PCs out of Balance - Need some Help

[Guest]

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

Quentin Stephens wrote:
> emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
> > David Serhienko wrote:
> > > Having those berries in his pouch allows him to
> > > indiscrimatelyly make use of his replenishable daily
> > > supply of Rages, knowing that he always has a way of
> > > getting more, if he has to do so.
> >
> > Well, if you haven't gotten rid of them already, I have
> > a suggestion. Instead of having them be stolen or rot
> > or vanish or whatever, have them *hatch*. Those
> > "berries" of rage were actually the eggs of something
> > interesting or valuable or nasty, or all three. Instead
> > of leaving the player with the feeling that his goodies
> > were stolen by the man, give him a roleplaying thrill.
>
> This is so much better than my suggestion.

This is so much better than *any* suggestion, IMO. 😉

Given that the berries caused rage, I'd suggest something with a
rage-like ability. Perhaps the berries were spores of farastu
demodands from the Fiend Folio IIRC (though the CR of demodands might
be too high, you could use Savage Species-style monster classes to
build "juvenile" versions of them at the appropriate CR, which would
also fit in with them having "just hatched". Also, I could be
misremembering which variety of demodand has Rage.

Similar creatures could include howlers, young howling dragons
(Draconomicon), ragewinds (MM2), slaadi, chaos dragons (Draconomicon),
any of the more berserker-like demons (I'm thinking of things like
bar-lgura (BoVD), armanite (MoP), hezrou and abyssal ravagers here),
rager varrangoin (FF), or even a Living Rage spell (Eberron, MM3),
perhaps Heightened.

Other than that, any chaotic creature with a rage ability or Barbarian
levels could probably work. If it seems odd to be hatching from an
"egg", give it the anarchic template from the Planar Handbook.

Hope this helps!

--
Nik
- remove vermin from email address to reply.

 

[Guest]

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

In article <1112751622.421957.310440@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
<emmitsvenson@hotmail.com> wrote:
>David Serhienko wrote:
>> Having those berries in his pouch allows him to indiscrimatelyly make
>
>> use of his replenishable daily supply of Rages, knowing that he
>always
>> has a way of getting more, if he has to do so.
>
>Well, if you haven't gotten rid of them already, I have a suggestion.
>Instead of having them be stolen or rot or vanish or whatever, have
>them *hatch*.

During an old campaign in college, I had the party find a magical stone. It
was the egg of a demonic creature based on the "shadowcat" in an old Wormy
coming. It would stay dormant until some blood was spilled on it; thereafter
it would need to eat the flesh or blood of whatever kind of creature the blood
came from.

The campaign ended before anything interesting happened. So I never got
around to statting out the shadowcat (kitten in this case).
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

 

[Guest]

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

Nikolas Landauer wrote:
> Quentin Stephens wrote:
>
>>emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>David Serhienko wrote:
>>>
>>>>Having those berries in his pouch allows him to
>>>>indiscrimatelyly make use of his replenishable daily
>>>>supply of Rages, knowing that he always has a way of
>>>>getting more, if he has to do so.
>>>
>>>Well, if you haven't gotten rid of them already, I have
>>>a suggestion. Instead of having them be stolen or rot
>>>or vanish or whatever, have them *hatch*. Those
>>>"berries" of rage were actually the eggs of something
>>>interesting or valuable or nasty, or all three. Instead
>>>of leaving the player with the feeling that his goodies
>>>were stolen by the man, give him a roleplaying thrill.
>>
>>This is so much better than my suggestion.
>
>
> This is so much better than *any* suggestion, IMO. 😉
>
> Given that the berries caused rage, I'd suggest something with a
> rage-like ability. Perhaps the berries were spores of farastu
> demodands from the Fiend Folio IIRC (though the CR of demodands might
> be too high, you could use Savage Species-style monster classes to
> build "juvenile" versions of them at the appropriate CR, which would
> also fit in with them having "just hatched". Also, I could be
> misremembering which variety of demodand has Rage.
>
> Similar creatures could include howlers, young howling dragons
> (Draconomicon), ragewinds (MM2), slaadi, chaos dragons (Draconomicon),
> any of the more berserker-like demons (I'm thinking of things like
> bar-lgura (BoVD), armanite (MoP), hezrou and abyssal ravagers here),
> rager varrangoin (FF), or even a Living Rage spell (Eberron, MM3),
> perhaps Heightened.
>
> Other than that, any chaotic creature with a rage ability or Barbarian
> levels could probably work. If it seems odd to be hatching from an
> "egg", give it the anarchic template from the Planar Handbook.
>
> Hope this helps!

