Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]

[Anubis]

apologies for the slow response I have become embroiled in an argument on CR/EL with Andy Collins (of WotC) over on his message boards.

I have GOT to see this. Link, please?

 

[Gez]

Hello everybuddy !

I don't have anything grand to say (well, except the obligatory "I hope you enjoyed your noël and nouvel-an"), just wanted to let people know I'm still alive.

Regarding Perry Rhodan, I wonder if someone gave them a good enough proposal would they be interested in allowing the official name to be used for a d20 setting book...? Food for thought eh mate!?

This reminds me... I saw a Perry Rhodan book for sale at the local trainstation's book&newspaperseller. Having heard of that cycle through this forum, I peered at it out of curiosity and found out it was the issue number 150-something... Eeeeeeeeeeek !

The world is probably well-detailed, thought-out and interesting, but 150 novels and counting... That's just frightening.



Oh, and on something totally different... I personnally agree with the post-20th progression for BAB and save found in the ELH, for the reason explained. Rather than house-ruling that out to keep them consistent with critters like outsider and dragons, I house-rule said critters to become consistent with characters.

(Except that the cap I use for monster HD is 40 rather than 20, out of lazyness because I don't want to recalculate the critters outlined in my various resources, the highest HD count I remember being 32.)

 

[Knight Otu]

Hi, all!

Hi Knight Otu mate!
Don't be too hard on Scott, hes a great guy and I know he works his socks off.

I guess he is busy with the City of Brass, there is no real problem with that.

To be fair I wasn't totally happy with d20 Modern. To me it seemed like D&D Modern (rather than d20 modern). I would have rather they kept the fantasy elements seperate rather than intrinsic. Though I know some people prefer it like that.

The way I see it you can easily ignore the more fantastic concepts.

Regarding Perry Rhodan, I wonder if someone gave them a good enough proposal would they be interested in allowing the official name to be used for a d20 setting book...? Food for thought eh mate!?

Why did I knew you would say that?

 

[Knight Otu]

I have GOT to see this. Link, please?

http://pub36.ezboard.com/fgameschat19968frm10.showMessageRange?topicID=13.topic&start=1&stop=20

 

[Knight Otu]

This reminds me... I saw a Perry Rhodan book for sale at the local trainstation's book&newspaperseller. Having heard of that cycle through this forum, I peered at it out of curiosity and found out it was the issue number 150-something... Eeeeeeeeeeek !

The world is probably well-detailed, thought-out and interesting, but 150 novels and counting... That's just frightening.

So few?

Sorry to shock you, but there is a little bit more to Perry Rhodan than just that.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

I have GOT to see this. Link, please?

Knight Otu was nice enough to supply the link (I made some more posts a little earlier). Thanks mate.

A few people still don't seem to want to except the evidence of the official rule frailties that I gave. But so far its a very interesting debate.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello everybuddy !

Bonjour mon ami Gez!

I don't have anything grand to say (well, except the obligatory "I hope you enjoyed your noël and nouvel-an"), just wanted to let people know I'm still alive.

I had an eventful holiday season if nothing else.

Glad to hear you are still alive! I wouldn't have it any other way.

This reminds me... I saw a Perry Rhodan book for sale at the local trainstation's book&newspaperseller. Having heard of that cycle through this forum, I peered at it out of curiosity and found out it was the issue number 150-something... Eeeeeeeeeeek !

The world is probably well-detailed, thought-out and interesting, but 150 novels and counting... That's just frightening.

I thought they were in the 2000's by now!?

Oh, and on something totally different... I personnally agree with the post-20th progression for BAB and save found in the ELH, for the reason explained. Rather than house-ruling that out to keep them consistent with critters like outsider and dragons, I house-rule said critters to become consistent with characters.

(Except that the cap I use for monster HD is 40 rather than 20, out of lazyness because I don't want to recalculate the critters outlined in my various resources, the highest HD count I remember being 32.)

As I mentioned before; technically either way works. However...

