Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Old Books

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 12:37:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
years ago isn't playing with us now).

There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
adventures?

Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right

More about : books

Anonymous
June 30, 2005 2:36:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
> ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
> years ago isn't playing with us now).
>
> There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
> Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
> adventures?
>
> Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
> stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
> I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
> thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
>

You might want to look on Ebay or a used RPG product site for
Planescape products, especially the _Planescape Monstrous Compendium
Appendix I_. Here's a listing of Planescape accessories you may find
useful:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7117/chant/products.htm...

Appendix II also contains some fiends as does the _Blood War_ boxed
set. Appendix III, IIRC (it's been awhile since I looked at my 2E
collection) focuses mostly on creatures from the inner planes and might
have a fiend or two there. _Faces of Evil_ or _Van Richten's Guide to
Fiends_ (from the Ravenloft line) aren't stat heavy (the Van Richten's
guide having variant rules, while Faces has virtually none), but they
have good ideas on how to run 'em.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 6:08:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:37:48 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
>ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
>years ago isn't playing with us now).
>
>There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
>Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
>adventures?

You are actually suggesting Deities and Demigods as a viable sourcebook for
midlevel opponents?

>Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
>stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
>I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
>thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?

Wasn't the monster manual in 2E called the Monstrous Compendium?

If you want Demons and Devils, you would have to go to what they were
really called, Baatezu and Tanar'i.

In 1E, there are Demons and Devils in the MM1, MM2, and Fiend Folio,
although the offerings in the Folio were quite sparse. There are also the
other categories of evil beasties like daemons and demodands.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 6:52:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Matt Frisch <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:37:48 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
>>ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
>>years ago isn't playing with us now).
>>
>>There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
>>Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
>>adventures?
>
> You are actually suggesting Deities and Demigods as a viable sourcebook for
> midlevel opponents?
>
>>Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
>>stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
>>I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
>>thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
>
> Wasn't the monster manual in 2E called the Monstrous Compendium?

Monstrous Compendia were the loose-leaf packages. Two of them came with
binders to collect them in -- first set and Dragonlance, IIRC. Note: if
you had them all, they didn't fit. There was also the Monstrous Manual
that came out later that contained subset spanning all the packages
(mostly the core monsters, some from other settings).

The stuff Jeff's looking for will be in the Planescape MC packages.
There were some other Planescape monster books that amplified on the
material in the PS MC packages.

> If you want Demons and Devils, you would have to go to what they were
> really called, Baatezu and Tanar'i.

Right.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 7:02:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
> news:1tk6c1hja9lab117eifmvuc7qj1hf80328@4ax.com...
> > >There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
> > >Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
> > >adventures?
> >
> > You are actually suggesting Deities and Demigods as a viable sourcebook
> for
> > midlevel opponents?
>
> Err, no, I'm suggesting that it has opponents in it. While mid level is
> where we have the most problems finding interesting things to beat up, it
> doesn't hurt to have the high levels covered too. Plus which, I've rarely
> glanced through Dieties and Demigods, maybe there's demons and devils and
> angels and such in there that I'm not aware of... just trying to cover the
> bases.
>
> > >Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
> > >stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from
> 2E.
> > >I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
> > >thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
> >
> > Wasn't the monster manual in 2E called the Monstrous Compendium?
>
> Well, there was this 3 ring binder job that they came out with that we
> didn't buy because we KNEW it would be a cheetos infested pile of raggedy
> papers that once were in a fancy binder, most likely within 3 sessions of
> starting to use it. I assume that's the Monstrous Compendium. But they
> also have a black/red motif book called the Monster Manual that we are
> using. It has about 250 pages or something, but barely any demons or
> devils, which are quite interesting to fight.
>

I have that too and TSR probably figured out the binder thing was a
sort of stupid idea. The PS Monstrous Comependium Appendices are
perfect bound, not sheets, and they got all sorts of outer planar
things in there.

> > If you want Demons and Devils, you would have to go to what they were
> > really called, Baatezu and Tanar'i.
>
> Well, in the book we have, there are 3 Baatezu variations(Pit Fiend was one
> of them), none of which are suitable for anything but high level(10+)
> parties, and I honestly don't recall any "Tanar'i" in the book we have.
>
> 3E has some decidedly low level demons and devils that are like minions that
> are appropriate for even low level characters(can't remember their names,
> but they have like 1HD and such). Basically, if we're going to use
> Demons/Devils, it would help to have a variety of pre-made 2E/1E stats for
> them, and it would help if we had more than just the top guys to fight(Pit
> Fiends, etc).
>

There's the PS products.

> > In 1E, there are Demons and Devils in the MM1, MM2, and Fiend Folio,
> > although the offerings in the Folio were quite sparse. There are also the
> > other categories of evil beasties like daemons and demodands.
>
> Are the daemons and demodands mostly in the Fiend Folio? Is the 1E Fiend
> Folio worth the purchase price?
>

If you're playing 2E, no. Get the PS MCI. Gerehleths (sp?) are
"demodands", yugoloths are daemons, tanar'ri are demons, baatezu are
devils.

> I think I'll get the 1E monster manual and monster manual 2, but I might
> wait on the fiend folio. I don't specifically recall any instance where we
> used the fiend folio in the old days, but then again, I might not have been
> paying attention. I know we used both of the other ones.
>
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 9:15:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:1tk6c1hja9lab117eifmvuc7qj1hf80328@4ax.com...
> >There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
> >Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
> >adventures?
>
> You are actually suggesting Deities and Demigods as a viable sourcebook
for
> midlevel opponents?

Err, no, I'm suggesting that it has opponents in it. While mid level is
where we have the most problems finding interesting things to beat up, it
doesn't hurt to have the high levels covered too. Plus which, I've rarely
glanced through Dieties and Demigods, maybe there's demons and devils and
angels and such in there that I'm not aware of... just trying to cover the
bases.

> >Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
> >stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from
2E.
> >I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
> >thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
>
> Wasn't the monster manual in 2E called the Monstrous Compendium?

Well, there was this 3 ring binder job that they came out with that we
didn't buy because we KNEW it would be a cheetos infested pile of raggedy
papers that once were in a fancy binder, most likely within 3 sessions of
starting to use it. I assume that's the Monstrous Compendium. But they
also have a black/red motif book called the Monster Manual that we are
using. It has about 250 pages or something, but barely any demons or
devils, which are quite interesting to fight.

> If you want Demons and Devils, you would have to go to what they were
> really called, Baatezu and Tanar'i.

Well, in the book we have, there are 3 Baatezu variations(Pit Fiend was one
of them), none of which are suitable for anything but high level(10+)
parties, and I honestly don't recall any "Tanar'i" in the book we have.

