| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Aaron Highcolor
Acolyte
USA
45 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Aug 2008 : 22:11:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kiaransalyn
If one was to buy the latest version of the FRCS does one need the core books as well? I would assume not but I'd like to know for sure.
The FRCG is a setting book, mainly describing effects and the "new Realms. Unless you planned on running the adventure that comes with the book or using any of the magic items and such from the book, then no, you don't need the PHB or anything like that (that I can recall). |
Run when you have to, fight when you must, rest when you can. |
 |
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 00:09:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neil
I don't think that's how the spell works.
I wasn't the exact example. The real thing was a good outsider fighting evil PCs and I was the DM. I don't remember the exact numbers or effects, but the point is that a recent shift in alignement nearly resulted in a TPK, and more generaly that alignement can be a "trap".
I suggest that we move on more important reasons why 4E is different/better/worse than 3.xE. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 00:09:45 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 00:15:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
I suggest that we move on more important reasons why 4E is different/better/worse than 3.xE.
Agreed, we were just debating the point since that was one of your key points to why 4E was better.
As for me, it's a personal opinion. I simply do not like the "Powers" system and how the game is a dolled up version of clicktech. And that is my opinion and interpretation of how the system works, based on my experiences through the years playing everything from (every edition and setting) D&D, (every edition) Shadowrun, Battletech, Mechwarrior (video game and RPG), Car Wars, Mage: The Ascension, Call of Cthulu, Toon, Star Wars (d6 and d20), SLA Industries, Immortal, Home-brew Talislanta, and a bunch others that were one-shots at cons. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 00:47:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I simply do not like the "Powers" system and how the game is a dolled up version of clicktech.
Explain what you dislike about it. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 00:57:52
|
Okay, in almost every system of game that I've played, the Magic System is something offset from the regular rules, thereby making Magic and their User's 'special'. By doing this, it says to the player, if you want to do something different than the others, you need to know a few extra things to make it work.
By making spells/attacks/etc. all the same, there nothing that distinguishes a Wizard from an Archer. Even the basic Magic Missile, with it's back-up 'never miss', is now an at-will to-hit ranged attack, identical to a regular melee attack except you use Intelligence instead of Dexterity.
Even rituals in the game are no longer special since you need a feat to use them. Clerics and Wizards get this feat for free at creation, but I don't like that a hack-and-slash Fighter can now Raise Dead with a feat (okay *3* feats the Arcana/Religion feat, the Heal and Ritual Caster), some time and some material components. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 01:28:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Okay, in almost every system of game that I've played, the Magic System is something offset from the regular rules, thereby making Magic and their User's 'special'. By doing this, it says to the player, if you want to do something different than the others, you need to know a few extra things to make it work.
By making spells/attacks/etc. all the same, there nothing that distinguishes a Wizard from an Archer. Even the basic Magic Missile, with it's back-up 'never miss', is now an at-will to-hit ranged attack, identical to a regular melee attack except you use Intelligence instead of Dexterity.
Even rituals in the game are no longer special since you need a feat to use them. Clerics and Wizards get this feat for free at creation, but I don't like that a hack-and-slash Fighter can now Raise Dead with a feat (okay *3* feats the Arcana/Religion feat, the Heal and Ritual Caster), some time and some material components.
The thing to have in mind is that different groups can bring in play rituals like they wish. If for some group, fighter shouldn't bring back people from dead, a player playing such a class won't be penalized for not choosing those feats/rituals.
In some RPG, where the "spolight balance" is not based on "combact effectivness", it may be possible to have a Magic skill handled very differently than swords and bows, but for D&D, I think that 4E solution was the best one. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 01:29:14 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 03:05:33
|
First, a response (as best as I can give) to the actual question.
The only 100% undebateable answer I could give is if you want to continue getting new official FR lore, then you need to switch to 4e FR.
I can't give the same answer for the 4e rules, however, since EVERY company other then WotC WILL continue to support 3e. 
