Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3.5e Rogue's Gallery?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
August 7, 2005 4:52:01 PM

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

So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's Gallery
for v3.5?

I looked over at the RPG Store and found 3 NPC books...

#1 is 1000 Faces, but the maker seems to be defunct (and only 250 NPCs
even though it says 1000). No reviews. Scares me with the link to
the maker dead...

#2 GM Mastery: NPC Essentials. Review makes me think it might be
interesting, but it doesn't look like what I'm looking for.

#3 Ultimate NPCs (Mongoose). No Reviews. Mongoose has been rather
erratic with thier quality, so I'm a bit warry, the price is also
rather high - $34. I'm also not sure I want something that's d20
either, I want to make sure it works with 3.5.

So anyone know of a good one, or if any of these are good?

Or if not, what do you use to make making NPCs a breeze instead of a
major project? On that note, I've tried James Buck's NPC generator,
but it doesn't include items (does include spells and feats, so it
might be a nice shortcut). But items are half the work.

More about : rogue gallery

Anonymous
August 7, 2005 10:54:52 PM

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

Justisaur wrote:
> So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
> or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's Gallery
> for v3.5?

Why don't we create one for ourselves?

All DM's could submit some old NPC's, and players could submit
their characters. We could put them all in a big ass document
and keep it on the web. Motivation and back story would be
nice (just for the ideas involved), but unnecessary.

There must be enough regular readers and lurkers in this group
to have 100 great NPC's in a very small amount of time.

What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
time to collect and format the NPC's...
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 7:15:41 AM

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

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
> So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
> or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's Gallery
> for v3.5?
>
> I looked over at the RPG Store and found 3 NPC books...
>
> #1 is 1000 Faces, but the maker seems to be defunct (and only 250 NPCs
> even though it says 1000). No reviews. Scares me with the link to
> the maker dead...

Yeah, that was disappointing. I was looking forward to the rest.

> #2 GM Mastery: NPC Essentials. Review makes me think it might be
> interesting, but it doesn't look like what I'm looking for.
>
> #3 Ultimate NPCs (Mongoose). No Reviews. Mongoose has been rather
> erratic with thier quality, so I'm a bit warry, the price is also
> rather high - $34. I'm also not sure I want something that's d20
> either, I want to make sure it works with 3.5.

I haven't seen it. I also haven't been terribly impressed with the
Ultimate series. I'd have to look it over carefully.

> So anyone know of a good one, or if any of these are good?
>
> Or if not, what do you use to make making NPCs a breeze instead of a
> major project? On that note, I've tried James Buck's NPC generator,
> but it doesn't include items (does include spells and feats, so it
> might be a nice shortcut). But items are half the work.

I know I've seen NPCs online, but I don't remember finding any big
repositories of them.

There's something that might be worth starting.


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
Related resources
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 2:43:53 PM

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

decalod85 wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
>> So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
>> or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's
>> Gallery for v3.5?
>
> Why don't we create one for ourselves?
>
> All DM's could submit some old NPC's, and players could submit
> their characters. We could put them all in a big ass document
> and keep it on the web. Motivation and back story would be
> nice (just for the ideas involved), but unnecessary.
>
> There must be enough regular readers and lurkers in this group
> to have 100 great NPC's in a very small amount of time.
>
> What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
> time to collect and format the NPC's...

Well, I think it's a good idea. The Netbook of NPC's or somesuch.

One thing though that I'd like to suggest is that, in addition to the stats
and minor background is a "typical combat strategies/first few rounds of
combat" so that one can drop a character into an encounter without too much
hassle.

--
Reginald Blue
"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my
telephone."
- Bjarne Stroustrup (originator of C++) [quoted at the 2003
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces]
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 6:09:49 PM

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

Joseph wrote:
> Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in news:D PNJe.109688$rb6.84308
> @lakeread07:
>
> >> What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
> >> time to collect and format the NPC's...
> >
> > I was thinking this EXACT same thing.
> >
> > I'm in as a contributor, if it ever gets off the ground.
> >
> > - Ron ^*^
>
> Will this project use the new DMG II statistics block format? Or does most
> of RGFD prefer the older offical stat format, or a modified house rule
> format?

