 |
|
|
|
Next: The Fate of Morgan Ironwolf and her party in the ..
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1608
|
(Msg. 316) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:27 am
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>games>frp>dnd (more info?)
|
|
|
Tetsubo <tetsubo DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote:
> Mark Blunden wrote:
>
>> Nuts to that. I know it's a common trope of fantasy settings, but the
>> whole "today's magic is as naught compared to the *proper* magic they
>> had in the old days" concept always grates for me. I want my fantasy
>> world to be one in which the exciting new discoveries in
>> spellcasting, rituals and crafting are being made *now*, not one in
>> which the current civilisations are effectively just picking over the
>> remnants of the far-more-powerful kingdoms and races of long ago.
>
> Have you tried Dawnforge? It is set *in* the Golden Age. During truly
> Heroic days of new races, new nations, when magic was fresh.
Dawnforge is currently my favorite setting that I've paid for.
Greyhawk's okay, I try to not think about Forgotten Realms, Eberron has
it's moments but I can live without it, Dragonlance is okay... but
Dawnforge has a whole bunch of my attention.
AEG has another setting out, I think it was released last year. I
forget the name offhand (books are at work), but I remember that elves
are no longer the long-lived race they have been in other settings.
Maximum age has been reduced to, IIRC, 27 years + 1d12 months.
No, the elves are *not* happy about this. In fact, they're panicking
rather badly.
I don't remember details about the setting otherwise, I flipped through
the books at the FLGS and saw enough goodness that I picked them up
then.
However, Tetsubo's right. Dawnforge is made of goodness. I'm leaning
on some of the character concepts fairly heavily.
Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies DeleteThis @gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1608
|
(Msg. 317) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:30 am
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Seebs <usenet-nospam DeleteThis @seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2008-03-06, David Trimboli <david DeleteThis @trimboli.name> wrote:
>>> Addition is faster than subtraction in human brains, and much less
>>> error-prone.
>
>> Table look-ups require less arithmetic than addition.
>
> Yes, but a lot more time. Every table lookup consists of roughly
> 2*(log2(n)) separate comparisons.
Depends how it's implemented. It should be fairly trivial to transform
the tables to the lookup is O(1).
>> Once you've looked up a value on a table, you don't usually have to
>> look it up again soon.
>
> If I only have one attacker and one target, or maybe two attackers
> with two targets, okay. If there's more... I have to look all of them
> up every round.
Or get better memory... which just means you do the searches with faster
media.
>> I don't disagree that using BAB is a simpler process when measured by
>> the number of distinct elements to process. I certainly agree that
>> addition is much less error-prone than subtraction. I haven't seen
>> anything to indicate that BAB is "significantly faster" than using
>> either of the first two cases.
>
> I have. The other cases require steps which take more time and are
> more error-prone.
I agree.
>> If one method were "significantly faster" than the others, I'd expect
>> that of three groups of equal skill conducting an encounter with one
>> method each, one group would finish running the combat a measurable
>> amount of time sooner than the others. How much time would you expect
>> to measure?
>
> Depends on how combat-heavy things are. I'd guess that in a typical
> game, the direct costs would only be a fraction of each combat --
> maybe at most thirty seconds in a ten-minute combat. The indirect
> effects, though, from loss of train of thought, arguments, retcons,
> and so on... 3e combat was always noticably faster for me than 1e or
> 2e.
Especially since there are fewer errors.
Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies DeleteThis @gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1608
|
(Msg. 318) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:37 am
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Hadsil <forumite RemoveThis @netzero.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 5:50 pm, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse... RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> "Hadsil" <forum... RemoveThis @netzero.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:a20f3cf8-66cf-49bf-8ac7-71a92371c32d@m34g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >There are bits of 4E I'm liking and bits I'm not liking.
>>
>> I am with you there.
>>
>> > I just have to wait until I read the 4E PHB to determine whether I
>> > like it or not in a confirmed opinion. As for magic items, the plethora
>> > of them or lack thereof or somewhere in between is a DM issue, not
>> > a game issue, at least as D&D is concerned.
>>
>> That is partially true. However, to the extent that magic items are
>> needed/expected in order to overcome certain challenges, it *is* a game
>> issue.
>
> I can see that. Taken in moderation I don't find it a bug, magic
> weapons and DR for example. A good change 3.5 did from 3.0 was lower
> the DR values so that even if you didn't have the proper weapon, you
> could still hurt the monster. What causes the problem of reliance on
> magic items I think are how the monsters are made. With arbirtrarily
> high natural armor and insight bonuses to AC and at will spell-like
> abilities, monsters are not really following the same rules in their
> creation as player characters. There are similarities, and I don't
> object to some natural armor or spell-like abilities (dragons and
> beholders e.g. are too iconic so I hold no ill will towards them), but
> a lot of monsters look like they were just made to be powerful by
> becoming resistant or immune to class abilities.