While the first part of that is a rather compelling reason to switch, it is so ONLY for FR fans, and if you enjoy 3e and have no problem running it, I don't see why you need to.
Now, moving on to other things people have brought up - an argument was made that the new rules prevent DM abuses.
This reminds me of a little something that happened way back in the 70's here in NY (for those of us who are DINOSAURS compared to 27 year olds  ).
The NY City Fire Dept. didn't have any female firefighters back then. The reason being that the tests had some very stringent strength requirements that most women simply could not pass (not to mention most men, either). The test most were having the biggest problem with was the one where you had to carry a two-hundred pound dummy on your shoulder through a burning building and down a three-story ladder.
Feminist groups fought that the tests were unfair to women, and the Fire Dept waved the test for female applicants.
WTF?! So the rules were changed and simplified for the people who weren't up to handling them before?
Fortunately, people came to their senses, and after a short time the strength tests were re-implimented (thank goodness! Peoples lives were in danger!)
The bottom line - just like I don't want to be trapped in a burning building with a Firefighter who can't carry my fat arse out, I also don't want to play a game with a DM who is 'forced' to play nice. If the rules need to hold them back from being snarling, TPK-monsters, then maybe its not the rules that were the problem. Lowering the DM-standards so anyone can run it is NOT a positive, IMHO.
Just my two cents.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Aug 2008 03:15:04 |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 03:18:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I can't give the same answer for the 4e rules, however, since EVERY company other then WotC WILL continue to support 3e.
This will be an interesting statement to revisit in twelve months or so. |
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 03:33:07
|
It certainly will.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 03:37:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I also don't want to play a game with a DM who is 'forced' to play nice. If the rules need to hold them back from being snarling, TPK-monsters, then maybe its not the rules that were the problem. Lowering the DM-standards so anyone can run it is NOT a positive, IMHO.
I'm certainly not the guy who wants the DM to pulls his punchs / fudges the dices to enforce his vision/plot/story unto the players.
I don't want the DM to play nicely, I want him to play fairly, i.e. using the system that playtests have shown to be working (e.g. the number of monsters in a encounter, the number of hard encounters in a level, etc.)
That doesn't mean that no PC will die or that a TPK will never occur, only that the result will depend heavily on the decisions made by the players (and that's the purpose of a game IMHO).
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 03:42:50 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 04:33:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
The thing to have in mind is that different groups can bring in play rituals like they wish. If for some group, fighter shouldn't bring back people from dead, a player playing such a class won't be penalized for not choosing those feats/rituals.
In some RPG, where the "spolight balance" is not based on "combact effectivness", it may be possible to have a Magic skill handled very differently than swords and bows, but for D&D, I think that 4E solution was the best one.
Sorry, I had to read this a few times to get past some of the double negatives. So, 4th Edition is good because it won't penalize the fighter for not bringing people back from the dead?
Phew, load off my mind. I've been struggling for years fighting against the common and prejudice notions that my fighters should bring the clerics back from the dead!
I know that my opinion on the matter will never change Skeptic's view of the 4th edition ruleset. I'm happy he's found something he likes and enjoys playing, making D&D fun for him.
So, Skeptic and the other 4E fans, have fun, be fruitful and multiply! Keep the D&D Brand name alive for future gamers! Us grognards will be here to regale you with stories of the 'good ole days' and spin tales of battling goblins and orcs. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 04:44:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I can't give the same answer for the 4e rules, however, since EVERY company other then WotC WILL continue to support 3e.
This will be an interesting statement to revisit in twelve months or so.
for what it is worth, here is one that doing 4E. never heard of it before though
http://www.sandsofdestiny.com/ |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 04:47:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Phew, load off my mind. I've been struggling for years fighting against the common and prejudice notions that my fighters should bring the clerics back from the dead!
 The idea is that each group (players + DM) is free to choose which kind of Rituals will be used by which kind of classes according to the campaign's theme/genre.