What is the DMG II block format? I generally don't do NPCs as just
statistics blocks anyway, I do them up as characters.

I've got a few NPCs I could post as well, been thinking about doing
that anyway.

I also took a look around the net to see if I could find anything
similar. Closest I came was

http://www.greyhawkonline.com/duicarthan/npcz.html

Which lists a whol lot of high level NPCs for greyhawk. Nothing in the
normal range though. Nothing else terribly promising.

Well how about [Rogue's Gallery] for posts, maybe list the CR or
classes and race or something as well in the subject.

- Justisaur
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 6:52:00 PM

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

decalod85 wrote:

> Justisaur wrote:
>
>>So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
>>or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's Gallery
>>for v3.5?
>
>
> Why don't we create one for ourselves?
>
> All DM's could submit some old NPC's, and players could submit
> their characters. We could put them all in a big ass document
> and keep it on the web. Motivation and back story would be
> nice (just for the ideas involved), but unnecessary.
>
> There must be enough regular readers and lurkers in this group
> to have 100 great NPC's in a very small amount of time.
>
> What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
> time to collect and format the NPC's...

I was thinking this EXACT same thing.

I'm in as a contributor, if it ever gets off the ground.

- Ron ^*^
August 8, 2005 11:48:32 PM

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

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in news:D PNJe.109688$rb6.84308
@lakeread07:

>> What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
>> time to collect and format the NPC's...
>
> I was thinking this EXACT same thing.
>
> I'm in as a contributor, if it ever gets off the ground.
>
> - Ron ^*^

Will this project use the new DMG II statistics block format? Or does most
of RGFD prefer the older offical stat format, or a modified house rule
format?
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 5:32:36 AM

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

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Joseph wrote:
>> Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in news:D PNJe.109688$rb6.84308
>> @lakeread07:
>>
>> >> What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
>> >> time to collect and format the NPC's...
>> >
>> > I was thinking this EXACT same thing.
>> >
>> > I'm in as a contributor, if it ever gets off the ground.
>> >
>> > - Ron ^*^
>>
>> Will this project use the new DMG II statistics block format? Or does most
>> of RGFD prefer the older offical stat format, or a modified house rule
>> format?
>
> What is the DMG II block format? I generally don't do NPCs as just
> statistics blocks anyway, I do them up as characters.

What I'd like to see is a data format, rather than a character format.
Then we can format to taste for presentation (DMG II, 'character', 3e
stat block, whatever).


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
August 9, 2005 5:32:37 AM

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

Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote in
news:slrndfg6t4.vig.keith.davies@kjdavies.org:

> decalod85 <decalod85@comcast.net> wrote:

>> 8. I am going to try to find some sort of open license
>> that allows distribution, copying, additions, but forbids
>> commercial sale. I don't want some punk to steal our
>> NPC's and make a mint selling them (and I don't want anyone
>> to accuse me of planning the same thing).
>
> Tough; OGL does allow this. At least, for the OGC. Consider
> something like "purely mechanical considerations are OGC, but
> backstory and description aren't". It's not a different
> license (I dislike proliferation of licenses if they can be
> avoided), but limiting the actual OGC would do what we need,
> I think.

Just block off all of the background, flavor, and non-crunchy stuff as
being non-OGL, and leave all the stats OGL. People could still reuse the
character stats, but that's the easy part anyway, so no big deal there.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 5:32:37 AM

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

Keith Davies wrote:

> Perhaps have some entries that are the same character at
> different points in his career.

Yeah, I like this idea.


> Actually, something I'd *really* like to see is full-on
> parties. Counter to my suggestion above (alphabetically
> by name), keep parties in one group. Perhaps have a "parties"
> chapter and a "characters" chapter.

Also a good idea.

My only problem is that I'm not sure what the SRD 3.5 rules are. Does
this mean only things from the PHB and DMG, or are PrCs from, say,
Draconomicon allowed? I'm not entirely sure what the SRD is limited to.