This is part of the reason I'm planning to dump enhancement bonuses. It
lets me strip the +19 natural armor bonus balor get (as an example); I
might leave them with a few points, give them some honest armor (or at
least, as honest as a demon's armor can be), and so on. Once you dump a
lot of the enhancement bonuses all around and justify the monster's
abilities, things get easier... and CR starts to make more sense.
And I like the idea of a balor Wiz16 as a CR19 threat (3HD + Wiz16 + a
bit of 'padding' in the form of demonic benefits).
> Running one-shot adventures at conventions, I sometimes used as the
> finale climactic combat for the party to face an equal number of equal
> level classed bad guys. It's not suitable for a campaign combat since
> party members will get killed, and they have been during play, but for
> a one-shot it's fun. The party had magic items and used them, but it
> was class abilities that were more important. Monsters don't need
> resistances, immunities, and save or die to be a fun challenge. Such
> qualities have their place; they just shouldn't be an overabundance.
I bet it would be fun to run that. Long ago one of my favorite
encounters was one we engineered between two PC parties (via smoke
signal^W^Wmodem). That got *ugly*.
Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies RemoveThis @kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies RemoveThis @gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1608
|
(Msg. 319) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:29 am
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Malachias Invictus <invictusebay RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Keith Davies" <keith.davies RemoveThis @kjdavies.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnft17lg.e6c.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
>
>> (Will saves -- having your tank turn against you is bad... can be fun
>> for the tank player, mind, I've had it happen to me *g*).
>
> Alright, just *how* convincing was your "I'm sorry I have to do this"
> face?
Probably not very. But enough they decided it was worth the effort to
drop me *nicely* rather than just kill me.
It *was* fun, though. I was under a compulsion that didn't let me look
for a gentle way, but didn't require me to be quite as nasty I could be.
I went with the straightforward 'smash anything in my way' approach,
rather than 'look for the fragile guy first'... though I *did* know
enough that when that sneaky bitch tried to get in behind me I was able
to nail him before he got me.
Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies RemoveThis @kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies RemoveThis @gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 209
|
(Msg. 320) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:47 am
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mar 2, 9:54 pm, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> "Tetsubo" <tets....TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:BvWdnTBFlNzyjVbanZ2dnUVZ_qPinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>
>
> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
>
> >> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspObvi....TakeThisOut@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote in message
> >>news:47C9BADE.3080005@sgeObviousinc.com...
>
> >>>Hong Ooi wrote:
>
> >>>>Biggest issues so far have been the banishing of the 15-minute
> >>>>adventuring day (or not),
>
> >>>Banishing of the WHAT? WTF are you talking about?
>
> >> It isn't obvious? Once certain spells are used up, the casters want to
> >> rest. That often happens early in the adventuring day, unless the group
> >> is encountering nothing but soft targets.
>
> > I've never encountered a player that did this. Not in thirty years.
>
> Weird. I find it to be the general consensus of the party, most of the
> time.
>
Heh, in our party the sorcerer and wizard used to blow through their
spells and the fighter and druid would say - well we're still fresh so
lets keep going. Then they would get to the big boss and the wizard
and sorcerer would only have wands of magic missile or something
weak. After about 10th to 12th level it seemed more like the wizard
would just sit back and wait, and just do something on the big fights,
never running out of spells, or really doing much.
In our other campaign we haven't really had any long dungeons and
usually only encountered one or two encounters a day, so it's been
full bore every battle. Unfortunately we don't have anyone who can
really take advantage of that. We've got a sorcerer, I don't think
he's ever run out of spells. A cleric, who usually does more fighting
than spellcasting, a couple rogues and a warblade who don't worry
about it, and me a bard - I usually use music first, and I've got
extra music, so I never run out of that. Even with a very limited
number of spells it's pretty rare to run out of those.
- Justisaur >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2006
Posts: 413
|
(Msg. 321) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:35 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <47d07fda$0$25025$607ed4bc@cv.net>,
David Trimboli <david.TakeThisOut@trimboli.name> wrote:
>
>Inconsistency is only an issue if you're looking at it from the "What do
>I need to roll this time?" aspect, which is the question asked by idiots
>(who can't learn or can't apply the rules) and the ignorant (who never
>learned the rules). If the only alternative to "a single rule" were "too
>many rules to remember," I might agree that the change was necessary.
>But that leaves out the category of "more than one rule, without being
>too many," which is where I feel that previous editions of the game
>fell, to varying degrees.
So comparing these:
1e combat: roll dice, add bonuses, cross reference result
against AC on one of several class-specific combat tables
3e combat: roll dice, add bonuses, see if result is >= AC
....and you can't see that the latter is a vast improvement?!
