Jump to content


Forum Mascot
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by buglips*the*goblin

  1. She's my most favourite mini of all. I need to get another one... The only suggestion I have is to maybe give her some dark (maybe even black) boots. She looks dead sexy in black thigh-highs.
  2. You get a sheen even with Testor's dullcote? That's weird. It knocks the shine off everything I've got. I discovered its powers working with hi-gloss decal and setting solutions for models. I don't know if that might be a feature of what you're using for underlayer or anything, though. I really haven't experimented with extenders, flow improvers, sealers, additives, misc. Paint, future, dullcote works for me. Sorry I couldn't be more help with what's causing your grief.
  3. No problem helping on the interpretation. A note on ranges: unless otherwise specified it will refer to a range generated with multiple dice of the same kind, and not mixed like 1d4+1d8. Unless there's no other, simpler way to generate the range but if multiple d-types are used it is *usually* spelled out. I think there's some of that in the old 1st ed. survival guides and Manual of the Planes.
  4. In the old days of 1st edition, and maybe some of second, that was how it was given and you had to create the math. So 2-15 (16?) is a range. 2-13 is 1d12+1, for example. 2-16 is 2d8. A 6 in 8 chance is roll a d8, 6 or lower something happens. 7 or 8, nada. In some places the math looks a little whacky, but it should all convert fairly easily into dice rolls with a standard set of 4,6,8,10,12, and 20. In the old 1st ed. AD&D there's a whole whack of info about odds, variables, bell curves, and working the math into dice rolls. Since then it's more standardized and simplified. Edit: occassionally you may come across a reference of using a d20 for percentile. You can just roll 2d10, 10's and 1's instead, or if it's given as a % chance to hit just roll a D20. Remember that every number on a 20 represents 5% of a percentile. So if it says a 5% better chance to hit, it means +1 on the D20. 10% = +2, and so on. I don't know if any of that is in that module, but I've come across it before so I figure the info might come in handy.
  5. It's a very tasty weasel butt. Yeah, it's an entirely different experience. I should've done it a lot sooner. I'll have to round up some series 7's to try, too. See if they're even better. All the minis I did with the taklons/red sables are now taking a bath in simple green. They just won't do anymore. I'm currently working on old DHL 2001, Reaper of the Apocalypse, Famine. He's being done with the new brushes, so when he's done if I can get some decent pics I'll pop him up in "Show Off". Probably alongside one of my older RP or RAFM minis (I'm not re-doing them, only the Reaper ones) and show the difference a quality brush makes. I haven't painted in over a year, so it's not like my skills have substantially improved since then. It's all in the brush.
  6. I'm giving this a little nudge now that Anne's back, see if she can tell me the mix for Warm Walnut.
  7. If I need good protection and a nice, flat look I seal the finished mini with a thin coat of Future and then use Testors dullcote. It makes them strong enough to absorb regular punishment from handling, and my Factol Rhys mini survived a dive to the hardwood without even a mar. That should do the trick without covering up details.
  8. So yesterday I got a nice big fat package from the folks at Mini-Giant. I had stumbled across their banner while cruisng CMON. When I saw they still had some old Pro Paint sets for cheap, I figured it was a good chance to round up a full set (minus inks and silks)... something I'd been planning to do for a while. Yeah, I know the new ones are out and I plan on rounding them up, too. But I wanted to play with the old ones a bit. Figured since I was in for the paint I'd buy some Reaper kolinskys. I'd read here and other places about what a difference good brushes make, but I wasn't totally convinced. Sure, my pro brushes wound up looking like little devil sticks with hairs all asunder... but that could be as much my inability to care for them and abuse as anything else. Well, uh... nope. Turns out that kolinskys (and these aren't even the best) are so far removed in quality from the pro brushes that they might as well be manufactured on a different planet. Not just the point they hold, but man... the way they flex so effortlessly when laying down paint and recover. It's beautiful. It's a wonder of the world. It's an ecstatic experience of such depth and power as to be akin to being kissed by an angel! Ok, maybe that's a *little* over the top. But they're pretty awesome, pretty awesome indeed. Now I understand what this layering thing is about, now I see how it works. Pro brushes are still useful for disposable grunt work, but if anybody out there is still struggling trying to get good results out of 'em then I urge you to upgrade ASAP. You won't regret it. Plus I swear the kolinskys taste better.