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 9:16:37 AM

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

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>My only problem is that I'm not sure what the SRD 3.5 rules are. Does
>this mean only things from the PHB and DMG, or are PrCs from, say,
>Draconomicon allowed? I'm not entirely sure what the SRD is limited to.

Umm.

No, This is too obvious a troll. I refuse.

Donald ("RTFSRD!!" ?)
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 10:07:45 AM

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

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> Keith Davies wrote:
>
>> Perhaps have some entries that are the same character at
>> different points in his career.
>
> Yeah, I like this idea.
>
>
>> Actually, something I'd *really* like to see is full-on
>> parties. Counter to my suggestion above (alphabetically
>> by name), keep parties in one group. Perhaps have a "parties"
>> chapter and a "characters" chapter.
>
> Also a good idea.
>
> My only problem is that I'm not sure what the SRD 3.5 rules are. Does
> this mean only things from the PHB and DMG, or are PrCs from, say,
> Draconomicon allowed? I'm not entirely sure what the SRD is limited
> to.

http://www.andargor.com

he's got a (rather nice, actually) CHM file containing the RSRD.

You can also, of course, grab the RSRD from wizards.com. Hard to have a
more explicitly correct RSRD.

*Basically*, though, purely mechanical-but-not-setting information from
PH, DMG, MM. Some monsters are excluded (beholders, yuan-ti, illithid
come to mind). No gods, not city rules... magic item charts are there.
Most of XPH and DDg (except the gods themselves -- divine salient
abilities are in, as are the *rules* about the different ranks of gods)
is there, ISTR the planar material (basics at least) are there.
Unearthed Arcana is completely OGC, IIRC.

All in all it's not *too* hard to stick to RSRD. It's *basically* the
core books, with a few additions (XPH, UA, DDg)


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
August 9, 2005 10:07:46 AM

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

Keith Davies wrote:
> Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Keith Davies wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Perhaps have some entries that are the same character at
>>>different points in his career.
>>
>>Yeah, I like this idea.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Actually, something I'd *really* like to see is full-on
>>>parties. Counter to my suggestion above (alphabetically
>>>by name), keep parties in one group. Perhaps have a "parties"
>>>chapter and a "characters" chapter.
>>
>>Also a good idea.
>>
>>My only problem is that I'm not sure what the SRD 3.5 rules are. Does
>>this mean only things from the PHB and DMG, or are PrCs from, say,
>>Draconomicon allowed? I'm not entirely sure what the SRD is limited
>>to.
>
>
> http://www.andargor.com
>
> he's got a (rather nice, actually) CHM file containing the RSRD.
>
> You can also, of course, grab the RSRD from wizards.com. Hard to have a
> more explicitly correct RSRD.
>
> *Basically*, though, purely mechanical-but-not-setting information from
> PH, DMG, MM. Some monsters are excluded (beholders, yuan-ti, illithid
> come to mind). No gods, not city rules... magic item charts are there.

Makes cleric NPC problematic, doesn't it?


> Most of XPH and DDg (except the gods themselves -- divine salient
> abilities are in, as are the *rules* about the different ranks of gods)
> is there, ISTR the planar material (basics at least) are there.
> Unearthed Arcana is completely OGC, IIRC.

Hmm.


> All in all it's not *too* hard to stick to RSRD. It's *basically* the
> core books, with a few additions (XPH, UA, DDg)

None of the "Complete" books, though?

- Ron ^*^
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 10:34:22 AM

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

Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
> Keith Davies wrote:
>>
>> *Basically*, though, purely mechanical-but-not-setting information from
>> PH, DMG, MM. Some monsters are excluded (beholders, yuan-ti, illithid
>> come to mind). No gods, not city rules... magic item charts are there.
>
> Makes cleric NPC problematic, doesn't it?

Not a lot. How many DMs (not playing in Greyhawk) use Greyhawk gods?

Make up aliases. The Greyhawk gods are fairly archetypal.

