Search results

I have often considered launching what I refer to as "Realms Zero". A campaign based as faithfully as possible to Ed's "Home Realms Campaign (tm)." I would wipe out Vaasa and Damara, and restore the Moonshaes to their pre pseudo-Britain form. But most importantly, it would focus on the small...

While I am pretty sure you are correct about the Elder Brain not being known in 1984, I am afraid you are way off on the date of it's introduction. It is clearly explained in the Mind Flayer entry in the Monstrous Manual c1993. While I no longer possess the Monstrous Compendium that preceded it...

There is a similar issue with the various d20 Star Wars games. As written, the rules for accumulating Dark Side points were problematic. Things like killing a person are cumulative, so that any soldier would automatically be a Dark Side NPC after several sessions. Of course, it's based on heroic...

Yes, it is speculative. Based on experience it is probable. I have seen WotC develop the Character Builder that shipped with the 3.0 PH. It was great, it was cool....it never got finished. Then they engaged CodeMonkey to make e-Tools, it was great, it was cool, it got finished, I bought a lot of...

Indeed. This is just more proof that WotC is like the Microsoft of table top gaming (every OTHER edition is a craptastic in some way. Can't wait for 6th, ugh). They put out their excellent main product. People clamor for digital support. WotC tries, in an overly controlling and expensive way...

I would argue the opposite. Looking up names on the internet isn't lazy? I have created dozens upon dozens of fantasy names over the decades, and I pride myself on their fluidity and "realness" while remaining distinctly unreal. Some people aren't good at it, and they need help; enter the name...

YES, this! Also, within the parameters of their license (and the timeline), TNG is the "current" era. As in the latest stardate is Star Trek Nemesis. The book is therefore presented as "current, looking back". The layout is the TNG LCARS style, ubiquitous on all the "modern" shows. I imagine...

So, I suppose we should all thank our lucky stars that we have nice printed books at all. The good news, is that the entire industry could dry up and blow away tomorrow, and we'd all have enough gaming materials to play for multiple lifetimes. B-)

This was a very evocative system, I have long admired it. To McLimore, Tepool, and Poehlein; you added significantly to the hobby's underpinnings, and enriched the fanbase. Thank you.

I suppose those are reasonable numbers, if for no other reason than you don't want to invalidate the light shield. I always just reflexivly doubled the pathetic bonuses in RAW. And, the reason to use a buckler is that you can not only hold something in your off hand...you can WIELD something in...

jdsivyer, I couldn't agree more! In fact the stats you put forth for shields is exactly what I've done. In combination with the various shield feats introduced in CW and especially PH2, it makes shields a worthy and viable option. One might be tempted to look at the math of two-handed vs...

Well, like I said, that's what I've been doing all along. In the system the DOES use the "no Con score", it makes excellent sense and "fixes" a bug in the system (i.e.: undead are supposed to be supernaturally tough, yet RAW makes them kinda fragile). To me though, the whole "logical approach"...

Hey Kerrick, Yeah, I have used Cha in place of Con for undead for quite awhile. More recently, I've thought of using Str instead of Con for mindless undead or maybe corporeal undead, while incorporeal use Cha. Anyway, you got my vote. In truth though, if you're actually re-examining rules like...

Oh, absolutely! I wasn't sugesting for a second that this group is pointless or unnecessary. I just like to <cough>steal<cough> other groups mojo for ourselves.....

Hey Kerrick, Thanks for the invite. I tried to post a hello earlier, but I didn't have autho. I'll keep it short this time cause I hate writing a big post only to be unable to post it! I don't mean to be uncouth, but have you checked out the "Toward 5E" group? They've got some pretty good...

Yes, it does have much to offer. In fact, it is a refined combination of D20 Modern, and the first two Star Wars D20 versions. I even started doing a "Saga" conversion of the SRD way back in the summer of 2007, but I was derailed when WotC announced 4E......I wish I had kept going. As you say...

Hey Kerrick! Yeah, as I alluded to in an earlier post, I've been SLOWLY grinding away on my own "3.75". After a lot of crunching (in my head), I have settled (for the time being) on a Saga-ized DnD 3.x....that's Star Wars....not Dragonlance... I am incorporating elements from 4e...my group...

Hey Kerrick, The way I do fractional BAB/Saves is purely mathmatical formula, which is what they are...they just express it per level and then tell us dummies to "go look at your class table pooky-bear". Which is why we had to endure years of wonky saves and BAB because using math would be "too...

Hey Kerrick, Very nice. Although I personally have a love/hate relationship with the Bard class (can't stand the image of the singing fop in the back of the party of grim slayers...."inspiring" them), I always appreciate new angles that improve the "feel" of the mechanics. I was disappointed to...

StreamoftheSky: The short answer is...that's the point! Those of us who favor Con damage for major trauma want it to be dangerous and potentially lethal to ANYONE. In the aftermath of a fall, the creature has reduced max hit points due to the Con damage until they are fully heal/restored...