3E has some decidedly low level demons and devils that are like minions that
are appropriate for even low level characters(can't remember their names,
but they have like 1HD and such). Basically, if we're going to use
Demons/Devils, it would help to have a variety of pre-made 2E/1E stats for
them, and it would help if we had more than just the top guys to fight(Pit
Fiends, etc).

> In 1E, there are Demons and Devils in the MM1, MM2, and Fiend Folio,
> although the offerings in the Folio were quite sparse. There are also the
> other categories of evil beasties like daemons and demodands.

Are the daemons and demodands mostly in the Fiend Folio? Is the 1E Fiend
Folio worth the purchase price?

I think I'll get the 1E monster manual and monster manual 2, but I might
wait on the fiend folio. I don't specifically recall any instance where we
used the fiend folio in the old days, but then again, I might not have been
paying attention. I know we used both of the other ones.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 2:23:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> writes:

>I think I'll get the 1E monster manual and monster manual 2, but I might
>wait on the fiend folio. I don't specifically recall any instance where we
>used the fiend folio in the old days, but then again, I might not have been
>paying attention. I know we used both of the other ones.

IIRC there were only 2 fiendish creatures in the FF - the Nycadaemon & its
bigger, badder kin whose name I can't remember. MM1 & MM2 are definately
the ones to go for (MM1 has vaaious devlis & the Type I-VI (was it?)
demons & also devil & demon lords). MM2 had more demon lords, the daemons
& demodands, various half-demons/devils as well. Ah, I've just remembered,
did the FF have Pazuzzu, demon lord of the 1st plane of the abyss, or was
he in MM2? Plus the slaadi (CN denzens of Limbo) were in FF IIRC, also an
evil elemental god for each element.

HTH

Chris
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 3:15:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4ZSdnRr02_sBJV7fRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
> Well, there was this 3 ring binder job that they came out with that we
> didn't buy because we KNEW it would be a cheetos infested pile of raggedy
> papers that once were in a fancy binder, most likely within 3 sessions of
> starting to use it. I assume that's the Monstrous Compendium. But they
> also have a black/red motif book called the Monster Manual that we are
> using. It has about 250 pages or something, but barely any demons or
> devils, which are quite interesting to fight.

I find it highly amusing that Goslin doesn't know the names of the books
of the edition *he actually uses*.

-Michael
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 5:12:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
>
> Well, in the book we have, there are 3 Baatezu variations(Pit Fiend was
> one of them), none of which are suitable for anything but high level(10+)
> parties, and I honestly don't recall any "Tanar'i" in the book we have.

You want the Planescape Monstrous Compendiums, definitely. You can buy all three
here:

MC1: http://tinyurl.com/e2jls

MC2: http://tinyurl.com/8yryf

MC3: http://tinyurl.com/cy4x3

Now, fair warning: these are Planescape supplements, and thus heavily flavourful
books. The descriptions of the monsters are often as full of fiction about
planar adventurers' encounters with the creatures as they are about a simple
description in neutral language. However, they *are* still fully-statted monster
entries, so there's no problem from that perspective - the standard statblock is
still there, along with combat tactics and the like.

Of course, it does tend to assume that these creatures are encountered on the
planes, but I can't remember too many instances of unusable tactics and the like
because of that.

Note also that some common fiends are found in the monster appendix of the
Planescape Campaign Setting boxed set and the Planes of Law, Chaos, and Conflict
boxed sets.

You can find a *lot* of TSR products available as PDFs here:
http://tinyurl.com/bywau

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 6:07:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zvQwe.11318$hK3.790@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:4ZSdnRr02_sBJV7fRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> > starting to use it. I assume that's the Monstrous Compendium. But they
> > also have a black/red motif book called the Monster Manual that we are
> > using. It has about 250 pages or something, but barely any demons or
> > devils, which are quite interesting to fight.
>
> I find it highly amusing that Goslin doesn't know the names of the
books
> of the edition *he actually uses*.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...
That's the one we have. You'll have to forgive me for calling the
"Monstrous Manual" by the name "Monster Manual". When I say "hand me the
monster manual", that's the book that finds its way to my hand. Plus which,
no matter what an item were actually called, if it were generally understood
to be the monster manual, it would be called the monster manual. If we had
that 3 ring binder job(the "monstrous compendium"??), it would be called the
monster manual. I don't suppose you've ever referred to "Legends and Lore"
as "Deities and Demigods", have you?

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 9:34:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
> ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
> years ago isn't playing with us now).
>
> There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
> Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
> adventures?
>
> Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
> stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
> I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
> thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
>

As others have mentioned, Ba'atazu are Devils in 2e, and Tanar'i (or
something) are Demons.

However they are wrong about the suppliment, it's the Outer Planes
Monster Compendium they are in.

- Justisaur
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 10:20:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> But they also have a black/red motif book called the Monster Manual
>>> that we are using. It has about 250 pages or something, but barely
>>> any demons or devils, which are quite interesting to fight.
>>
>> I find it highly amusing that Goslin doesn't know the names of the
>> books of the edition *he actually uses*.
>
>[...] You'll have to forgive me for calling the "Monstrous Manual"
>by the name "Monster Manual".

When you made the distinction between it and the Monstrous Compendium,
it was sorta important that you got the name right. Which you didn't.

So, do you refer to the 2nd Ed DMG as the "Dungeon Master's Guide", or
the "Dungeon Master(TM) Guide"? The latter came out at about the same
time as the "Monstrous Manual", IIRC. What I really love is that TSR
tried to retroactively change the title of the first version of the
2nd Ed. DMG to "Dungeon Master(TM) Guide" in all of its reference
materials.

Donald (anyone remember TSR's infamous Nazi(TM) debacle?)
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 11:40:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

One of the voices in my head - or was it Donald Tsang? - just said...
> Donald (anyone remember TSR's infamous Nazi(TM) debacle?)

To anyone who actually understands what it was about (and doesn't
confuse trademarks with copyrights), it hardly qualifies as a "debacle",
or even as interesting.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 11:40:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> One of the voices in my head - or was it Donald Tsang? - just said...
>
>> Donald (anyone remember TSR's infamous Nazi(TM) debacle?)
>
>
> To anyone who actually understands what it was about (and doesn't
> confuse trademarks with copyrights), it hardly qualifies as a "debacle",
> or even as interesting.

Not nearly as interesting as what happened with Illuminati...

