Arvok

"Dies Horribly" reminds me of a joke: WARNING! IF YOU ARE EASILY OFFENDED DON'T READ FURTHER I usually try to avoid foul words, but this joke just doesn't work without one. A young Indian boy approached the tribal chief and asked, "How is it that the Indian boys and girls get their names?" The Chief replied, "Well lad, when a mother is about to give birth I go into the wigwam. After the child takes his first breath I step out the door...the first thing I see is what I name the child. Take for instance 'Robin in the Mist' or 'Pink Sunrise' or your sister 'Deer Walking Throught the Woods'. Why do you ask 'Two Dogs F***ing?'"

Naming the comic "Goblins" seems to be setting it up for a short run (which is too bad--the strips are hilarious). I mean, what's the average life expactancy of a Goblin when adventurers are around? Four or Five days tops? How often has anybody been involved in a campaign where a Goblin tribe is a problem for anything weaker than 3rd level characters? Maybe the tribe in the comic will wipe out party after party of hapless adventurers--that could be very funny. I hope Min Max is the first to go.

Is it just me or is WOTC trying to flood the CCG market so that their competitors will die off and MTG will be all alone (or nearly so)? I know, this isn't a wizards CCG, but they have been pumping out a lot of crap into the CCG market recently.

I'd like to see some more savage, animalistic vampires. You know, the kind with no hair, long, pointed ears, a feral face, etc. The Judas Bloodspire type vampire is great for the main villian, but he needs a group of bestial minions to serve as cannon fodder.

I did use them for D&D, but now that I moved and haven't yet found a local gaming group, I just paint them.

Isn't his likelihood of dying part of his romanticism?

What about a night watchman? An average-looking shlub holding up a lantern in one hand whilst fearfully gripping a sword in his other with a look of fear on his face.

I saw a news report not too long ago about a working space elevator somebody had planned to be up and running within a decade. Does somebody else out there have some specifics?

That was true of the moon flights, but not the modern space program. The shuttle has more computing power than some small campuses.

Nice 'Straw Man' analogy. I don't see a LN cleric condoning the sacrificial death, via torture, of an innocent. The cleric would then either move right on over to the evil side, or he would have one hell of a time attoning for his actions. 3E also redefined how alignments are explained. you should read the changes. Quoting from the SRD: "Lawful Neutral, "Judge" A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government." I bet a person with that kind of personality could get hired a a cleric for a LG god. But Lawful Neutral can still commit acts of Evil, especially if they are for the greater good. Neutral with respect to Evil and Good means one doesn't think one is inherently better that the other.

I've been to both and much preffered Columbia. USC is a fun party school and there is a river there there in Columbia you can swim.

As far as Clerics being one step from their gods' alignments give this one a try: Imagine a Lawful Good god. Do you suppose he would support torturing to death an innocent in order to end a drought thus benefiting the whole community? NO, because that is EVIL. But, one of his Clerics who is Lawful Neutral might support such an act. That doesn't make any sense to me.

Well, human, because that's what I am. But if I had to choose the non-human race into which I would fit most closely I'd have to say Dwarf. Short, stubborn, dour, live underground, apreciate weapons and beer and not much else. What is there not to love?

I dont think thats true. Rather than the rules restricting players to certain roles,(Eg: Dwarves cant have arcane magic. Half-Orc must be barbaric. etc) now its up to the players to restrict themselves. It's not the rules fault that there are players out there that abuse them, its the players fault. I heartily disagree. The other races' inability to advance in certain classes was part of what made them unique and alien. Men (the race of Man) are supposed to be the most versatile and adaptable race in D&D--that's part of their nature. The other races may have a bent for one or a few classes, but just lack Man's ability to do nearly anything. That's part of what makes each race unique (and why Man hasn't been overshadowed by the longer-lived races). In the modern world, especially in the West, we believe anybody can become just about anything. Part of what makes each race different is that it lacks the ability to excell at certain things. With regards to spells, I hate the idea that all clerics are equally good healers (ignoring the +1 caster level for the Healing domain, which isn't really that big of a deal). I hate the idea that a specialist wizard can choose his opposition schools (and that no matter what he'll have access to Wish). Certain schools of magic are intrinsically opposed to one another. I know DMs can force their players to choose the proper opposition schools, but they shouldn't have to create house rules for that.

Dwarven women don't have mustaches, just beards. Mustaches would be gross.