| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

FrontPage

This version was saved 16 years, 1 month ago View current version     Page history
Saved by PBworks
on February 28, 2008 at 10:16:38 am
 

Welcome to Heroshi

 

 

Realm of HE who is ROund and SHort... with an I at the end.

 

News

 

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Aggro management in D&D? Please! link

 

Here's an excerpt from an alternate universe... other time... other space... in which I run 4e... to show how I'd handle the use of the Marked condition:

Me: The gnoll swings his axe at player1's warlock.

P2: He's marked. If he's not attacking me he takes damage.

Me: Who are you to say who he attacks, beep-hole? Why should he target the dwarf with a billion AC and HP that he knows he has no chance of hitting when there's a ripe target spewing acid on him every turn? He's hitting the warlock, so get over it!

P2: Fine. He takes damage though.

Me: The crap he does. Maybe you should take damage for not attacking who I want you to! BBftH! 90 damage!

P2: I'm at -32. Just wait til I roll a 20.

Me: Is that so? Take 90 more, douche.

P3: How'd that gnoll survive four acid blasts anyway?

Me: He has class levels. Deal with it! Oh, and his buddies rolled 20 on their recovery check. They're up again.

 

You see, being restricted as a GM would make me far more heavy handed, even moreso than in the second campaign. Know this: I decide the rules, not the books. While I run with most of the rules in 3e, it would not be so in 4e. In that, I'd dispense with story and would feel it was my goal to get a TPK every session. It would be the only way I'd derive satisfaction from it. In other words, it'd be like Hack Master: GM vs PCs.

 

Wednesday, February 7, 2008

I'm not even going to comment on this article. It'd be shooting fish in a barrel. I read about Monte Cook's system and like it: dead at negative Con, disabled from 0 to neg-con bonus. Might try that if the opportunity arises. Oh, and the DC for the Fort save to stabilize is 25. With my Nat-20=30 rule, even an elven mage with Con as his dump stat can still make it with the same odds as the normal rule (5%).

- Adam

 

Thursday, January 10, 2008

So I suppose you've heard the news. I guess that'll keep crap like Airships from being made. Nevertheless, some of those books have good ideas presented that are just not implemented well. So this is the wind from the publishers. Most are going to sit down with the OGL and see if it restricts them creatively or not, then decide whether it's worth forking over the five-grand. Mongoose outlines things nicely. Many of the publishers that started with d20 have (to paraphrase Jolly Blackburn) weaned themselves from the d20 teat. They have their own systems now and don't depend on what direction WotC goes. Hackmaster 5E is absorbing Kalamar as its default campaign setting, for example. I doubt there'll be a flood of early supplements as there was with 3E, and the 5K admission fee and new standards will certainly thin the herd of weak product and small-time contributers. What concerns me is that all 3rd party stuff for D&D must be based on the Players Handbook. To what extent I wonder. Also, the SRD will not be in a usable form as it was implemented by www.d20srd.org, but way more general, lacking context. No more 3-ring binders with the rules printed out. Buying the book is the only option. Hmmm... pass.

-Adam

 

 

 


EN World 4e Info

 

DnD Insider Usernames

Will - Shadowsnipe

Adam - Axcalibar

Clifton - Butcher_Jackson

 

Coming Soon

LN Oath Enforement Dude

 

 

 

Links

Sluggy Freelance Domain of the Apocalypse Wikipedia GameFAQs RPGamer Newgrounds Hypertext d20

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.