I am still running a 3.5 game alongside my 4e and would like to know what happened to him.
Thanks in advance.
Of course, when he got there, he found out it was all a lie and the Elven gods were really just human gods in disguise. :D
Guess he died for nothing... especially since that dark Elven city didn't have ANY Dark Elves in it. :P
You get to meet his replacement in that novel, which is really cool... until she is killed-off in a couple of sentences (AND the distant past) in the next novel...
And yes, folks, I'm in a foul mood lately...
You see that? Obviously the Seldarine was working at-odds to Mystra all along, to the point of subverting her own Chosen!
Is there no end to Corellon's madness?
and corellon does it just to annoy you MT, you should just stick it to him by ignoring him/her/it whatever whomever,whichever ifever soonafter, there after,
He is my anethema personified!!!
Without LK, this thread would consist of three or four pages full of spam, with one and a half page just from MT alone. :P
That said, don't even think of declaring this post spam, guys ;)
As to the point, I didn't much care for Khelben's death in the novel (though it was a good novel overall, except for that ending), so its something I utterly ignore for my games.
As to the point, I didn't much care for Khelben's death in the novel (though it was a good novel overall, except for that ending), so its something I utterly ignore for my games.
-I'm the complete opposite. I got the book because of all of the hype amongst everyone, and as I read it, I thought it was decent, but nothing great. It was towards the ending that I thought things picked up, and that it became worthy of all of the carte blanche praise it was getting (I picked it up on the first day it was released, so there wasn't all that much substance to reviews and such, at that point).
Not so much the sequel, though... I felt like I was having my nose rubbed in Spellplague on every other page.
Not a writing (author) problem so much, as a 'when' problem.
Spammer. :P
As to the point, I didn't much care for Khelben's death in the novel (though it was a good novel overall, except for that ending), so its something I utterly ignore for my games.
Hard to believe that he picked such an useless successor though. Nothing about that idiot girl made her stand out enough to take on his power and knowledge.
Hard to believe that he picked such an useless successor though. Nothing about that idiot girl made her stand out enough to take on his power and knowledge.
Agreed.
Hard to believe that he picked such an useless successor though. Nothing about that idiot girl made her stand out enough to take on his power and knowledge.
Indead, that half drow made a better blackstaff
but Khelben's decendant, the current blackstaff is hot...
I think Khelben had Danilo in mind, but things just didn't work-out liked he planned.
Khelben didn't pick her... Fate did.
-Right. I was going to point that out. At first, Khelben didn't seem none too happy, with what happened and with Tsarra.
-Though, with Khelben the planner and "schemer", I wonder how much of a role fate actually had to play, concerning that transfer between the two.
Which is what I liked about the story. Nearly a thousand years of careful planning, and in the end, it was still just a crapshoot. :D
I got the impression that Khelben was a victim of the old addage "The best laid plaid of mice and men..."
Which is what I liked about the story. Nearly a thousand years of careful planning, and in the end, it was still just a crapshot. :D
Indeed- Khelben " The BLackstaff" Arunson
Probably true. Although with Elaine Cunningham pushed off the writer roster, I can see why there's been nothing more about Danilo (or Arilyn, for that matter). We may never know what happened to them, or her other characters.
-I'd rather have that than some other author picking up the characters, and not being true to who/what they actually are. I'd rather see no conclusion of Arilyn's tale than something written up at the last minute, that doesn't do everything justice.
(despite being an atrocious build mechanically in 3.5e).
-What was she?
-What was she?
Probably something idiotic like wiz3/sorc5/Ranger1. Yea, thats useful.
Like the simbul, with her 22 sorc levels and 10 wiz levels. Why hasn't Szass Tamm killed her again with his 29 pure wizard levels? Seems to me that Simbul wouldn't be able to best him in a "duel" if going by mechanics.
Like the simbul, with her 22 sorc levels and 10 wiz levels. Why hasn't Szass Tamm killed her again with his 29 pure wizard levels? Seems to me that Simbul wouldn't be able to best him in a "duel" if going by mechanics.
Well, most of the 3e NPCs got a rather sub-optimal built, even more so 3.0 NPCs. They (WotC) published so many alternate base classes and prestige classes but rarely, if ever, used them for official NPCs.
Fortunately, a few fan-made stats still swirl around for the Simbul that easily match and justify her flavor.
I have run-across this - it's called "Nerd-boy DM allows female gamer to run rampant over his game, in hopes of achieving the ultimate goal".
In fact, I've come-across that a LOT more times then I care to mention (not by me... I've never had a female player).
-Of all of the people I've played D&D with, in total, there were (including myself) 10 guys, and 5 girls, all at different times. I guess I'm cool or something? Progressive?
