Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="paradox42" data-source="post: 4006007" data-attributes="member: 29746">Well enough. My game has continued apace, I just took a few months off from ENWorld because I was spending too much time on it. Originally. Then for a few weeks I wasn't going back on because I was afraid to face the backlog and slog through it all, plus I felt I was getting on fine without it so there was little motivation. But eventually some side comments by one of my players who sometimes reads the site led me to finally get off my duff and read the posts referred to, which in turn led me to slog through that backlog (it was actually easier than I'd supposed it would be, though probably in part due to me avoiding the 4E threads this time around and just sticking to the news posts).You have my email of course, and with it my real name, so trading whatever personal information is necessary shouldn't be a problem. I'd be happy to have my contribution honored with inclusion.I did slog through the backlog, so I didn't miss it. I actually went out and got the book myself on the strength of that discussion, and enjoyed the read even if the beasts presented are absurdly low-level for the threats they supposedly represent. I did want to actually stat up, however, the full moon-sized Atropus, and the completed/reintegrated Pandorym. The Leviathan might be fun to do too, eventually, though just doing a Macrobe Pleiseosaur would probably be good enough. The plots themselves are of course designed for sub-Epic characters, which means they're not suitable to my games in any case: if I have a world-ending threat it's going to be faced by Epic characters or gods. You did, in the sense that Nightshades and Qlippoth weren't included. <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=":)" /> Those will be Undead too, yes? Nightshades in the Monster manual are, at any rate, and if Qlippoth are supposed to be super-Nightshades (and certainly the Void Dragon as an example supports that notion even if your further comments in reply to me didn't) then they would be as well.Taking that into account I think Undead are actually doing rather well in the polling- it's just a pointer to what sorts of Undead people are most interested in seeing.I definitely like the notion of making that new ability introduced in recent WotC supplements, Unholy Toughness, a feat. Or just plain adding it to Undead as a Trait, even. For those who don't know what that ability is, it means the Undead critter that has the ability gets to add its CHA modifier to its hit points like normal creatures add their CON. It definitely helps bring things back into balance. My players and I recently had a discussion on this topic during a game session, in fact, due to the fact that one of the players recently ascended to godhood and took Death as one of his Portfolios. Since that makes him Undead now, and thus with no CON score, he lost half his hit points in the bargain.I played up the Un-Beings in my game for months of real time before ever introducing one- and when I finally did, the 30th-level party actually ran away (well, Teleported away) in terror from a Small-sized Unelemental. I had mixed feelings about that- on the one hand it was delightful having something that I could scare them that badly with, plus hilarious to contemplate when one compares the player characters' stats with the monster's, but on the other I was disappointed that no actual combat took place and part of me felt like accusing them of wimping out. The next time I threw one at the party was during a rest period so they didn't want to run then, and the party Sorceress one-shotted it with a low-level spell, so they learned it wasn't really so tough. They all seemed to think they got lucky with that, though, and no doubt if I ever send another one after them they'll do their best to play Keep-Away again.</blockquote>

Verification