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I know that my opinion on the matter will never change Skeptic's view of the 4th edition ruleset. I'm happy he's found something he likes and enjoys playing, making D&D fun for him.
Even if I'm pretty much convinced that 4E is the best D&D edition ever, I do think it has its flaws and that it is not the kind of RPG I like the most.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 04:49:45 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 04:55:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
The idea is that each group (players + DM) is free to choose which kind of Rituals will be used by which kind of classes according to the campaign's theme/genre.
But, it's only up to the player creating the character. I for one have never been part of a group where my character's feats/skills/spells/etc. were up for "group approval". My character choices were always about the story I was telling of my character. Sometimes that story was different from the overall campaign story, but that's how it was.
Sure, I've had DMs restrict certain classes, spells or other things because they simple wouldn't exist in his vision of the setting (like a samurai in Eberron; yes it tells you how in the sourcebooks, but it didn't work thematically for him). But even those restrictions did not hinder the character overmuch. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 05:03:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
But, it's only up to the player creating the character. I for one have never been part of a group where my character's feats/skills/spells/etc. were up for "group approval". My character choices were always about the story I was telling of my character. Sometimes that story was different from the overall campaign story, but that's how it was.
If you want to tell your story about your character, write a novel.
When you play a RPG, other members of the group have their word to say (it may involve dice rolls, GMs can have a stronger voice) about anything happening in the game-world. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 05:04:35 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 17:39:57
|
So what your saying is that D&D should become just a game, and not a vehicle for social interaction, as it has always been.
Will Hasbro be releasing a rulebook covering Going out 'Clubbing'?
D&D was designed with the idea in mind that the DM is a judge, and that he is supposed to be running things - NOT the players. By putting ALL the decision making into the hands of the players, and coupling that with pre-generated dungeons, the DM has now become nothing more then a glorified X-Box, or a Computer.
D&D, in the beginning, was about friends getting together and just having fun; what is the point of the DM if everything becomes cut and dry? What happens when players try to "think outside the box"? People are no longer allowed to have "clever ideas", unless the rules already cover them? There's a famous quote from Gary Gygax that even states you don't need the rules to play D&D - thus proving that that is NOT what it was supposed to be about (and while most people's concept of D&D would just be considered 'opinion', I think the guy who invented it knows what he had in mind).
For a Game, consistent and logical rules are the way to go, but I always felt that D&D was a little more then that. It was more like a 'Drama club' (with rules), wherein people get to step outside of their dreary lives and pretend to be something they are not.
If you want precise, consistent rules in a rigid, stratified setting, play a MORPG.
But if you want to have fun, play D&D.
Sorry, but the idea of emasculating the DM I find kinda repulsive, but thats just IMHO. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Aug 2008 17:43:41 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 17:55:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So what your saying is that D&D should become just a game, and not a vehicle for social interaction, as it has always been.
Any game is a vehicle for social interaction, no ?
quote:
D&D was designed with the idea in mind that the DM is a judge, and that he is supposed to be running things - NOT the players. By putting ALL the decision making into the hands of the players, and coupling that with pre-generated dungeons, the DM has now become nothing more then a glorified X-Box, or a Computer..
I certainly don't want pre-generated dungeons, I want a DM to respond to players decisions. As prep is reduced in 4E vs 3.xE, it means that the DM can in many cases responds in real time.
In D&D, I want a somewhat powerful DM, mainly to reduce rules lawyering, but as the system offer no formal player priorities mechanics, I want the DM to listen what his players want the game to be about (at character creation time and during play).
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
What happens when players try to "think outside the box"? People are no longer allowed to have "clever ideas", unless the rules already cover them?
I really think that "thinking outside the box" in D&D is overrated.
I don't want my D&D games to looks like a Sierra game.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
For a Game, consistent and logical rules are the way to go, but I always felt that D&D was a little more then that. It was more like a 'Drama club' (with rules), wherein people get to step outside of their dreary lives and pretend to be something they are not.