The party has a lease on a local Townhouse that they are using as their
'home base'.

Imagine the berries hatching small clouds of gnat like 'bugs'.

At first, they are too small and numerous to kill them all. Soon, using
the wind, and sheer numbers, dozens upon dozens get away and begin to
feed...

....Growing larger, and more dangerous. Within a day, they are the size
of bottle-flies. By week's end, they are essentially stirges. And they
KEEP growing!

Funniest if done as the party is preparing to leave town for a few days.

They return to find the city near their home deserted and posters
ordering them to report to the Office of Security and Justice immediately.

Woo woo! Get on board the 'Amuse the Dm Express'!

DWS

 

[Guest]

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

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:YKWdnasRlcbuxcnfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> > Anyone with this attitude has no business being behind a GMs screen.
>
> I'm curious, then. What attributes combine to make a good GM, in your
> estimation?

Not being a deluded and moronic jackass would be a good start. Hint.
Hint.

> Personally I would think that the metagame ability to keep multiple
players
> at the same table would be one of them. That, of course, is the only goal
> of using such a tactic as above to reign in one player for the betterment
of
> the game.

See what I mean? The belief that this behaviour on your part is "for the
betterment of the game" is a display of public stupidity and delusion. Ie;
Par for the course for stoopid Jeffie.

-Michael

 

[Guest]

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

Michael Scott Brown <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Personally I would think that the metagame ability to keep multiple
>> players at the same table would be one of them. That, of course,
>> is the only goal of using such a tactic as above to reign in one
>> player for the betterment of the game.
>
> See what I mean? The belief that this behaviour on your part is "for the
>betterment of the game" is a display of public stupidity and delusion. Ie;
>Par for the course for stoopid Jeffie.

Note his (mis-)spelling of "rein". Freudian slip, or just incompetence?
(not that "Ie;" is all that much better...)

Donald

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:24:12 -0400, Nikolas Landauer
<dacileva.flea@hotmail.com.tick> scribed into the ether:

>Quentin Stephens wrote:
>> emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > David Serhienko wrote:
>> > > Having those berries in his pouch allows him to
>> > > indiscrimatelyly make use of his replenishable daily
>> > > supply of Rages, knowing that he always has a way of
>> > > getting more, if he has to do so.
>> >
>> > Well, if you haven't gotten rid of them already, I have
>> > a suggestion. Instead of having them be stolen or rot
>> > or vanish or whatever, have them *hatch*. Those
>> > "berries" of rage were actually the eggs of something
>> > interesting or valuable or nasty, or all three. Instead
>> > of leaving the player with the feeling that his goodies
>> > were stolen by the man, give him a roleplaying thrill.
>>
>> This is so much better than my suggestion.
>
>This is so much better than *any* suggestion, IMO. 😉
>
>Given that the berries caused rage, I'd suggest something with a
>rage-like ability. Perhaps the berries were spores of farastu
>demodands from the Fiend Folio IIRC

Popplers. Which D&D monsters most closely aproximate the inhabitants of
Omicron Perseii 8?

 

[Guest]

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

Suddenly, Matt Frisch, drunk as a lemur, stumbled out of the darkness and
exclaimed:

> Popplers. Which D&D monsters most closely aproximate the inhabitants of
> Omicron Perseii 8?
>
>

Heh. "People of Earth! Shhhhhhh!"

--
Billy Yank

Quinn: "I'm saying it us, or them."
Murphy: "Well I choose them."
Q: "That's NOT an option!"
M: "Then you shouldn't have framed it as one."
-Sealab 2021

Billy Yank's Baldur's Gate Photo Portraits
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2xvw6/

 

[Guest]

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

"David Johnston" <rgorman@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:42541428.347353427@news.telusplanet.net...
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 17:44:10 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> >Personally I would think that the metagame ability to keep multiple
players
> >at the same table would be one of them. That, of course, is the only
goal
> >of using such a tactic as above to reign in one player for the betterment
of
> >the game.
>
> Picking on a player for having an effective character is not a good
> way to go about it.