Quick, who'm I talking about:

1. "God of barbarians and physical might, Good guy"
2. "Master of magic and knowledge"
3. "Mistress of magic and death"

.... it's not that hard to do. You can get by, to a certain extent, with
the domains of the god -- even just the domains of the cleric... at
least mechanically. Character-wise you need a little more, but as I
said, they're fairly archetypal gods.

>> All in all it's not *too* hard to stick to RSRD. It's *basically* the
>> core books, with a few additions (XPH, UA, DDg)
>
> None of the "Complete" books, though?

As far as I know, true.

You may be able to skirt things if you only refer to the names (either
copied or easily deciphered) of the things you want to connect to,
without any mechanical information. "Radiant Servant 4", sort of thing.
I wouldn't do it myself, but I've seen other publications (Gates of Hell
comes to mind) do so.

WotC *shouldn't* have a problem, since it means someone using the NPC
would need to have a copy of the book to use it as written. OTOH,
technically they could still have a position should they choose to
complain (i.e. C&D, sue), and I really don't like *requiring* someone to
go out and buy a book just to use this one.

Hence, I'd recommend against using non-OGC material. If it's OGC, we
can copy (as long as we acknowledge) the material ourselves so the NPC
is, with the RSRD, complete. That removes from us *all* OGL-related
hassles.


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
August 9, 2005 10:34:23 AM

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

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 06:34:22 GMT, Keith Davies
<keith.davies@kjdavies.org> dared speak in front of ME:

>Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
>> Keith Davies wrote:
>>>
>>> *Basically*, though, purely mechanical-but-not-setting information from
>>> PH, DMG, MM. Some monsters are excluded (beholders, yuan-ti, illithid
>>> come to mind). No gods, not city rules... magic item charts are there.
>>
>> Makes cleric NPC problematic, doesn't it?
>
>Not a lot. How many DMs (not playing in Greyhawk) use Greyhawk gods?
>
>Make up aliases. The Greyhawk gods are fairly archetypal.
>
>Quick, who'm I talking about:
>
>1. "God of barbarians and physical might, Good guy"

Thor.

>2. "Master of magic and knowledge"

Odin.

>3. "Mistress of magic and death"

Kali.

Still, the point is taken: the names of the god(s) the cleric is
devoted to isn't as important to this kind of thing as the general
nature of the gods. Also fits the purpose of such a project a bit
better, as they become less tied to setting.

--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 2:06:49 PM

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

decalod85 wrote:
> Let's try this.
>
> 1. Submissions should be sent as an email attachment.
> Word, Text, RTF, PDF are all fine. I will accept old
> stat block format and PCGEN characters. My user name is
> decalod85. My mail server is comcast.net. Hopefully,
> you are able to put these two together and the spammers
> are not.
>

I'd rather have them show up here under [Rogue's Gallery] That way they
can be picked up and used by anyone, instead of relegated to a possible
data hole of someone's email.

> 2. NPC's must use the SRD 3.5 rules. All classes, races,
> equipment, magic, spells and artifacts must come from the
> 3.5 SRD. You might question why, and I'll tell you. I
> don't want to get 500 NPC's in and be told by WOTC that
> I have to quit because someone used a red wizard of Thay
> class that infringed their copyright. Also, this will be
> more useful to everyone if all "world" specific and
> house rules are stripped out. Violating this rule means
> that your submission has to be rejected.
>

I hate to eliminate mind flayers, beholders, and slaad, they are rather
popular and they are from core, but not SRD. The complete books have a
lot of jucy stuff as well, but personally I'd like to stick to core as
much as possible too.
August 9, 2005 5:51:55 PM

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

I've got a backlog of characters looking for a home. I'm in.

Are the Unearthed Arcana OGL rules that are now in the Hypertext SRD
acceptable?
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 6:32:20 PM

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

Justisaur wrote:
> decalod85 wrote:
> > Let's try this.
> >
> > 1. Submissions should be sent as an email attachment.
> > Word, Text, RTF, PDF are all fine. I will accept old
> > stat block format and PCGEN characters. My user name is
> > decalod85. My mail server is comcast.net. Hopefully,
> > you are able to put these two together and the spammers
> > are not.
> >
>
> I'd rather have them show up here under [Rogue's Gallery] That way they
> can be picked up and used by anyone, instead of relegated to a possible
> data hole of someone's email.