WTF, your position on this is frankly insane.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1608
|
(Msg. 322) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:33 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Malachias Invictus <invictusebay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Keith Davies" <keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnft0351.b31.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
>> Malachias Invictus <invictusebay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Tetsubo" <tetsubo.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:5OednVOkg9v5iFLanZ2dnUVZ_qainZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> And I am feeling like I'm being marginalized by my hobby.
>>>
>>> Dude. It is really not that bad. There is still a ton of goodness out
>>> there for 3.5E, and I am willing to bet there is a demand for new stuff
>>> which will be filled by competent publishers.
>>
>> /me raises hand
>
> Case in point.
I'll accept competent, I haven't actually *published* anything yet.
>> What I've seen of the licensing presented by WotC looks *much* less
>> accommodating than the current OGL.
>
> That is probably one of the strongest reasons for the fork. That, and
> 3.5E is a great system.
I would say it's the best D&D so far. Including what I've seen of 4e,
though I expect to backport some of the things I've seen 'leaked' about
4e.
>> I think they'll give it a try with an open mind -- I probably will
>> too, there *is* good stuff in there -- but I think a lot of the people
>> are coming to believe that while it'll be *marked* 'D&D', and may
>> still be a lot of fun, it won't be nearly close to what they're used to.
>
> That much is true.
I'm not complaining about it, but I think I'll have a much easier time
dealing with 4e if I *don't* call it D&D.
Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2006
Posts: 413
|
(Msg. 323) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:56 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <awessels-C98019.16230204032008.DeleteThis@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>,
Allen Wessels <awessels.DeleteThis@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
>
>I think we're going to see a lot of game mechanics in 4e that seem wierd.
>
>The fix seems to be don't think about it too much and play the game.
*Every* edition of D&D has had weird mechanics that only work if
you remember that it's a game, and not a simulation of anything
other than "D&D reality".
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2006
Posts: 413
|
(Msg. 324) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:13 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <5IGdnTSMLueIeVfanZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d.DeleteThis@comcast.com>,
Tetsubo <tetsubo.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> 4E: The Unwanted.
Actually it's amusing watching the newsgroup's slow drift from
- "This sucks unbearably and beyond all measure!", to
- "Well, it still sucks, but this one thing I heard about it
is actually kind of cool", to the current state of
- "Well, it has some things that are kinda neat, but it
still mostly sucks, and I'm not going to play it!"
I await the arrival of the next stage
- "Well, I guess I'm gonna try playing it, but that doesn't
mean I like it!"
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 06, 2004
Posts: 460
|
(Msg. 325) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:13 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Del Rio wrote:
> In article <5IGdnTSMLueIeVfanZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d.DeleteThis@comcast.com>,
> Tetsubo <tetsubo.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> 4E: The Unwanted.
>
>
> Actually it's amusing watching the newsgroup's slow drift from
> - "This sucks unbearably and beyond all measure!", to
> - "Well, it still sucks, but this one thing I heard about it
> is actually kind of cool", to the current state of
> - "Well, it has some things that are kinda neat, but it
> still mostly sucks, and I'm not going to play it!"
>
> I await the arrival of the next stage
> - "Well, I guess I'm gonna try playing it, but that doesn't
> mean I like it!"
>
I haven't drifted anywhere. I will more than likely pick up the PHB in
September (when I next have gaming money). But I won't be running a game
or playing in one. I own hundreds of gaming books that I read but never
play. Most of them because I don't think they are worth playing.
Like 4E.
--
Tetsubo
--------------------------------------
"The apparent lesson of the Inquisition is that insistence on
uniformity of belief is fatal to intellectual, moral and spiritual health."
-The Uses Of The Past-, Herbert J. Muller
BLUP >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2006
Posts: 413
|
(Msg. 326) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:17 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <97-dnQntlMR78lHanZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d.TakeThisOut@comcast.com>,
Tetsubo <tetsubo.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> So why support 4E? Why support a game that is heading in the direction
> of more combat simulation, less role-playing, an increased use of
>miniatures and the need for digital content?
What makes you think there will be less roleplaying? The
roleplaying aspect of D&D has always been pretty much optional.
The RAW scarcely touch on it, compared to the massive heap of
pages devoted to combat and spellcasting.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am." >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 06, 2004
Posts: 460
|
(Msg. 327) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:17 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Del Rio wrote:
> In article <97-dnQntlMR78lHanZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d RemoveThis @comcast.com>,
> Tetsubo <tetsubo RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> So why support 4E? Why support a game that is heading in the direction
>> of more combat simulation, less role-playing, an increased use of
>>miniatures and the need for digital content?
>
>
> What makes you think there will be less roleplaying? The
> roleplaying aspect of D&D has always been pretty much optional.
> The RAW scarcely touch on it, compared to the massive heap of
> pages devoted to combat and spellcasting.
>
Not optional in my campaigns.