That depends on the game. In our game, we do whatever we can to make sure
that our first priority is one that we attain: we are there to have fun.
Any means to accomplish the goal of accomplishing the highest overall fun
level(not individual fun level, but overall fun level), we avail ourselves
of those means. In our game, the ends justify the means. The end is having
fun, the means is anything necessary to accomplish that goal.

Obviously the "true role players" would disagree, as an unnecessary
interaction between the game and the metagame, but it has worked for us.

We have kicked players out of the game for simply not fitting in. If
someone doesn't fit in well, that player lowers the fun level for everyone,
not just the person he is in conflict with. Sometimes you have to do what
you have to do, in order to accomplish the goal of having fun.

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

 

[Guest]

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

"Michael Scott Brown" <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5P_4e.2146$yq6.1241@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> See what I mean? The belief that this behaviour on your part is "for
the
> betterment of the game" is a display of public stupidity and delusion.
Ie;
> Par for the course for stoopid Jeffie.

Let me put it to you this way. If you showed up at OUR game, and started
playing with an attitude like you display online, well, it wouldn't be too
long before you'd be shown the door, by EVERYONE at the table. Nobody who
plays in our game is interested in dealing with people like you, and you
would leave, hopefully without being thrown thru my front door.

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

 

[Guest]

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

"Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:r27951dbsm3gpjro5qg09jhbjfl5hikcko@4ax.com...
> >Personally I would think that the metagame ability to keep multiple
players
> >at the same table would be one of them.
>
> Picking on characters because their player doesn't conform to your idea of
> a good character does not in any way fall into that "metagame ability".

It's not *MY* idea, it's *OUR* idea. We, as a group, do not like power
gamers, rules lawyers, munchkins or any of the breeds of irritating gamers
at our table. As such, we, as a group, do everything in our power to avoid
their problems from becoming OUR problems at our table. They can certainly
play with us, and they are made aware up front that such things are not
tolerated. If and when they become a problem, my only two available
avenues, in game terms, are to both reward what I find desirable, and punish
what I find undesirable. One is a positive reinforcement, and one is a
negative reinforcement.

In metagame terms, obviously I also have a chat with the player, letting him
know that the reasons for his in-game abuse is of his own making, and if he
doesn't want his character to be abused like that, he should avoid the
activities that cause it.

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

 

[Guest]

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

"Rexx Magnus" <trashcan@uk2.net> wrote in message
news:Xns963167BB9B2EFrexxdeansaund@130.133.1.4...
> If something is more often irritating and annoying than fun - why would
> you do it for fun, if it wasn't?
> I don't do things for fun that I find irritating and annoying. I generally
> try to avoid stuff like that.

My players seem to enjoy the twists I throw at them from time to time.
Honestly, they are the subject of much between-game reminiscing. They truly
enjoyed being hammered from time to time. I guess they're a bit masochistic
like that, who knows.

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

 

[Guest]

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

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:z5GdnYis4bsUxNHfRVn-qQ@comcast.com...

> What we're trying to correct here is a DM-induced imbalance, combined with
> more than a bit of rather transparant min/max style power gaming on the
> part
> of the player.

First of all, how exactly is this min/maxing? Secondly, how exactly is this
power gaming?

> So, the berries have to go. You can either rule zero it and
> have a reality shift(the berries are gone, basically they never were, sez
> DM),

Once again, horribly hamfisted.

> or you can fudge a die roll or two against the characters.

....or you could come up with something better.

> Hell, it doesn't even have to be a fudged roll, either, just up the amount
> he needs
> to get to an unattainable level(don't know the exact terminology, but want
> to say DC 50(?)), let the player roll, tell him he missed his spot
> check(it
> was a REALLY good pickpocket).

So, some Epic-level pickpocket just happened to be working the crowd that
day? Horseshit.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

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

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Q_qdnboexMnjxcjfRVn-tw@comcast.com...

>
> So, some Epic-level pickpocket just happened to be working the crowd that
> day? Horseshit.