Why don't we do it both ways? Then, those who want to
include non-SRD rules or world specific background or
rules can include it.

I can lift NPCs out of the newsgroup just as easily as
out of e-mail.

> > 2. NPC's must use the SRD 3.5 rules. All classes, races,
> > equipment, magic, spells and artifacts must come from the
> > 3.5 SRD. You might question why, and I'll tell you. I
> > don't want to get 500 NPC's in and be told by WOTC that
> > I have to quit because someone used a red wizard of Thay
> > class that infringed their copyright. Also, this will be
> > more useful to everyone if all "world" specific and
> > house rules are stripped out. Violating this rule means
> > that your submission has to be rejected.
> >
>
> I hate to eliminate mind flayers, beholders, and slaad, they are rather
> popular and they are from core, but not SRD. The complete books have a
> lot of jucy stuff as well, but personally I'd like to stick to core as
> much as possible too.

Like both Keith and I said, it probably would earn us a
Cease and Desist letter from WOTC. There is stuff in the
core 3 books that WOTC protects rather jealously.

If you have non-core stuff, you should just post it with
the [Rogue's Gallery] tag in the subject. They can't sue
Usenet.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 6:51:28 PM

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

Presto <donotuse@thisaddress.no> wrote:
> I've got a backlog of characters looking for a home. I'm in.
>
> Are the Unearthed Arcana OGL rules that are now in the Hypertext SRD
> acceptable?

Where's this (Hypertext SRD), then?


And I'd consider them, at least, but I'd want them very clearly marked.
UA is an unusual book in that there is stuff there that is specifically
(or deliberately) unbalanced in a core game... and these things aren't
always marked.

Actually... sure, as far as I'm concerned send it, but make it really
clear which bits are being used. Some are no big deal (the variant
classes), others are unilateral improvements (wizard domains), some are
really out there (Item Familiar, apparently)... leave it to the DMs to
decide. If you make it clear what you're using, though, and that you're
using UA, we can flag these things.


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
August 9, 2005 8:03:40 PM

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

decalod85 <decalod85@comcast.net> wrote:

>Justisaur wrote:
>> So toward the end of not having to take hours to create each Advanced
>> or Classed Monster or NPC, is there a good version of a Rogue's Gallery
>> for v3.5?

>Why don't we create one for ourselves?

>All DM's could submit some old NPC's, and players could submit
>their characters. We could put them all in a big ass document
>and keep it on the web. Motivation and back story would be
>nice (just for the ideas involved), but unnecessary.

>There must be enough regular readers and lurkers in this group
>to have 100 great NPC's in a very small amount of time.

>What do you folks think? I would be willing to volunteer the
>time to collect and format the NPC's...

I think that's brilliant. And not just because I've
been thinking that it might be a good idea myself.

I'm in.

~P.
Anonymous
August 9, 2005 9:59:39 PM

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

On 8 Aug 2005 19:38:33 -0700, "decalod85" <decalod85@comcast.net>
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Let's try this.
>
> 1. Submissions should be sent as an email attachment.
> Word, Text, RTF, PDF are all fine. I will accept old
> stat block format and PCGEN characters. My user name is
> decalod85. My mail server is comcast.net. Hopefully,
> you are able to put these two together and the spammers
> are not.

As the full form is on your message headers, the spammers have it if
they want it.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 12:29:16 AM

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

vanye111@gmail.com wrote:
> There is the Wikicities article...
>
> http://d20npcs.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page
>
>

Thanks,

I've taken a look at this, it looks like it might be a good way to go.
I'm not terribly familiar with wiki though... Anyone else have any
thoughts on it?
I looked at the Orc Barbarians, as they are probably most useful off
the bat.
taking a quick look at this one...
http://d20npcs.wikicities.com/wiki/Orc_Barbarian_9
There's some obvious errors like having a breastplate and bracers of
armor. The possessions aren't properly fleshed out either.

Apparently one can edit and fix these things even if they weren't
created by you, but I'm not sure the etiquette and how to go about
doing so.