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 1:24:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 05:15:52 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:1tk6c1hja9lab117eifmvuc7qj1hf80328@4ax.com...
>> >There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
>> >Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
>> >adventures?
>>
>> You are actually suggesting Deities and Demigods as a viable sourcebook
>for
>> midlevel opponents?
>
>Err, no, I'm suggesting that it has opponents in it. While mid level is
>where we have the most problems finding interesting things to beat up, it
>doesn't hurt to have the high levels covered too. Plus which, I've rarely
>glanced through Dieties and Demigods, maybe there's demons and devils and
>angels and such in there that I'm not aware of... just trying to cover the
>bases.

The 1E D&D (Hmm, confusing acronym there) did have some lower level
pantheon servants, like norse Valkyries, but generally it was statting out
a bunch of gods. A big mistake, as a lot of them were pretty damn weak, and
led to some campaigns playing whack-a-god. There just aren't enough
opposition-worthy creatures in there to justify it for that reason.

Now, it does have fairly comprehensive lists of gods and pantheons, which
*can* be useful, just not to fight against.


>> If you want Demons and Devils, you would have to go to what they were
>> really called, Baatezu and Tanar'i.
>
>Well, in the book we have, there are 3 Baatezu variations(Pit Fiend was one
>of them), none of which are suitable for anything but high level(10+)
>parties, and I honestly don't recall any "Tanar'i" in the book we have.

Political correctness struck TSR when 2E came out, and using words like
"Demon" and "Devil" were considered bad, so they were replaced with Baatezu
and Tanar'i. The actual monsters that fell under those categories were
completely unchanged in name or behavior.

>3E has some decidedly low level demons and devils that are like minions that
>are appropriate for even low level characters(can't remember their names,
>but they have like 1HD and such). Basically, if we're going to use
>Demons/Devils, it would help to have a variety of pre-made 2E/1E stats for
>them, and it would help if we had more than just the top guys to fight(Pit
>Fiends, etc).

1E included things like Lemures which were quite weak. Lemures are in the
first monster manual, as well as things like Type I demons, reasonable
midlevel opponents.

The best resource will likely be Monster Manual 2. It carries a number of
minor demons and "least" devils (although the devil section is fairly heavy
on archdevils as well). It goes extensively into Daemons, including some
weak versions (but not the ubiquitous nycadaemon, which is a fiend folio
resident). It also covers Demodands, but not many of them, and the ones it
has are fairly bad-ass.

>> In 1E, there are Demons and Devils in the MM1, MM2, and Fiend Folio,
>> although the offerings in the Folio were quite sparse. There are also the
>> other categories of evil beasties like daemons and demodands.
>
>Are the daemons and demodands mostly in the Fiend Folio? Is the 1E Fiend
>Folio worth the purchase price?

The Fiend Folio is a strange beast. A lot of the creatures in there are
just flat-out bizarre. There's a lot of good stuff in there, especially if
you want some really horrible stuff (horrible in the monstrous sense, not
that they are "bad" monsters)...highlights of the folio include:

Death Knights
Drow
Githyanki/Githzerai
Kuo-Toa
Penanggalan (one of the most disgusting monsters, EVER)
Revenant
Slaadi

There are other chunky bits in there, but those are the ones that most
folks will recognize. However, mixxed in with that is a lot of wierdness.
Of course there is the Flumph (the one and only good aligned creature in
the whole book), but also we have the Gorbel (think: pissed off helium
balloon with weak claws) and the Al-Mi'Raj (think: unicorn, but based on a
rabbit, instead of a horse).
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 1:24:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:8rn8c1dob0iggagokc9mmns3psnb65nkte@4ax.com...
> The 1E D&D (Hmm, confusing acronym there) did have some lower level
> pantheon servants, like norse Valkyries, but generally it was statting out
> a bunch of gods. A big mistake, as a lot of them were pretty damn weak,
and
> led to some campaigns playing whack-a-god. There just aren't enough
> opposition-worthy creatures in there to justify it for that reason.

Well, the only use we ever had for Deities and Demigods was to describe the
gods, not to provide stats. In our game, it is flat out impossible for a PC
to do anything to a god that the god does not will to happen to himself. In
other words, a god is only hit if he allows himself to be hit, at least when
talking about deity vs mortal interaction. In that way, it was literally
impossible to play "whack a god"(nice name, btw ;)  ). First time you try
to take a stab at an immortal, you either get bitchslapped instantly, or the
god toys with you (ala a cat and his injured but not dead mouse) until you
realize on your own that such actions are inherently pointless.

I didn't remember any servant type creatures in Deities and Demigods, but if
the gods had servants, I assumed they would be listed there, and it seems my
assumption was correct, even if the usefulness of those servants would
appear to be limited.

> Now, it does have fairly comprehensive lists of gods and pantheons, which
> *can* be useful, just not to fight against.

Agreed. I actually downloaded a free RTF file of Legends and Lore that has
all the information we'll ever need.

> Political correctness struck TSR when 2E came out, and using words like
> "Demon" and "Devil" were considered bad, so they were replaced with
Baatezu

I hated that. I actually liked kicking demons asses n such.

> 1E included things like Lemures which were quite weak. Lemures are in the
> first monster manual, as well as things like Type I demons, reasonable
> midlevel opponents.
>
> The best resource will likely be Monster Manual 2. It carries a number of

Yep, I got the MM1 and MM2 for 1E, figuring they would have the
pre-politically-correct versions in there.

> balloon with weak claws) and the Al-Mi'Raj (think: unicorn, but based on a
> rabbit, instead of a horse).

I think someone was watching too much Monty Python. "It's a foul creature
with big nasty pointy teeth..."

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
July 1, 2005 1:24:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:EsKdnYLjgOms4lnfRVn-og@comcast.com...

> I think someone was watching too much Monty Python. "It's a foul creature
> with big nasty pointy teeth..."

Ah yes...the Vorpal Bunny...

David

--
CaissaWas__SPAMHater__INTP@adelphia__ANTIV__.net without the block
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 5:25:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
> Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> > One of the voices in my head - or was it Donald Tsang? - just said...
> >
> >> Donald (anyone remember TSR's infamous Nazi(TM) debacle?)
> >
> >
> > To anyone who actually understands what it was about (and doesn't
> > confuse trademarks with copyrights), it hardly qualifies as a "debacle",
> > or even as interesting.
>
> Not nearly as interesting as what happened with Illuminati...
>

Is that as corruptable as _The CIA and the Cult of Intelligetence_ by
Victor Marchetti, a book the CIA tried to censor?
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 6:13:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
>However they are wrong about the suppliment, it's the Outer Planes
>Monster Compendium they are in.