Do you think people with Epic level pickpocketing skill never use it?
That's like saying it's unrealistic for a 20th level fighter to attack a
single kobold. It's just bad luck for the kobold to be in his way.

 

[Guest]

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

Shawn Wilson wrote:
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Q_qdnboexMnjxcjfRVn-tw@comcast.com...
>
> >
> > So, some Epic-level pickpocket just happened to be working the
crowd that
> > day? Horseshit.
>
> Do you think people with Epic level pickpocketing skill never use it?


It's *possible* that an Epic-level pickpocket was out for a stroll and
just decided to cut a big, ugly barbarian's purse just for grins. It's
also possible that the Man in Black is just out for a pleasure cruise,
at night, in eel-infested waters.

Possible, but highly unlikely. It reminds me of one DM I knew that was
infamous for the 20th-level wizards who seemed to run every single
tavern in his campaign.

--
Jay Knioum
The Mad Afro

 

[Guest]

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

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:l9np41lf7l1b39kp1r55lkc943vnppvfnk@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:55:51 -0500, "Jeff Goslin"
> <autockr@comcast.net> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> I seem to recall threads that indicate that a high level barbarian vs a
>> high
>> level wizard was almost no contest(bickering about details aside)...???
>
> Depends how close together they start.

....and who is prepared for what, and what equipment they have, etc.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

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

David Serhienko wrote:
> emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
> > ...I have a suggestion.
> > Instead of having them be stolen or rot or vanish or whatever, have
> > them *hatch*.
>
> That is *SO* happening.

There's a small charge for the use of the idea: you have to write in to
this group and let us know how you ran it and what happened as a
result. Otherwise we'll never hear the end of the story. May it be as
crazy a tale as the Head of Vecna!

 

[Guest]

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

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Q_qdnboexMnjxcjfRVn-tw@comcast.com...
>
> "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:z5GdnYis4bsUxNHfRVn-qQ@comcast.com...
>
> > What we're trying to correct here is a DM-induced imbalance, combined
with
> > more than a bit of rather transparant min/max style power gaming on the
> > part
> > of the player.
>
> First of all, how exactly is this min/maxing? Secondly, how exactly is
this
> power gaming?

First of all, because of the dramatic overpowering of the barbarian
character as compared to the others. Player knowledge, skill at the system,
or just plain blind luck, it is obviously a case of min/maxing, regardless
of the intent of the player. Secondly, it's power gaming, because we
actually *DO* know the player's intent, from the words of his own DM.

> > So, the berries have to go. You can either rule zero it and
> > have a reality shift(the berries are gone, basically they never were,
sez
> > DM),
>
> Once again, horribly hamfisted.

Yes, I agree, and plenty of people have devised ways of getting rid of the
berries that aren't so hamfisted, like the eggs hatching scenario, the
"rotted fruit" scenario, the "pickpocket" scenario, and so on. You only
refer to any of those scenarios as "hamfisted" because you think they are
arbitrary, and you'd be right, but then again, what does the DM do that
ISN'T arbitrary in some way or another? (Rhetorical question)

> > or you can fudge a die roll or two against the characters.
>
> ...or you could come up with something better.

You've declared everything to be hamfisted. Assuming the berries have to be
gone NOW rather than later, how would you handle it? Even the lauded and (I
think) incredibly awesome egg hatching scenario is DM interference cloaked
in a nice little encounter. As a player, I would think it would be just as
transparently hamfisted of a DM to do that as any of the other solutions,
but hey, if it sounds cool then why not, right?

> So, some Epic-level pickpocket just happened to be working the crowd that
> day? Horseshit.

Stranger things have happened.

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

 

[Guest]

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

madafro@sbcglobal.net <madafro@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Compromise works. The DM and player can come to an agreement that only
> one berry may be ingested safely by the same character per day, due to
> the strain the berries place on the system. Subsequent berries may
> force a Fortitude save with cumulative penalties, resulting in
> temporary Con damage if failed. Or perhaps the "comedown" is twice as
> bad (or twice as long) for any rage granted by the berries than by the
> Barbarian's own Rage ability.

This is a reasonable approach, especially if the effects of using them
has not yet been established. For instance, if they've only ever tried
*one*, the effects of using two in one day would not be known, and thus
can be changed without continuity problems.