And on more combing the internet I came across another source... EN
World has a Rogue's Gallery board as well. I know a lot of regulars
read EN World, but I generally avoid graphical sites - one of the
reasons I like usenet. Doesn't look terriby active, and the one thing
I looked at was not what I'd categorize as an NPC, it was solidly a
monster.

http://www.enworld.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 5:42:29 AM

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

Justisaur wrote:
> I looked at the Orc Barbarians, as they are probably most useful off
> the bat.
> taking a quick look at this one...
> http://d20npcs.wikicities.com/wiki/Orc_Barbarian_9
> There's some obvious errors like having a breastplate and bracers of
> armor. The possessions aren't properly fleshed out either.
>

Looks like someone has changed it to an Amulet of Natural Armor (stacks
with armor) since you last looked. I think its fair that an Orc
wouldn't know better though (as long as the listed AC was correct).
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 1:30:45 PM

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

ringofw@hotmail.com wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
> > I looked at the Orc Barbarians, as they are probably most useful off
> > the bat.
> > taking a quick look at this one...
> > http://d20npcs.wikicities.com/wiki/Orc_Barbarian_9
> > There's some obvious errors like having a breastplate and bracers of
> > armor. The possessions aren't properly fleshed out either.
> >
>
> Looks like someone has changed it to an Amulet of Natural Armor (stacks
> with armor) since you last looked. I think its fair that an Orc
> wouldn't know better though (as long as the listed AC was correct).

The AC was not correct. I changed it, hehe. I wanted to see how it
worked. It seems rather TOO easy to change stuff on there. The orc
also has 31k in equipment, a standard lv 9 NPC has 12k. I was sorely
tempted to 'fix' that too, but I wasn't sure if it was intentional. I
couldn't resist 'fixing' the stats which weren't standard NPC array,
they were a bit low. I also fixed the bonus damage on the Greataxe
which was only x1 IIRC.

*sigh* I'm the guy who fixes displays in stores he doesn't work at.
If only I could do that with my own stuff...

I did notice if you go into one section you can see all edits and the
original form.

- Justisaur
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:37:09 PM

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

I think some of these characters were originally PC's, which may
account for the difference in gear values...
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 10:16:51 PM

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

vanye111@gmail.com <vanye111@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think some of these characters were originally PC's, which may
> account for the difference in gear values...

Very likely, actually. The ones I've thought about putting up were all
PCs -- mine or someone else's.


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
August 12, 2005 4:47:56 AM

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

Keith Davies wrote:
> Presto <donotuse@thisaddress.no> wrote:
>> I've got a backlog of characters looking for a home. I'm in.
>>
>> Are the Unearthed Arcana OGL rules that are now in the Hypertext SRD
>> acceptable?
>
> Where's this (Hypertext SRD), then?

http://d20srd.org/

--
Mark.
Anonymous
August 12, 2005 4:47:57 AM

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

Mark Blunden <m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid> wrote:
> Keith Davies wrote:
>> Presto <donotuse@thisaddress.no> wrote:
>>> I've got a backlog of characters looking for a home. I'm in.
>>>
>>> Are the Unearthed Arcana OGL rules that are now in the Hypertext SRD
>>> acceptable?
>>
>> Where's this (Hypertext SRD), then?
>
> http://d20srd.org/

Ah, okay. I thought maybe there was a new one or something.


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
August 12, 2005 4:59:58 AM

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

Mark Blunden wrote:
> Keith Davies wrote:
>> Presto wrote:
>
>>> I've got a backlog of characters looking for a home. I'm in.
>>>
>>> Are the Unearthed Arcana OGL rules that are now in the Hypertext SRD
>>> acceptable?
>>
>> Where's this (Hypertext SRD), then?
>
> http://d20srd.org/

I think this one is better:

http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sag...

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
The geek with roots in Hell!
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Who do you blame when your kid is a - brat?
Pampered and spoiled like a Siamese - cat?
Blaming the kids is a lie and a - shame!
You know exactly who's - to - blame:
The mother and the father!
!