I don't like "logical rules", I like rules that force players to take interesting decisions, either tactical ones or thematic ones.
Dices can be a powerful narrative engine.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If you want precise, consistent rules in a rigid, stratified setting, play a MORPG.
I don't like CRPGs like Baldur's Gate or NWN, no nore than MMOs. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 18:04:31 |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 18:13:07
|
| Am I right to believe (I'm using you guys as a source on this) that 4ed sort of encourages "group discussion" rather than DM direction (direction in the 'director of a play' sense of the word)? |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 18:24:19
|
Skeptic, you talk about how you want the players to determine the game, but you want a powerful DM to adjudicate the decisions, but only if they are in agreement with the players.
You don't want your game to resemble a video game, but you also don't want anyone thinking outside the (very strict, it seems) parameters how the game is.
You want a powerful story, as long as it is determined by a random roll of dice at every decision.
Good luck finding that. I don't think there is anything like the paradoxes you are creating for yourself. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 18:41:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Skeptic, you talk about how you want the players to determine the game, but you want a powerful DM to adjudicate the decisions, but only if they are in agreement with the players.
.
The DM is at least always as powerful as a player.
Rules-heavy tactical game like D&D (3.x or 4) suffer from problems like broken combos, etc. I want the DM to have final word on those things.
In D&D, the DM is also at least responsible to setup the challenges, but players can have a large input on which kind of challenges they will face.
Two different examples in the little 4E game I'm running.
1) Players said they don't want to encounter Warforgeds ("No F* robots!")
2) Last session, they barely won a big fight with kobolds, then they got away before other kobolds attack them again. Doing so, they stumbled on the entrance of a natural cavern. I prompted them with a choice directly : either you enter that cavern and meet the badass bear living inside, or you stay outdoor for the night and fight the kobolds looking for you on a dark night. (They chose the bear and it was a nasty fight).
Yeah, I know that a DM coming up upfront with that kind of decision may sound crazy for some of you  .
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
You don't want your game to resemble a video game, but you also don't want anyone thinking outside the (very strict, it seems) parameters how the game is.
I want the game "primitives" to be scrict (i.e. skill check, powers, rituals, etc.), higher-level tactics are of course expected, but cheesy things that were common in the A&D era like strange combination of magic items (I'm thinking about a Decenter of Endless Water) is not something I'm looking for.
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
You want a powerful story, as long as it is determined by a random roll of dice at every decision.
It's not so simple, and I don't want to go here in thing like task resolution vs conflict resolution, but yeah the basic idea is that randomness can help creating a story during play.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 18:54:50 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 18:57:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arion Elenim
Am I right to believe (I'm using you guys as a source on this) that 4ed sort of encourages "group discussion" rather than DM direction (direction in the 'director of a play' sense of the word)?
Not as much as I would have liked. But good "meta-gamming" is certainly more encouraged than in past D&D editions.
Also, as they got rid of most of the "gameworld physics" rules, it is more easier to do it even if it is not what is said in the DMG.
And I'm talking of doing such thing to link encounters toghether. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 19:00:00 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 18:58:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
The DM is at least always as powerful as a player.
The DM is should be more powerful than a player. Always. If a player is more powerful than the DM, then the game is broken.
quote:
Rules-heavy tactical game like D&D (3.x or 4) suffer from problems like broken combos, etc. I want the DM to have final word on those things.
1) I have to point out that I still disagree that D&D is a tactical game. 4th Edition is tactical, true, but since I don't consider the flavor to match the brand...
2) Broken combos like a 125 year-old half-elf rogue that can use Eldritch Blast and Soldier of Faith feat allowing him to wield a Holy Avenger? EVERY system has a broken bit. And you'll be seeing the game break more and more with every sourcebook released. It is an entropic effect that the more sourcebooks you release, the more you break the original rules (except GURPS. You can't break chaos. )
quote:
In D&D, the DM is also at least responsible to setup the challenges, but players can have a large input on which kind of challenges they will face.