I still don't think the greatest wizard in the universe should be even remotely approaching the combat prowess of the greatest fighter, and yes I do think the higher you ascend the greater the distinction should be.

Fighters don't cast spells so I don't see why Wizards should competantly wield weapons. Magic items already blur the lines between both sufficiently.

 

[Gez]

I had an eventful holiday season if nothing else.

That's great ! As we say, "no news, good news".

Glad to hear you are still alive! I wouldn't have it any other way.

Neither do I, trust me

I thought they were in the 2000's by now!?

The issue I saw was numbered 150-something... But 2000 ? That's just "worsier". The author just can't be human. Or, there are about 50 authors that spend their time writing (potential continuity troubles).

As I mentioned before; technically either way works. However...

Fighters don't cast spell so I don't see why Wizards should competantly wield weapons. Magic items already blur the lines between both sufficiently.

Indeed... I must admit, where I to travel back in time and usurp Gygax's or Arneson's place (rather than that actor), I would have magic items be usable competantly only by magic-users... That would fit more my conception. But well, figthers may use enchanted weapons and armors, so why couldn't wizards use swords (point at Gandalf, even if he's not human).

Especially at high level, where the "you're not a magicien, you can't practice magic" argument fade (I myself consider epic use of skills to be supernatural effects the character can achieve through instinctual understanding of magic -- mere training and physics can't allow a character to run on clouds or swim up a waterfall).

The wizard will still be 10 points (and two iterative attacks) behind the fighter. That's enough for me as far as "not approaching the combat prowess of a (equivalent level) fighter" goes.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi, all!

Hello Knight Otu mate!

sorry for the slower reply; my computer crashed just as I was trying to reply to you. It was just as I was about to break for lunch anyway so...

I guess he is busy with the City of Brass, there is no real problem with that.

I am sure he has a number of things on his plate.

The way I see it you can easily ignore the more fantastic concepts.

True. But they were so integrated into the rules that they are a distraction. I would have rather seen real world elements dominate the book then perhaps the last few chapters could have encompassed variable setting ideas.

Still, each to there own I suppose!?

Why did I knew you would say that?

I have given the matter some thought; perhaps it could be marketed as 'epic sci fi'...what do you think?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Bonjour mon ami!

That's great ! As we say, "no news, good news".

Absolutely!

Neither do I, trust me

The issue I saw was numbered 150-something... But 2000 ? That's just "worsier". The author just can't be human. Or, there are about 50 authors that spend their time writing (potential continuity troubles).

Knight Otu is the real expert but as far as I know Perry Rhodan is massive in Germany - I mean we are talking television and movies either in planning or already shown...whats the deal with those Knight Otu mate?

Incidently the plural of the word 'worse' is 'more worse' or 'even worse'. Though I am sure I have used worsest sometime in the past.

Indeed... I must admit, where I to travel back in time and usurp Gygax's or Arneson's place (rather than that actor), I would have magic items be usable competantly only by magic-users... That would fit more my conception.

Sounds good in theory until we start addressing game balance I imagine.

But well, figthers may use enchanted weapons and armors, so why couldn't wizards use swords (point at Gandalf, even if he's not human).

There is a difference between using an item and becoming skilled with an item.

Also the term 'use' a magic sword is misleading given in function it operates no different from a normal sword.

Especially at high level, where the "you're not a magicien, you can't practice magic" argument fade (I myself consider epic use of skills to be supernatural effects the character can achieve through instinctual understanding of magic -- mere training and physics can't allow a character to run on clouds or swim up a waterfall).

Supernatural skills aside (most of which were inspired by Hong Kong 'wire-fu' movies) glancing at the 30th-level NPC Fighter in the ELH I don't see any great magical prowess either generated in and of his own abilities or from magic items; looks like he has about three spells at his disposal...?

The wizard will still be 10 points (and two iterative attacks) behind the fighter. That's enough for me as far as "not approaching the combat prowess of a (equivalent level) fighter" goes.

Thats far too close for me; the best warrior in the universe is practically pegged by an equal level wizard who has never bothered to study the martial arts (if they did they would have taken Fighter Levels).