Monstrous Compendium Appendix, IIRC (MC8, now that I've consulted
references). Given the earlier discussion, I'm disappointed that
you didn't look this up before posting.

[as for real spelling flames: it should be "supplement;"]

Donald
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 7:41:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
> news:8rn8c1dob0iggagokc9mmns3psnb65nkte@4ax.com...
>
>>The 1E D&D (Hmm, confusing acronym there) did have some lower level
>>pantheon servants, like norse Valkyries, but generally it was statting out
>>a bunch of gods. A big mistake, as a lot of them were pretty damn weak,
>
> and
>
>>led to some campaigns playing whack-a-god. There just aren't enough
>>opposition-worthy creatures in there to justify it for that reason.
>
>
> Well, the only use we ever had for Deities and Demigods was to describe the
> gods, not to provide stats. In our game, it is flat out impossible for a PC
> to do anything to a god that the god does not will to happen to himself.

In mine, there is nothing any NPC can do that a PC cannot do. That
includes the gods. If a PC works hard enough, they can find a way to
hurt a god, kill a god, or BECOME a god. If it's good enough for
Conan, it's good enough for me.




--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 7:41:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
news:42C4BB5F.2060907@obvioussgeinc.com...
> In mine, there is nothing any NPC can do that a PC cannot do. That
> includes the gods. If a PC works hard enough, they can find a way to
> hurt a god, kill a god, or BECOME a god. If it's good enough for
> Conan, it's good enough for me.

Actually, I should have been a little more clear. Never in any campaign has
any PC had even the OPPORTUNITY to take a stab at a deity. Our game has
it's share of visions and such, but actual direct divine intervention is
almost unheard of. I guess there's an unspoken rule that gods and mortals
do not directly interact.

That said, if a god WERE to appear before a mortal, and for whatever reason,
that mortal decided to get froggy, the implementation of the combat would be
similar to DM fudging but with the fudging done in front of the screen. I
would probably take a 20 sider and place it on the die roll I wanted the god
to have in front of the players. Then, when they tried to attack, it would
be like this: "YESSSS! A 20! I HIT HIM!" "wait a tick... *reach over,
roll player's die around until 1 is showing* no, not so much actually..."

It would be my way of saying "run away very fast" without actually saying
it. As an alternative, I could say that he's going to cast fireball or some
such, and pull out the 6 siders one at a time, allowing them the opportunity
to tell me that they are going to run. We've got a good hundred or so 6
siders at the table at any given time, so I think it would be fairly obvious
what they should do. But hey, if they REALLY want to stay and die, I'm not
one much for railroading... ;) 

I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."

However, I am fully in favor of the theory of allowing PC's to become
gods(immortals, actually), should they become that powerful. Along those
lines, a PC would have to reach EXTREME levels in order to accomplish this,
go on quests and such, and honestly, no character has lasted long enough in
their gameplay that this ever became a real option. To this point in my
gaming career, the longest any D&D character has been played has been 2.5
years of real time, which ended up taking him to 12th level(from 1st). At
that point, I was sick of the character, and retired him.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 9:10:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Jeff Goslin wrote:
>> We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
>> ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
>> years ago isn't playing with us now).
>>
>> There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
>> Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
>> adventures?
>>
>> Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
>> stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
>> I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
>> thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?
>>
>
> As others have mentioned, Ba'atazu are Devils in 2e, and Tanar'i (or
> something) are Demons.
>
> However they are wrong about the suppliment, it's the Outer Planes
> Monster Compendium they are in.

Outer Planes was the 'first one'. The Planescape compendia amplified on
them.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 1:26:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:


> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
> flavor.

Because really, what do you do with it? Necklace? Frisbee? Ashtray?

--
Jay Knioum
The Mad Afro
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 5:10:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 19:23:10 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:8rn8c1dob0iggagokc9mmns3psnb65nkte@4ax.com...

>I didn't remember any servant type creatures in Deities and Demigods, but if
>the gods had servants, I assumed they would be listed there, and it seems my
>assumption was correct, even if the usefulness of those servants would
>appear to be limited.

The Greek section had Greater and Lesser Cyclops, who were different from
the standard version...the "Lesser" ones were still 13 HD monsters, so they
weren't really less than very much. The norse section does stat out the
valkyries. There are a couple of other beasts in there that are
non-deityish, but very few.


>> balloon with weak claws) and the Al-Mi'Raj (think: unicorn, but based on a
>> rabbit, instead of a horse).
>
>I think someone was watching too much Monty Python. "It's a foul creature
>with big nasty pointy teeth..."

Most of the Folio monsters were from english authors of one stripe or
another. I have no idea where the Gorbel came from...probably some module,
but god are they stupid.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 9:21:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> We're looking to pick up PDF's of 1E and 2E monster books. We currently
> ONLY have the 2E Monster Manual(the guy who had the books when we played
> years ago isn't playing with us now).
>
> There's a lot out there, Monster Manual II, Fiend Folio, Deities and
> Demigods, etc. Which ones are the best, especially for mid level
> adventures?

I'd stick with 2nd edition stuff if that's what you're playing. The
Monstrous Manual (2140) you have, after that there's four fairly good
softcover Monstrous Compendium Annuals came out to supliment it from 94
to 97. ~100 monsters each, officially.
2145, 2158, 2166, and 2173.

Any earlier Monstrous Compendiums would be good for a complete
world-specific set, but the most common and popular ones all went into
the Monstrous Manual and the following Annuals.
I don't know of anything that lists which monsters are in which
book, so if you want anything specific outside the main books you'll
have to guess by world.


> Also, there is some confusion in our group as to which ones actually have
> stats for demons and devils, which seem to have all but disappeared from 2E.
> I thought they were in the Fiend Folio, but another person in our group
> thinks they were in the MM2. Anyone?

MC8, TSR 2118, MC: Outer Planes Appendix. 1991. Best Demon/Devil
sourcebook for 2nd edition, and no looseleaf problems with the new pdf
versions. Also has the various other Fiends, Angels, Slaadi, and so on.

2602, 2613, and 2635 were the Planescape versions of the same and a
few more, which tended (IMO) to de-power a few of them to make them
easier for low and mid-level characters to get along with.
I much prefer MC8 to anything from planescape when it comes to
monsters, unless perhaps you're actually playing a planescape game, and
having breakfast with the damned things.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 9:41:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" wrote
>.
> I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
> interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
> flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."

"Sure I'll take care of that dragon for you. But now I have a little favor
you can do for me.."


John
July 1, 2005 10:14:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> write:
> I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
> interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
> flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."