As to Arcane Archers... sure they're great on a battlefield, no question, but facing off against archmage level threats the way Khelben did? Manshoon would eat her for breakfast, she'd barely be a speedbump for a Malaugrym, and I'm pretty sure a guy like Frostrune or Tam would maul her as they walked past her if she was all he had to face. Hell, even that twit Chembryl would probably laugh as he toasted her without blinking...
Like I said, interesting character who I liked, but a very poor choice for becoming the Blackstaff.
-It was my sister and my stepfather as the DM, about five years ago, when she was like 12, so none of that going on. An Arcane Archer with Fireball imbued in their bow just kicks a lot of ass.
Love is Love, whether sexual or 'pure'. You don't think he would have tried to reign-in the player, if it were you or someone else?
Women tend to 'get away with more' at the gaming table, in MY experience. On some sort of primitive level, DMs have been wired with "Don't hit girls", and it transfers into the game via their character.
To the point where it ruined several campaigns for me.
Love is Love, whether sexual or 'pure'. You don't think he would have tried to reign-in the player, if it were you or someone else?
Women tend to 'get away with more' at the gaming table, in MY experience. On some sort of primitive level, DMs have been wired with "Don't hit girls", and it transfers into the game via their character.
To the point where it ruined several campaigns for me.
-Nothing was being reigned in: The prestige class kicks a lot of ass. In a single attack, an 10th Level Arcane Archer can fire a normal, mundane arrow that has been imbued with a +5 enchantment bonus at no penalty to the creator, imbued to be an 'arrow of death' that instantly slays the target upon a failed DC 20 Fortitude save, and imbued to hold within it any area-affecting spell. In a single round, an Arcane Archer can do 1d6+5 (DC 20 vs. death) + 20d6 (Maximized Delayed Blast Fireball).
There are hundreds of 'loopholes' in the rules (in any edition), and min-maxers (now affectionately called 'Power-Gamers') find them all and exploit them.
Part of what a DM does is too make sure that anyone who has come-up with an 'unbeatable trick' is not gloming all the camera-time, and ruining it for others.
If I DM'd, you guys would have met-up with a group of Zentarrim all wearing amulets of Protection from Missle Fire (not to mention a few rings of Fire protection).
Shearly by coincidence, of course. ;)
Well, that actually goes around my point, which is that it is the DM's job to provide balance when the rules do not.
There are hundreds of 'loopholes' in the rules (in any edition), and min-maxers (now affectionately called 'Power-Gamers') find them all and exploit them.
-That's not power-gaming, min-maxing, searching for loopholes. That's the class, as presented. Given the power level being discussed, other character classes can do equally impressive things (Druids with their transforming, for example, or Wizards with their Summon Monstering).
If I DM'd, you guys would have met-up with a group of Zentarrim all wearing amulets of Protection from Missle Fire (not to mention a few rings of Fire protection).
Shearly by coincidence, of course. ;)
-Railroading. Choo-choo!
Khelben was always one of my favorite FR characters. I must say, I'm rather glad he got to die with dignity, to "go out with a bang" so to speak.
-It's certainly better than disappearing in ambiguity (from a fan point-of-view).
-Railroading. Choo-choo!
A VERY poor term considering that one person in the group is the 'Game MASTER'.
I suppose that when a DM prepares for a session, he is railroading, correct? After all, anything he 'plans' could constitute him trying to force the players into certain situations.
In fact, EVERY game-module ever commercially produced would be an example of railroading.
You are supposed to control events and make the game more interesting for everyone... thats why you are the Dungeon MASTER.
It's only 'Railroading' if the players know you're doing it (and all DMs are doing it, all the time). Subtlety is key... ;)
I hit girls... gladly really. But one of my best friends is a kickboxer who likes sparring with me when I have my back turned on her.
It doesn't help the stereotype brother :P@ MT I have Six players three males and three females
-Nothing was being reigned in: The prestige class kicks a lot of ass. In a single attack, an 10th Level Arcane Archer can fire a normal, mundane arrow that has been imbued with a +5 enchantment bonus at no penalty to the creator, imbued to be an 'arrow of death' that instantly slays the target upon a failed DC 20 Fortitude save, and imbued to hold within it any area-affecting spell. In a single round, an Arcane Archer can do 1d6+5 (DC 20 vs. death) + 20d6 (Maximized Delayed Blast Fireball).
Except for that whole part of not actually being able to cast 7th level spells... presuming you took the other 10 levels as a wizard or sorcerer, you could manage 5th level spells, at best, by 20th level. That's their real weak point, given that they still only have the 7 base feats everyone gets, a weak caster level (still only 14th with Practised Spellcaster), and at best 2 more feats (IC or metamagic), with a 3/4 BAB. Toss in at least one level of ranger like Tsarra did, and it just gets worse for everything but BAB, especially as a Sorcerer, who's now limited to 4th level spells @ 20th level with a level 10 arcane archer build.