--
Tetsubo
--------------------------------------
"The apparent lesson of the Inquisition is that insistence on
uniformity of belief is fatal to intellectual, moral and spiritual health."
-The Uses Of The Past-, Herbert J. Muller
BLUP >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 18, 2006
Posts: 459
|
(Msg. 328) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:26 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"David Trimboli" <david.RemoveThis@trimboli.name> wrote in message
news:47d051f9$0$15184$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> "David Trimboli" <david.RemoveThis@trimboli.name> wrote in message
>> news:47cf7a60$0$15183$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>>> Del Rio wrote:
>>>> In article <47cae1f1$0$15204$607ed4bc@cv.net>,
>>>> David Trimboli <david.RemoveThis@trimboli.name> wrote:
>>>>> I'm sorry, but the "higher is always better" is a mnemonic for idiots
>>>>> and the ignorant. If you know the rules, and you can't figure out what
>>>>> you're supposed to roll in a given situation, go take a vacation.
>>>> You've got to be kidding. Consolidating all the disparate
>>>> mechanics of previous editions under a single consistent task
>>>> resolution system was best step forward D&D had taken in 20+
>>>> years.
>>> Did you have trouble playing D&D without a "single consistent task
>>> resolution system"?
>>
>> That is utterly irrelevant. I doubt most folks would have trouble
>> walking to the nearest grocery store. Funny thing, though: most drive
>> there instead.
>
> Yeah. Because they need something with which to carry home the groceries.
Are they armless?
> Or because it's too far to walk comfortably.
So, even though they would not have trouble walking to the nearest grocery
store, they choose not to when there are more efficient alternatives
available. Check.
> Unless the posters here are willing to admit they had difficulty playing
> D&D before there was a "single consistent task resolution system," I can
> only conclude that such is merely the product of the desire to systematize
> and regularize the game for its aesthetic value,
....or to, you know, speed gameplay and reduce errors, like others have
already mentioned.
> not due to any real need.
There is no "real need" to play roleplaying games at all.
--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.
from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 329) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:44 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mar 6, 8:51 pm, Keith Davies <keith.dav....TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:
> You actually have to make a choice at that point. Right now what I see
> is the high Str, high Dex guys almost always go with the mobility route
> because they end up with similar AC either way but big mobility hit if
> they go with armor.
>
> Keith
> --
That's because of RAW's speed penalty. If you initiate your proposal
of no speed penalty in armor with which your proficient it becomes
more personal flavor. Armor still has some natural hindrances such
as weight, when it matters for crossing weak appearing bridges or a
river, so some people will still for go it, while others would like
the magic properties armor can provide.
Gerald Katz >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 330) Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:02 pm
Post subject: Re: A VERY positive review of 4E [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mar 6, 10:36 pm, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse....DeleteThis@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> "Hadsil" <forum....DeleteThis@netzero.com> wrote in message
>
> news:22b9ba55-990f-4f05-81b3-fa344068f0f9@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I should clarify that when I say MAD, I mean dependent upon 3
> > or more attributes. When a class is dependent upon three or more
> > to do what it's supposed to do, it gets stretched thin and effectively
> > can't do what it's supposed to do.
>
> I think that depends greatly upon what your stat resources are.
>
> --
> ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^
>
Agreed. While I don't think a particular character array of 18, 17,
15, 15, 13, 12 means the campaign is doomed to implosion and can
handle a MAD class quite well, too many DMs will have a conniption fit
over it. When a class only requires at most two ability scores to do
what it's supposed to do, it becomes easier to make such a character
in a campaign where the DM would be afraid of his players with an
array such as that. Those DMs prefer the so called "elite" array,
minor tweaks accepted.
Gerald Katz >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | Review this race please... - Is this race balanced compared to core book races? IE, compared to gnomes or elves, is it fair? Vogornian (Tabaxian) Tabaxians are a subrace of Vogornian resembling domesticated cats instead of various types of the "great" cats (ie, lion, pan...
Movie Review: 300 - I'm sure most of you know the story...The Persians were trying to impose their rule over the world, and tiny, poor Greece had not submitted yet. So the Persians invaded, and Greece decided to fight, and the Spartans, the best warriors in the land were..
Magician Class for Review - I'm trying to create a new arcane spellcasting class for an upcoming campaign I will be running. This class replaces the Wizard. This campaign will be utilyzing very many of the variant campaign rules from the SRD and almost all of the character classes....
Complete Psionic [Review] - = CHAPTER ONE = There are three new psionic classes introduced in this chapter: the ardent, the divine mind, and the lurk. One of these things is not like the other, as we will soon see, but thankfully not in terms of quality. All three are quite..
Instant Review: D&D Minis - Seems like fun. Kind of confusing the first couple times through. A little brain-sapping playing so late at night. It worked better after we removed some of the rules and ignored some other things(morale, commanders, charging, coverand concealment.. |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