1. "Hi, uhm, Cleric person. Here's a lot of Cure spells for you,
you're going to need them."

2. "You want the dragon dead, you kill it. If I wanted it dead,
it would never have gotten to be Ancient."

3. "I'd be happy to do that. Of course, I'm pretty sure that the
dragon is a friend of Loki. It sure is a good thing that Loki
isn't vengeful or anything."

4. "Sorry, no time now. I'm already helping this ancient red dragon
friend of mine take on some party of adventurers."

5. Odin attacks the dragon, and is KILLED. The PCs are BLAMED,
and there are REPERCUSSIONS.

6. Odin attacks the dragon, and KILLS IT. Nidhogg, the dragon's
father, is NOT HAPPY, and there are REPERCUSSIONS.

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/&gt;
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: Putting new limits on productivity.
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 11:41:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 01 Jul 2005 18:14:05 GMT, drow <drow@bin.sh> scribed into the ether:

>Alien mind control rays made Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> write:
>> I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
>> interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
>> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
>> flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."
>
>1. "Hi, uhm, Cleric person. Here's a lot of Cure spells for you,
> you're going to need them."
>
>2. "You want the dragon dead, you kill it. If I wanted it dead,
> it would never have gotten to be Ancient."

I like this one.
Anonymous
July 2, 2005 4:50:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:23:48 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
> interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
> flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."

Odin: "What? I owe you nothing, mortal. What's your offer?"


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 2, 2005 5:45:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
> news:42C4BB5F.2060907@obvioussgeinc.com...
>
>>In mine, there is nothing any NPC can do that a PC cannot do. That
>>includes the gods. If a PC works hard enough, they can find a way to
>>hurt a god, kill a god, or BECOME a god. If it's good enough for
>>Conan, it's good enough for me.
>
>
> Actually, I should have been a little more clear. Never in any campaign has
> any PC had even the OPPORTUNITY to take a stab at a deity. Our game has
> it's share of visions and such, but actual direct divine intervention is
> almost unheard of. I guess there's an unspoken rule that gods and mortals
> do not directly interact.
>
> That said, if a god WERE to appear before a mortal, and for whatever reason,
> that mortal decided to get froggy, the implementation of the combat would be
> similar to DM fudging but with the fudging done in front of the screen. I
> would probably take a 20 sider and place it on the die roll I wanted the god
> to have in front of the players. Then, when they tried to attack, it would
> be like this: "YESSSS! A 20! I HIT HIM!" "wait a tick... *reach over,
> roll player's die around until 1 is showing* no, not so much actually..."
>
> It would be my way of saying "run away very fast" without actually saying
> it. As an alternative, I could say that he's going to cast fireball or some
> such, and pull out the 6 siders one at a time, allowing them the opportunity
> to tell me that they are going to run. We've got a good hundred or so 6
> siders at the table at any given time, so I think it would be fairly obvious
> what they should do. But hey, if they REALLY want to stay and die, I'm not
> one much for railroading... ;) 
>
> I'm being somewhat facetious above, but honestly, we're not big on direct
> interaction with immortal beings, they simply imbalance the game too much.
> If you happen to have the ear of a god, the game REALLY starts to lose
> flavor. "Ancient Red Dragon? Bah, we can take him. Odin?..."

Gods generally let you help yourself unless you really are out of
your league.

And if you get to the point that you're up against things that
powerful, then you probably CAN take on a god... and the gods then
don't need to help you, or at least aren't any more useful to you than
any other powerful ally.

The last game I ran hit power levels that scared ME. And believe me,
there was no loss of "flavor" nor of threat, fear, combat, or glory.




--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 2, 2005 7:22:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42C5F1AF.9050109@obvioussgeinc.com>,
seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com says...

> The last game I ran hit power levels that scared ME.

What power levels are that, in common terms?

> And believe me,
> there was no loss of "flavor" nor of threat, fear, combat, or glory.

IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players. When you're
10th level and trying to stop the dragon from terrorizing the village,
almost everyone can relate. When you're 150th level and trying to stop
Azathoth in single combat from unravelling the Loom of Fate, it's easy
for all those concepts to become just words.

Or so I imagine. I don't have much experience with truly high-level
campaign, except my own, currently stuck at about 18th. It worked well
so far, but already the plot is getting a bit to metaphysically abstract
and disconnected from everyday experience...


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 2, 2005 7:22:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> In article <42C5F1AF.9050109@obvioussgeinc.com>,
> seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com says...
>
>
>> The last game I ran hit power levels that scared ME.
>
>
> What power levels are that, in common terms?

Do you know the Chronicles of Amber? Well the penultimateultimate
adversary in the campaign was something so powerful that it rewrote
all Reality at need. The entire Amber-Courts of Chaos multiverse (with
associated add-ons for our campaign) was the tiny, pathetic remnants
of the original multiverse, sort of the little pile of dirt swept
under the rug of Reality. Eventually, after four years of play, the
PCs confronted Monolith in its fortress at the heart of nullspace...

>
>
>>And believe me,
>>there was no loss of "flavor" nor of threat, fear, combat, or glory.
>
>
> IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
> connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
> Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
> threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
> all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
> PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
> become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players.

But the REAL concerns of the PCs are EXACTLY the same at first level,
tenth, 100th, or God. Succeeding at some personal goal, protecting the
ones they care for, avenging some past wrong -- only the SIZE of the
challenge changes. Whether you're trying to achieve the point where
you can finally cast that wondrous spell "fireball", or working to
unlock the very secrets of magic itself, your character's GOAL is to
learn. Whether the love of your life is a peasant girl or a goddess
with the powers of the Earth, do you feel any different, are your
goals so very unlike, when she is killed in front of your eyes? If
you've always wanted your father to be proud of you, does it really
feel different to you when he finally IS, whether you're just the son
of a blacksmith or the son of Odin?


--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
July 2, 2005 8:07:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made Sea Wasp <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> write:
> Do you know the Chronicles of Amber? Well the penultimateultimate
> adversary in the campaign was something so powerful that it rewrote
> all Reality at need. The entire Amber-Courts of Chaos multiverse (with
> associated add-ons for our campaign) was the tiny, pathetic remnants
> of the original multiverse, sort of the little pile of dirt swept
> under the rug of Reality. Eventually, after four years of play, the
> PCs confronted Monolith in its fortress at the heart of nullspace...

.... and had tea.

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/&gt;
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: More than enough rope
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 12:42:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42C6ACB8.9080601@obvioussgeinc.com>,
seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com says...

> >> The last game I ran hit power levels that scared ME.
> >
> > What power levels are that, in common terms?
>
> Do you know the Chronicles of Amber?