If they've never used them before, but know what they do from seeing
someone else use them, the more powerful crash may not be known either.

FWIW, doubling the duration of the exhaustion doesn't much work, since
it's 'until the end of the combat'. 'Until fully rested' could be
appropriate (i.e. until the next morning, in most cases).

Another slight change (that only works if it hasn't been established
otherwise) is that it doesn't grant additional rages per day. It gives
the person who eats it the ability to rage... but doesn't stack with the
existing ability. A non-barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage as
normal. A barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage... from his daily
allotment.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "English is not a language. English is a
keith.davies@kjdavies.org bad habit shared between Norman invaders
keith.davies@gmail.com and Saxon barmaids!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ -- Frog, IRC, 2005/01/13

 

[Guest]

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

"Keith Davies" <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
news:slrnd5art5.rb.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
> Another slight change (that only works if it hasn't been established
> otherwise) is that it doesn't grant additional rages per day. It gives
> the person who eats it the ability to rage... but doesn't stack with the
> existing ability. A non-barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage as
> normal. A barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage... from his daily
> allotment.

That's a good option, basically, they are more or less useless to the
barbarian. That puts the berries back in the hands of the rest of the
party, which is where the DM wanted them in the first place.

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

 

[Guest]

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

Jeff Goslin wrote:

> "Keith Davies" <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnd5art5.rb.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
>
>>Another slight change (that only works if it hasn't been established
>>otherwise) is that it doesn't grant additional rages per day. It gives
>>the person who eats it the ability to rage... but doesn't stack with the
>>existing ability. A non-barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage as
>>normal. A barbarian eats a berry, it triggers a rage... from his daily
>>allotment.
>
>
> That's a good option, basically, they are more or less useless to the
> barbarian. That puts the berries back in the hands of the rest of the
> party, which is where the DM wanted them in the first place.

Unfortunately, the Barbarian has already used them. I don't know that
he's ever used more than one a day, though.

DWS

 

[Guest]

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

emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
> David Serhienko wrote:
>
>>emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>...I have a suggestion.
>>>Instead of having them be stolen or rot or vanish or whatever, have
>>>them *hatch*.
>>
>>That is *SO* happening.
>
>
> There's a small charge for the use of the idea: you have to write in to
> this group and let us know how you ran it and what happened as a
> result. Otherwise we'll never hear the end of the story. May it be as
> crazy a tale as the Head of Vecna!

Deal. We're in the 2nd of a projected 8 session adventure with DM2, so
I'll try to lay some groundwork over the next couple weeks, and get it
rolling then.

 

[Guest]

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

Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
> It's not *MY* idea, it's *OUR* idea. We, as a group, do not like power
> gamers, rules lawyers, munchkins or any of the breeds of irritating gamers
> at our table ....

You forgot "shameless meta-gamers."
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd

 

[Guest]

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

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd5b00h.ccj.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Jeff Goslin <autockr@comcast.net> wrote:
> > It's not *MY* idea, it's *OUR* idea. We, as a group, do not like power
> > gamers, rules lawyers, munchkins or any of the breeds of irritating
gamers
> > at our table ....
>
> You forgot "shameless meta-gamers."

Well, since the reference was to *OUR* group, I did not include that because
it's not something we find irritating. I'm sure a list of irritating gamer
traits at YOUR table would include such an option.

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

 

[Guest]

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

Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> Jeff Goslin wrote:
> >>> I'm curious, then. What attributes combine to make a good GM, in
> >>> your estimation?
>
> MI wrote:
> >> Well, there is creativity, the ability to be engaging, a good
grasp
> >> of the system, maturity and evenhandedness in handling disputes,
an
> >> understanding of what makes the game fun for the group, and the
> >> ability to balance all these things while running.
>
> > All attributes I possess.
>
> Yeah, right.

He also flies and shoots eye-beams.

--
@ @ Nockermensch, the talking .sig

 

[Guest]

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

In article <1112898633.672828.141710@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
madafro@sbcglobal.net <madafro@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>... It reminds me of one DM I knew that was
>infamous for the 20th-level wizards who seemed to run every single
>tavern in his campaign.

Sounds like an interesting basis for a conspiracy theory.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)