Yep, it's called running away. Something that video games have killed in the minds of adventurers.
quote:
I want the game "primitives" to be scrict (i.e. skill check, powers, rituals, etc.), higher-level tactics are of course expected, but cheesy things that were common in the A&D era like strange combination of magic items (I'm thinking about a Decenter of Endless Water) is not something I'm looking for.
Thinking outside the box used to earn you extra XP for a great idea and enhancing the story. In one campaign, my character (Ashe R., of course) and his party had to fight a sea hag and her pet kraken. I was carrying a Potion of Shrink (opposite of AD&D's Growth) and, after makings a successful throw item roll, tossed it down the gullet of the kraken and turning it into calamari. But, in your game, this is detrimental to the enjoyment of the game.
quote:
It's not so simple, and I don't want to go here in thing like task resolution vs conflict resolution, but yeah the basic idea is that randomness can help creating a story during play.
I'm a firm believer in the DM as a storyteller. They know the beginning, middle and end of the story and it's up to them to describe what your characters see in the world and how their actions have effect. The randomness of the dice role is to show that 'luck' factor that heroes encounter during a story. It is not a storytelling device. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 19:01:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I'm a firm believer in the DM as a storyteller. They know the beginning, middle and end of the story and it's up to them to describe what your characters see in the world and how their actions have effect. The randomness of the dice role is to show that 'luck' factor that heroes encounter during a story. It is not a storytelling device.
Okay, we have much work to do . I'm just no sure it's the right place for doing it.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 27 Aug 2008 19:02:16 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
|
|
Neil
Learned Scribe
Canada
107 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 19:25:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Yep, it's called running away. Something that video games have killed in the minds of adventurers.
So very true. A lot of younger players seem to get caught up on the 'if it's there, it must be beatable' idea. And so you get 4th level characters making frontal attacks on ancient dragons. Havoc, of course, ensues. |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2008 : 20:09:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neil
So very true. A lot of younger players seem to get caught up on the 'if it's there, it must be beatable' idea. And so you get 4th level characters making frontal attacks on ancient dragons. Havoc, of course, ensues.
Communication problem between DM and players.
|
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2008 : 04:15:45
|
DM: "You see an elder wyrm, the size of its teeth dwarfing your blade. He smiles as you look upon him, his eyes glinting with challenge at the tasty morsels offering themselves up to him."
Player: "We attack this stuck-up lizard!"
(rolls dice)
Player: "I hit a 25 AC with my +1 longsword!"
DM: "The dragon eats you."
Morale of the story? Next time, the player will think to run away. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2008 : 04:27:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
DM: "You see an elder wyrm, the size of its teeth dwarfing your blade. He smiles as you look upon him, his eyes glinting with challenge at the tasty morsels offering themselves up to him."
Player: "We attack this stuck-up lizard!"
(rolls dice)
Player: "I hit a 25 AC with my +1 longsword!"
DM: "The dragon eats you."
Morale of the story? Next time, the player will think to run away.
That is exactly the kind of situation I wish no RPG group would experience. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 28 Aug 2008 04:32:32 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2008 : 05:02:31
|
Ah, but that's the experience that is entirely possible in any good story. And before you say "What story?", may I point out Bilbo and Smaug.
Point of fact, both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings trilogy is about a LOT of running away and only fighting when you absolutely have to. Granted, the fighting's pretty fun, but it should only be done when you are pretty sure of the victory. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 28 Aug 2008 05:03:55 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2008 : 05:21:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Ah, but that's the experience that is entirely possible in any good story. And before you say "What story?", may I point out Bilbo and Smaug.
The protagonists didn't end up eaten. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 28 Aug 2008 05:21:14 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Concrete, undebatable reasons to switch to 4th ed.
Topic Locked