A bit.

> Well the penultimateultimate
> adversary in the campaign was something so powerful that it rewrote
> all Reality at need. The entire Amber-Courts of Chaos multiverse (with
> associated add-ons for our campaign) was the tiny, pathetic remnants
> of the original multiverse, sort of the little pile of dirt swept
> under the rug of Reality. Eventually, after four years of play, the
> PCs confronted Monolith in its fortress at the heart of nullspace...

OK, scary. :) 

So, what is Monolith? How does it look like? Is it closest to a person,
a construct, a force...? (I'd imagine it's a little bit of all that,
hence "closest".)

> >>And believe me,
> >>there was no loss of "flavor" nor of threat, fear, combat, or glory.
> >
> > IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
> > connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
> > Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
> > threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
> > all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
> > PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
> > become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players.
>
> But the REAL concerns of the PCs are EXACTLY the same at first level,
> tenth, 100th, or God. Succeeding at some personal goal, protecting the
> ones they care for, avenging some past wrong -- only the SIZE of the
> challenge changes. Whether you're trying to achieve the point where
> you can finally cast that wondrous spell "fireball", or working to
> unlock the very secrets of magic itself, your character's GOAL is to
> learn. Whether the love of your life is a peasant girl or a goddess
> with the powers of the Earth, do you feel any different, are your
> goals so very unlike, when she is killed in front of your eyes? If
> you've always wanted your father to be proud of you, does it really
> feel different to you when he finally IS, whether you're just the son
> of a blacksmith or the son of Odin?

That much is true. But note how the goals you mention are all basically
internal, personal hangups: make father proud, get vengeance, get the
girl, learn for the sake of learning.

ISTM that all sorts of once-valid goals would just slide out of focus
after a certain power level, since they're way below your league. "Try
to acquire money? Bah. I can conjure up money. Better yet, I can conjure
up anything I'd ever want to buy with money." "Study healing so I can
stop the plague? Bah. I can will the plague out of existence."

And once you get to the point where you're rewriting Reality, what's to
stop you from writing a Reality you want, where the girl is madly in
love with you and you're the crowning joy of your father's life? Of
course, it could be argued that those aren't the real girl and the real
father, but it could also be argued that they are, and you could even
have a subplot all about that... but that's exactly the issue I was
talking about: metaphysical dilemmas on whether an edited Reality can be
considered as real as the original one or whether the original one
really is original or just appears so from your PoV since it wasn't you
that rewrote it last... I think that that kind of thing cannot engage
the average player as easily as deciding whether we should pay taxes to
the evil king and strengthen his position but also buy time to build up
a credible resistance, or just rebel right now come what might.

Another issue: a 10th-level paladin might see a town wiped out by the
Great Evil before he manages to stop it. A 100th-level paladin might see
universes fall. I'd expect that after seeing zillions die or be soul-
eaten or erased from history, even a moderatly compassionate person
would soon become either terribly jaded or terribly angsty and guilt-
ridden. Or perhaps he might manage to adopt a realistic viewpoint and
say that a zillion dying before a thousand zillions are saved is no less
of a victory that a hundred dying before a hundred thousand are saved...
but even so, there's a disconnect from anything resembling everyday
experience (even extended to encompass things we experience through
fiction like books and movies).

.... I must qualify the above: I'm don't find extreme power level
campaigns as unworkable as it might come across. I might be playing the
devil's advocate just a bit, but that's because I know you have
extensive experience with this sort of thing, I don't, my campaign is
nearing 20th-level, and I'm starting to have doubts about my ability to
wrap it up decently, much less take it to, say, 30th. So I'm interested
in the specifics of how you handle it.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 12:42:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> In article <42C6ACB8.9080601@obvioussgeinc.com>,
> seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com says...
>
>
>>>> The last game I ran hit power levels that scared ME.
>>>
>>>What power levels are that, in common terms?
>>
>> Do you know the Chronicles of Amber?
>
>
> A bit.
>
>
>>Well the penultimate
>>adversary in the campaign was something so powerful that it rewrote
>>all Reality at need. The entire Amber-Courts of Chaos multiverse (with
>>associated add-ons for our campaign) was the tiny, pathetic remnants
>>of the original multiverse, sort of the little pile of dirt swept
>>under the rug of Reality. Eventually, after four years of play, the
>>PCs confronted Monolith in its fortress at the heart of nullspace...
>
>
> OK, scary. :) 
>
> So, what is Monolith? How does it look like? Is it closest to a person,
> a construct, a force...? (I'd imagine it's a little bit of all that,
> hence "closest".)

Monolith looks like a gold-and-black trapezoidal box about a foot and
a half high, a foot wide at the top, a foot and a half wide at the
bottom, and about six inches thick. Most of the PCs had never actually
seen it until that final battle. It mostly fights by drawing in
threats from across all reality.


>>
>> But the REAL concerns of the PCs are EXACTLY the same at first level,
>>tenth, 100th, or God. Succeeding at some personal goal, protecting the
>>ones they care for, avenging some past wrong -- only the SIZE of the
>>challenge changes. Whether you're trying to achieve the point where
>>you can finally cast that wondrous spell "fireball", or working to
>>unlock the very secrets of magic itself, your character's GOAL is to
>>learn. Whether the love of your life is a peasant girl or a goddess
>>with the powers of the Earth, do you feel any different, are your
>>goals so very unlike, when she is killed in front of your eyes? If
>>you've always wanted your father to be proud of you, does it really
>>feel different to you when he finally IS, whether you're just the son
>>of a blacksmith or the son of Odin?
>
>
> That much is true. But note how the goals you mention are all basically
> internal, personal hangups: make father proud, get vengeance, get the
> girl, learn for the sake of learning.

But that's what pretty much drives most PCs in my experience. They
have some particular goal -- becoming the greatest healer was the goal
of one of these PCs, for instance.

>
> ISTM that all sorts of once-valid goals would just slide out of focus
> after a certain power level, since they're way below your league. "Try
> to acquire money? Bah. I can conjure up money. Better yet, I can conjure
> up anything I'd ever want to buy with money." "Study healing so I can
> stop the plague? Bah. I can will the plague out of existence."

Yep. But that's NORMAL for PCs in an Amberverse; you're a Prince (or
Princess) of Amber. You can walk to a universe where gold paves the
streets, and you OWN it. You're immune to all diseases and can reshape
the reality you're in to eliminate disease.

So what really matters? Personal goals, ranging from marrying the
perfect counterpart to becoming the greatest warrior to saving the
people you love.