-You can ask my players, I don't engage in that kind of stuff. I've had a session that just kind of grinded to a halt because they didn't know what to do next. They finished extracting revenge from a Lich that killed one of the PC's parents. That whole plot was done with, and they returned to the major metropolis they hung out in. When one of my players asked, out of game, what we were supposed to do now, I told him that it's up to their characters. They actually got upset because I didn't "assign" them something to do, and gave them the choice of doing whatever it was they wanted to do. Unless my PCs are actually somewhere, doing something, I don't force anything on them, story/plotline wise. It's up to them to decide, not me. When they start, if I have no warning, I wing it. Once I know what they're doing, I start thinking ahead, adjusting based on what they do.
That would annoy me.
Sounds more like a babysitter then a Game-Master, but whatever.
I've been in games with real railroading (No, not Eberron :P ), where the DM tells you where you are going and what you are doing.
In my book, not giving players anything to do is just as bad as forcing players to do things. Even when I do a 'free form' session, I will drop subtle hints about a few possible directions they could take (without forcing anything). There have been plenty of times when I didn't have something fully prepared (just a basic idea in my head), and it went well.
However, I still had the idea first, and once I knew what they were interested in doing, I adapted my idea to what they wanted... which would still be railroading, by your definition.
You can't just let players sit-around and make-up their own adventures... you have to have something in mind. The second they enter a locale of your making, or meet with an NPC of your making, you are railroading.
In the boradest sense of the term.
The idea is to know your players, and think ahead of them, so you're never caught off-gard. That means constanly changing your style and adapoting your antagonist's to your players skills and equipment. A real world is dynamic, and reacts to your PCs, and in the game you - the DM - are 'the world', so you had better have some contingency up your sleeve so your game doesn't grind to a halt.
I'm just saying... I've never been accussed of 'railroading' by a player...
That would annoy me.
Sounds more like a babysitter then a Game-Master, but whatever.
-I challenge you, then to come and be a part of the campaign I'm putting together!*
I've been in games with real railroading (No, not Eberron :P ), where the DM tells you where you are going and what you are doing.
-So have I, so have I. And it's pretty frustrating, yes, to have to scheme behind the scenes with fellow players, to "throw a wrench" in the DM's plans, just to do something that your characters want to do, as opposed to what the DM wants them/you to do.
In my book, not giving players anything to do is just as bad as forcing players to do things. Even when I do a 'free form' session, I will drop subtle hints about a few possible directions they could take (without forcing aything). There have been plenty of times when I didn't have something fully prepared (just a basic idea in my head), and it went well.
However, I still had the idea first, and once I knew what they were interested in doing, I adapted my idea to what they wanted... which would still be railroading, by your definition.
You can't just let players sit-around and make-up their own adventures... you have to have something in mind. The second they enter a locale of your making, or meet with an NPC of your making, you are railroading.
In the boradest sense of the term.
The idea is to know your players, and think ahead of them, so you're never caught off-gard. That means constanly changing your style and adapoting your antagonist's to your players skills and equipment. A real world is dynamic, and reacts to your PCs, and in the game you - the DM - are 'the world', so you had better have some contingency up your sleeve so your game doesn't grind to a halt.
-It's not that I don't have things waiting in the wings, should the PCs want to pursue them. In my last game (sadly, that ended), the PCs had a gangster who wronged them (technically) that they could have dealt with, they had some ancient pirate treasures they could have gone after, they had a scroll with the location of a Lich who was sealed away, rather than being killed, that they could have destroyed, buried, turned over, sold, investigated, whatever, they had a contract between an illicit Yakuza organization and an NPC that they knew that dealt with the NPC purchasing a ancient "super weapon". I drop in things for them to do, but I don't tell them, "THIS! This is what you have to do."
I'm just saying... I've never been accussed of 'railroading' by a player...
-Only in the sense that, as per the example above, the bad guys all just happened to all have protection against that one thing, coincidentally, for no 'valid' reason, other than because the/a PC had those kinds of abilities. Who woulda known? Otherwise, I am sure you do nothing else wrong (except maybe portray Elves in an unflattering light!)
* No, I know that really isn't doable right now, but I would, at some point, like to meet up, and maybe get a one-shot game or something like that up, with me, you, possibly my sister, Rin, msatran, johnkretzer...
I was trying to get to Gencon this year - Ed promised me a private chat! - but I have a family vacation planned that same week.
I'm only bringing that up because I was thinking you and I could do a 'road trip' next year, maybe, if you can get away for four days (plus driving-time).
Plus whoever else is local and wants to go.
Anyhow, I'm not nearly as 'controlling' as I sound. If I did feel the need to intervene in your sister's show-boating (for lack of a better phrase), I would of done in it in a less heavy-handed and more logical way (the bad-guys were a group you've encountered before, and beat with your methods, and were therefore prepared this time, etc...)
I sometimes say things in a certain way for comedic effect.. scratch that... I ALWAYS do that. :P