Goodman Games

jmucchiello wrote:Hey, how about random rolls on the NPC personality charts on pages 100-101 of the DMG?

I'd prefer that over alignments.

joela wrote:Pathfinder? The Core book doesn't have a specific setting info any more than the 3.x core books.

Which still has too much setting info IMO. I don't want official gods. I much prefer the way they handled clerics and deities in the AD&D 2e phb.

That's a cool chart, but it looks a lot more intimidating and complex than actually just reading the rules did IMO. I certainly don't remember combat in MT being so complicated. The thing that rulebooks need more of is examples. There should be an example for just about every rule. And the absolute ...

some more stuff in this forum thread-

http://www.therpghaven.com/viewtopic.php?p=20773#p20773

That settles it, my next character will have an alignment of "decepticon".

There was no Chaotic Good in OD&D. Only Chaotic. Where almost everyone read as Lawful = Good and Chaotic = Evil. Just dump the whole bit into the dump along with alignment language. It's bloody useless. How about instead of writing Chaotic on your character sheet, you just write Hippy Elf? That...

I'd rather that alignments were optional altogether. They were only part of a couple of Appendix N books and most Sword & Sorcery is very morally grey. Of course, I could do without clerics altogether as well.

here's the list- Anderson, Poul: THREE HEARTS AND THREE LIONS; THE HIGH CRUSADE; THE BROKEN SWORD Bellairs, John: THE FACE IN THE FROST Brackett, Leigh Brown, Frederic Burroughs, Edgar Rice: "Pellucidar" series; Mars series; Venus series Carter, Lin: "World's End" series de Camp,...

Yeah, those covers rock!

another report-

http://oldguyrpg.blogspot.com/2011/03/g ... rapup.html

another report from the con-

http://bravehalfling.com/?p=580

Wizards can use bows? That seems very odd, especially being able to use a longbow which historically required great strength and a lifetime of training. Crossbows seem like a lot better choice.

Did you play it at garycon? Let us know the details!

I just found a post by Jeff with some cool pics-

http://jrients.blogspot.com/2011/03/few ... mages.html

Since Raise Dead is a spell, it would have an affects table. I've posted this one I made for D&D before, but here it is in DCC form. Something like this would add a lot of flavor, and trepidation, to the event. 1: Failure, something else comes through - (1d4) 1-Demon, 2-Invisible Stalker, 3-Shad...

Have any of you looked at the Dragon Age RPG (by Green Ronin?) I had it. It's a nice system that's too limited by the DA setting IMO. I also didn't like how high hit points were - it's impossible to kill anything with one hit even with the stunts. The way crits work in the DCC game sounds a lot lik...

GnomeBoy wrote:I like that idea, and have used it at times, but not usually each round... would it bog things down too much?

It works great in Basic D&D, but of course we're also using group initiative which I also prefer. I hate rolling initiative and keeping track of it.

With Josephs earlier desire not to add attack of opportunities to the game, it makes it nearly impossible to disrupt a spell via melee combat without going back to the old segmented casting method. Nah, all you need to do is go back to declaring actions before rolling init. If you say you're castin...

smathis wrote:I think it's exacerbated in 3e because of inflated hit point values.

And made ridiculous in 4e.

This is why I prefer older versions of D&D and even those only at low levels.

MSHensley, You just need to broaden you horizon regarding hit points. At first level, that axe will hurt and most likely drop most characters with one "hit." What you should do is have the players keep track of just how many hit points their character had at first level. That's the charac...

I don't quite know what that means because you haven't been very specific as to exactly what you don't like. :? My biggest problems with D&D are how hit points and armor work. They work well in a game sense as they are easy to use and allow for lots of combat but fail in a roleplaying sense as ...