>
> And once you get to the point where you're rewriting Reality, what's to
> stop you from writing a Reality you want, where the girl is madly in
> love with you and you're the crowning joy of your father's life?

(A) It was the BAD guy doing the rewriting.

(B) After winning (against Monolith and the final, ultimate villain)
they basically DID get to "set things right". But... they aren't done,
if they don't want to be.

Amber basically answers that one, too; you touch on it later on. A
villain or a very shallow person might be satisfied with the rewrite
approach, but most people would feel it was ... not real. You didn't
really please your father, you just MADE him feel pleased. You didn't
win the girl, you MADE her like you. There's real, and there's forced.

The PCs all agreed on that; you have to do it the honest way.

....
> would soon become either terribly jaded or terribly angsty and guilt-
> ridden.

Or both, then get over it, or refuse to accept the compromise. The
latter is what the PCs mostly did; they decided that the job was to
beat the opponent and then fix what was damaged.

One of the ways in which I do it is by making sure the players have
clear ideas of what (A) they want to accomplish, and (B) how they will
interact with the other PCs, so that there's something for everyone
easily available in the game.


--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
July 3, 2005 1:52:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

okay, how do people handle uber-20 level campaigns mechanically?
besides the epic stuff, which i'm not really a fan of. any working
alternatives?

so far, i'm looking at...

1. extrapolate classes beyond 20th level as needed
2. classes have 20 level limits, PCs dont; start multiclassing
3. kill them all, start accumulating eidolon(cer) levels
4. start accumulating divine ranks

monolith, huh? not bad.

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/&gt;
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: The defacto sub-standard.
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 8:51:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

drow wrote:
> okay, how do people handle uber-20 level campaigns mechanically?
> besides the epic stuff, which i'm not really a fan of. any working
> alternatives?

AMBER. At really super-high levels I avoid mechanics except in very
broad strokes.


--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 10:41:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42c70cb9$0$648$8046368a@newsreader.iphouse.net>,
drow <drow@bin.sh> wrote:
>okay, how do people handle uber-20 level campaigns mechanically?
>besides the epic stuff, which i'm not really a fan of. any working
>alternatives?
>
>so far, i'm looking at...
>
>1. extrapolate classes beyond 20th level as needed
>2. classes have 20 level limits, PCs dont; start multiclassing
>3. kill them all, start accumulating eidolon(cer) levels
>4. start accumulating divine ranks

Thats a tough one, IMHO characters over 15th level become incomprehensible
..... to their players as they struggle to keep track of their spells, feats,
magic items, range, hit and damage modifiers.

I'd suggest converting the characters in a different system Amber has been
suggested, I've toyed with modified FengShui, perhaps a superhero system
Champions springs to mind.... However I believe that the game would suffer
as all the 'D&D flavour' would be hard to preserve.

How about The Primal Order? <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_2459.html&g...;
You could re-factor the characters, review the tangle of feats and replace them
with short _general_ list of the things the character can do. Combine the endless
list of misc magic into a 2-3 signature artifacts. Then use the 'bolt on' God rules
in the Primal Order I think you would be able to keep the general feel
much better...


--
Michael
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NPC rights activist | Nameless Abominations are people too.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:43:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:22:01 +0200, Jasin Zujovic <jzujovic@inet.hr>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
> connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
> Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
> threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
> all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
> PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
> become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players. When you're
> 10th level and trying to stop the dragon from terrorizing the village,
> almost everyone can relate. When you're 150th level and trying to stop
> Azathoth in single combat from unravelling the Loom of Fate, it's easy
> for all those concepts to become just words.

So have Azathoth get to start unravelling the Loom before the heroes
can get the wherewithal to stop him. Describe the effect this has on
their homeworld/land. Describe what it's like to see your family
unravel before your eyes, pleading for your help, while you are
powerless to do anything (being unprepared, and all). Describe the
pain of having the two fingers on your left hand 'leaking' into
nothingness as the part fo the Weave that you are part of starts
failing...


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:43:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <glcfc19q58arqbcv0r3ijc7esll2iomcfs@4ax.com>,
rboleyn@paradise.net.nz says...

> > IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
> > connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
> > Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
> > threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
> > all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
> > PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
> > become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players. When you're
> > 10th level and trying to stop the dragon from terrorizing the village,
> > almost everyone can relate. When you're 150th level and trying to stop
> > Azathoth in single combat from unravelling the Loom of Fate, it's easy
> > for all those concepts to become just words.
>
> So have Azathoth get to start unravelling the Loom before the heroes
> can get the wherewithal to stop him. Describe the effect this has on
> their homeworld/land. Describe what it's like to see your family
> unravel before your eyes, pleading for your help, while you are
> powerless to do anything (being unprepared, and all). Describe the
> pain of having the two fingers on your left hand 'leaking' into
> nothingness as the part fo the Weave that you are part of starts
> failing...

As I've said: a disconnect from the players' experience. As the power
level increases, it's more difficult to anchor the descriptions in
things the players' and the DM know. Most people know what it's like to
get cut by a blade, even if it's just a kitchen accident, so when you're
describing a sword cut, there's something for both the DM and the
players to hold on to. When you're describing unravelling, neither the
DM nor the players really know what the DM is talking about.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:44:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> In article <glcfc19q58arqbcv0r3ijc7esll2iomcfs@4ax.com>,
> rboleyn@paradise.net.nz says...
>
>
>>>IME, the biggest danger isn't the loss of either of those, but of
>>>connection with the players' experience. If the game is like Ninja
>>>Scroll where there are superpowered villains whose ultimate world-
>>>threatening scheme is to "STEAL... A PILE OF GOLD!!1 HA HA HA!!", it's
>>>all good. But if the themes and plots follow the power level, so that
>>>PCs with godlike powers have godlike concerns, those concerns can easily
>>>become incomprehensible and uninteresting to the players. When you're
>>>10th level and trying to stop the dragon from terrorizing the village,
>>>almost everyone can relate. When you're 150th level and trying to stop
>>>Azathoth in single combat from unravelling the Loom of Fate, it's easy
>>>for all those concepts to become just words.
>>
>>So have Azathoth get to start unravelling the Loom before the heroes
>>can get the wherewithal to stop him. Describe the effect this has on
>>their homeworld/land. Describe what it's like to see your family
>>unravel before your eyes, pleading for your help, while you are
>>powerless to do anything (being unprepared, and all). Describe the
>>pain of having the two fingers on your left hand 'leaking' into
>>nothingness as the part fo the Weave that you are part of starts
>>failing...
>
>
> As I've said: a disconnect from the players' experience. As the power
> level increases, it's more difficult to anchor the descriptions in
> things the players' and the DM know. Most people know what it's like to
> get cut by a blade, even if it's just a kitchen accident, so when you're
> describing a sword cut, there's something for both the DM and the
> players to hold on to. When you're describing unravelling, neither the
> DM nor the players really know what the DM is talking about.
>
>

You've never seen a piece of cloth unravel?

