variant, but that would be down to the GM and players to sort out on a local level.
My feeling is that when presenting a rules add-on you should only assume use and possession of the core rules, unless specifically aiming for an "Expanded Book of Nine Swords" or whatever. Plus, there's that whole Open Content thing....
Which is really to say not to expect anything specifically designed for Swordsages, or Binders, or Duskblades, etc. as I can't legally refer to 'em!
Addendum to that thought: Also, I personally dislike the ethos that crept in towards the end of 3.5E, that moved from options that, whilst they suited some classes better than others, were still more or less available to all, towards options that were specifically geared to one character class, or even one type of build of character class. Plus they explicitly told you in the books *how* to best build a character.
There's a column by Monte Cook where he outlines one of the design decisions in creating 3rd Ed. Sure, everyone eventually figures that taking Weapon Focus (longsword) is a good choice for a fighter, Toughness is almost a must for a Wizard, and that Magic Missile will see more use than Animate Rope, etc., but *discovering* that is the "hidden" game, and I think all those "how to build a Ruby Knight Vindicator" stuff that they added in for 3.5 kind of killed it.
Sorry, bit of a rant there! Not aimed at any of you!
My feeling is that when presenting a rules add-on you should only assume use and possession of the core rules, unless specifically aiming for an "Expanded Book of Nine Swords" or whatever. Plus, there's that whole Open Content thing....
Which is really to say not to expect anything specifically designed for Swordsages, or Binders, or Duskblades, etc. as I can't legally refer to 'em!
Addendum to that thought: Also, I personally dislike the ethos that crept in towards the end of 3.5E, that moved from options that, whilst they suited some classes better than others, were still more or less available to all, towards options that were specifically geared to one character class, or even one type of build of character class. Plus they explicitly told you in the books *how* to best build a character.
There's a column by Monte Cook where he outlines one of the design decisions in creating 3rd Ed. Sure, everyone eventually figures that taking Weapon Focus (longsword) is a good choice for a fighter, Toughness is almost a must for a Wizard, and that Magic Missile will see more use than Animate Rope, etc., but *discovering* that is the "hidden" game, and I think all those "how to build a Ruby Knight Vindicator" stuff that they added in for 3.5 kind of killed it.
Sorry, bit of a rant there! Not aimed at any of you!
Last edited:
Walking Dad
First Post
No problem 
BTW, that are fun discoveries by MC. On the wizard 3.5 CO boards, both Weapon Focus and Toughness are considered weak. And in my own game here, a cleric used animate rope for great effect as a single target entangling spell
And that is part of the fun with my heavy house ruled druid I play here. Nobody to tell one what options are good, because he is one of a kind.
BTW, that are fun discoveries by MC. On the wizard 3.5 CO boards, both Weapon Focus and Toughness are considered weak. And in my own game here, a cleric used animate rope for great effect as a single target entangling spell
And that is part of the fun with my heavy house ruled druid I play here. Nobody to tell one what options are good, because he is one of a kind.
Dr Simon
Explorer
Weapon Focus and Toughness probably are pretty weak compared to newer feats. I like the Pathfinder version of Toughness that keeps on giving, but it's not the most exiting option, I must admit.
And hooray for non-standard options. It's almost tempting to create a setting without all the typical spells, to force spellcasters to be more creative.
Anyway, looking through the art forum I found this picture by Storn, released under Creative Commons, that fits Aru Leng, the "young Vashti", quite well. I darkened the hair.
And hooray for non-standard options. It's almost tempting to create a setting without all the typical spells, to force spellcasters to be more creative.
Anyway, looking through the art forum I found this picture by Storn, released under Creative Commons, that fits Aru Leng, the "young Vashti", quite well. I darkened the hair.