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:44:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
news:42C7D23A.2060202@obvioussgeinc.com...
> Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> > In article <glcfc19q58arqbcv0r3ijc7esll2iomcfs@4ax.com>,
> > rboleyn@paradise.net.nz says...
> >>powerless to do anything (being unprepared, and all). Describe the
> >>pain of having the two fingers on your left hand 'leaking' into
> >>nothingness as the part fo the Weave that you are part of starts
> >>failing...
> >
> >
> > As I've said: a disconnect from the players' experience. As the power
> > level increases, it's more difficult to anchor the descriptions in
> > things the players' and the DM know. Most people know what it's like to
> > get cut by a blade, even if it's just a kitchen accident, so when you're
> > describing a sword cut, there's something for both the DM and the
> > players to hold on to. When you're describing unravelling, neither the
> > DM nor the players really know what the DM is talking about.
>
> You've never seen a piece of cloth unravel?

Now, connect with the pain the cloth feels as it unravels. We as people
aren't connected with the pain the cloth feels when it is being unravelled.
I believe that's the point he's trying to make. Such a vastly different
experience is difficult to connect with.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:44:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
> news:42C7D23A.2060202@obvioussgeinc.com...
>
>>Jasin Zujovic wrote:
>>
>>>In article <glcfc19q58arqbcv0r3ijc7esll2iomcfs@4ax.com>,
>>>rboleyn@paradise.net.nz says...
>>>
>>>>powerless to do anything (being unprepared, and all). Describe the
>>>>pain of having the two fingers on your left hand 'leaking' into
>>>>nothingness as the part fo the Weave that you are part of starts
>>>>failing...
>>>
>>>
>>>As I've said: a disconnect from the players' experience. As the power
>>>level increases, it's more difficult to anchor the descriptions in
>>>things the players' and the DM know. Most people know what it's like to
>>>get cut by a blade, even if it's just a kitchen accident, so when you're
>>>describing a sword cut, there's something for both the DM and the
>>>players to hold on to. When you're describing unravelling, neither the
>>>DM nor the players really know what the DM is talking about.
>>
>>You've never seen a piece of cloth unravel?
>
>
> Now, connect with the pain the cloth feels as it unravels. We as people
> aren't connected with the pain the cloth feels when it is being unravelled.
> I believe that's the point he's trying to make. Such a vastly different
> experience is difficult to connect with.
>

*shrug* I have no difficulty connecting with it. It'd be like being
dissected in an ordered fashion with no anaesthetic.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:49:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 20:08:32 GMT, Sea Wasp
<seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Yep. But that's NORMAL for PCs in an Amberverse; you're a Prince (or
> Princess) of Amber. You can walk to a universe where gold paves the
> streets, and you OWN it. You're immune to all diseases and can reshape
> the reality you're in to eliminate disease.

You are? Corwin was unusually tough, and the plague nearly killed him.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:49:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 20:08:32 GMT, Sea Wasp
> <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>
>> Yep. But that's NORMAL for PCs in an Amberverse; you're a Prince (or
>>Princess) of Amber. You can walk to a universe where gold paves the
>>streets, and you OWN it. You're immune to all diseases and can reshape
>>the reality you're in to eliminate disease.
>
>
> You are? Corwin was unusually tough, and the plague nearly killed him.
>
>

You're right, I should NOT have said "immune". Highly resistant.
Corwin wouldn't have caught the black plague had he not been wounded
near to death already.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 10:26:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
news:42C839C7.7090002@obvioussgeinc.com...
> Jeff Goslin wrote:
> > Now, connect with the pain the cloth feels as it unravels. We as people
> > aren't connected with the pain the cloth feels when it is being
unravelled.
> > I believe that's the point he's trying to make. Such a vastly different
> > experience is difficult to connect with.
>
> *shrug* I have no difficulty connecting with it. It'd be like being
> dissected in an ordered fashion with no anaesthetic.

And I imagine that you have vast experience in the arena of
non-anaesthetized self-surgery? I'm sorry, but there are very few people on
the PLANET to whom that has happened even once, let alone often enough to
relate to such a feeling as a matter of course.

He's concerned about the disconnection the players have from their
characters, and such a thing is disconnected from the experience of
humanity.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:14:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Mr. M.J. Lush wrote:
>
> Thats a tough one, IMHO characters over 15th level become
> incomprehensible .... to their players as they struggle to keep track of
> their spells, feats, magic items, range, hit and damage modifiers.

I find it trivial. You just need to organise your character sheet in a
comprehensible fashion.

This is how I do mine:

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/john-canm...

That's the actual sheet as I use it in play.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 3:59:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 14:53:35 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Now, connect with the pain the cloth feels as it unravels. We as people
> aren't connected with the pain the cloth feels when it is being unravelled.
> I believe that's the point he's trying to make. Such a vastly different
> experience is difficult to connect with.

So, describe the sensation of being torn apart. Of having your hand
just melt (or something equally gruesome). Describe having to watch
your loved ones come undone before your eyes, having to listen to
their screams, their pleadings, their cries to you for help as you are
able to do nothing to even ease the suffering of their passing. Make
it personal.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 3:59:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Rupert Boleyn said

> So, describe the sensation of being torn apart. Of having your hand
> just melt (or something equally gruesome). Describe having to watch
> your loved ones come undone before your eyes, having to listen to
> their screams, their pleadings, their cries to you for help as you are
> able to do nothing to even ease the suffering of their passing. Make
> it personal.

So much like watching AI or Minority Report then?

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 5:43:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspobvious@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
> news:42C839C7.7090002@obvioussgeinc.com...
>
>>Jeff Goslin wrote:
>>
>>>Now, connect with the pain the cloth feels as it unravels. We as people
>>>aren't connected with the pain the cloth feels when it is being
>>
> unravelled.
>
>>>I believe that's the point he's trying to make. Such a vastly different
>>>experience is difficult to connect with.
>>
>>*shrug* I have no difficulty connecting with it. It'd be like being
>>dissected in an ordered fashion with no anaesthetic.
>
>
> And I imagine that you have vast experience in the arena of
> non-anaesthetized self-surgery?

No, but unless you've never been injured one should be able to
imagine it pretty well.





--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
!