  9. Now that I've got some coffee in me I'll expand a little. The beauty of any RPG is that it is flexible and customizable, dependent on the needs and desires of the group that plays it. So let's go back to the high-powered mage for a moment. I guess the nitpick I'd have with that would be the 'high powered' part, because that seems a weak definition if the object is a strong character. Now for some groups and players, it's all about the power. For some it's about the adventure, some dig combat, and some just want to kill some time. In the whole of RPGs, all of these are essentially valid forms of gaming since the system caters to varying tastes, and these come down to matters of taste. For my tastes, a high powered mage is a pretty dull concept. For one, to be a high power mage the world must be pretty magic heavy or the character is woefully out of place and far in excess of the abilities of others (loss of balance). As well, this applies to how many other similar characters might be around. Where there's one high-power mage there's others. Magic loses a lot of its thrill when people are walking around wielding gigantic spells of mass calamity. It gets old fast, at least for me. For my tastes, a mage in a low-magic campaign is much more interesting. The character inherits, by virtue of the setting, an air of mystery and arcane. Just from being a mage. Even the simplest spells and tricks are things of awe and wonder, wielded by few and mastered by characters of such rarity as to be near myth. That also gives the character an end goal to strive towards. Not the gaining of power for its own sake, but to join the ranks of the fabled few masters whose names are whispered in rumours at inns and gathering places. That's pretty cool stuff, and that's a pretty solid base for a character. Then you can move on from there and flesh out more. How did they come to be a mage? If magic is rare, how did they learn? Was it a natural talent they discovered by accident and figured out some minor spells? Did they have a mysterious mentor? What's their relationship? Is the mentor still alive? Now the player is giving the DM some meat to work with, too. What are the character's responsibilities as a mage? Is there a code, formal on informal, about the protection of the arcane secrets? How is it enforced? What happens to rogue mages who don't toe the line? I could go on, but I think my point is pretty clear. The second character is much easier to develop if one uses the confines and restrictions of the setting as a framework or starting point and logically walks through it. Something I feel is rather more lacking with the high-powered mage concept for reasons I outlined above. Now, again, every group is different. There is nothing wrong with a high-magic superpowered fantasy RPG if that's what the group wants, and that's why the games are customisable. For me, roleplaying evolved into the fun of creating new and interesting things, of interpreting the stats and data as what they are: mechanical representations of abstract ideas. A basic example of this is the classic "bad stat". A 7 Dex? What's that about? Is the character clumsy? Crippled, perhaps? I had a Paladin with a 7 Dex and his backstory was that he'd been badly injured in his leg and it hadn't set properly. I took a speed penalty for it, too. But the backstory evolved that he'd been set upon by assassins hired by his church superiors (who were evil and had infiltrated his order to corrupt it), and had been nearly killed but saved by a treant. The treant protected him and he survived, but wound up with the game leg. All that from rolling a 7 dex. This is what I mean when I said before that the stats are only semi-important. They're one part of a big collection of information that can be used to make interesting characters with interesting stories. Same with alignment. What's Chaotic Neutral? The common accepted interpretration is that it's crazy. But that doesn't have to be so. The person could be undisciplined and careless (resulting in Chaotic actions) and be completely unconcerned with the moral questions of good and evil (Neutral). They may be a rebel without a cause (or clue). Perhaps even just a plain ol' anarchist causing trouble for no reason other than that they can. Or be a mixed bag of good and evil based on circumstances that unconsciously winds up in balance. While such a person may appear crazy to others, they may indeed be quite sane and lucid. So my idea of what makes a good character works well for me and my style of play. I'm certain that any reasonably-constructed game system would allow me equal freedom to create interesting characters... be they interesting mech pilots, soldiers of fortune, paranormal investigators, or superheroes. Than again, my idea doesn't work for everybody. Some would find such depth tedious and boring. To each their own. So I was perhaps a little quick with the "munchkin gaming" remark, since essentially any character in any campaign that is fun and not disruptive to that campaign could, necessarily, be considered a "good character". In the end, it all comes down to the fun.
  10. But setting isn't dependent on rules. Want a half-orc in a fantasy game with zero rules for it? Make it up. Maybe with the option of revision if rules become available. The high power mage in a low magic setting isn't a good concept. If you want a high power mage, why play a low magic setting? That's like complaining there's no wookies in Waterdeep. A high power mage is a bad character concept because it violates the spirit and purpose of a low-magic setting and would, thusly, be better suited to a high magic setting. Which, if that's what the group wants to play, is certainly doable within established rules or modifications of such. Edited to add 2 points: 1. I'm speaking specifically about D&D so that's why I said editions. I've played other systems, but I'm not going to discuss their merits or lack of merits because I don't really care that much about them and since there is a huge array I'm not qualified to rate all of them. Some systems work, some suck, but I'm talking about D&D editions. 2. One the issue of stats, if all else fails just use the basic human generation. No stats for gnome? Roll 'em up like normal. Same for elf, tiefling, half-orc, giraffe alien, or what have you. Who cares about a +1, -1, whatever? Is it really that critical? To me, playing a half-orc is about playing a half-orc, a gnome a gnome, and how exactly the stats get generated (so long as they are within the reasonable range of other races) isn't important. Or, at least, shouldn't be. If it's about the stats, I think that's missing the point. JMO.
  11. I liked to play different stuff, try to push some limits. Rules, stats, etc. were only a route to that goal. My most interesting character was "Just A Fighter". A straight-up, no frills, basic fighter from the PHB. He washed up on shore with nothing, not even clothes, on the Sword Coast after fleeing the tyranny of his island homeland. He met some people and off they went. His was a tale full of allies, enemies, traitorous friends, madness, and futility. It was epic, one of the best remembered characters from the years we played... and still just a plain old fighter. Didn't need any feats, tweaks, boosts, kits, or anything else. The goblin Buglips, who was a regular old evil goblin and one day a voice came into his head and told him to be good. The voice was a near-dead god, who had reached out with his waning strength to find a new mind to take up the word and restore belief in him. To bring him back from the dead with faith. The mind he reached was a goblin. So off Buglips went to discover firsthand the meaning of GOOD and preach the word. Fighting prejudice, his own alien upbringing, and overcoming a hoard of misunderstanding. Because a voice in his head told him to. Good characters never come from rules, good characters come from good imagination. Seeds of inspiration. They can exist in any edition, and if they can't then they probably aren't real good characters at all. They're dependent on 'goodies', 'stats', and 'powers' and become the essence of munchkin gaming. My old DM put it best when I asked if I could import a Tiefling into the Forgotten Realms since nobody wanted to play Planescape. He asked me if I'd still play it if it had no powers. Not only would I, I'd play it if I had severe penalties! If you can create something so interesting you'd play it without any benefits outside the fun of just doing it... then you're there. That's roleplaying. That's the sweet spot. Rules and editions are just the framework to bring it to life.
  12. In '94 one day when the gaming store was packed with people, I decided to have a little fun and in my best "clueless noob" I asked what page Saving Throws were on. I was greeted with an immediate chorus of "101!". I don't care for 3rd or 4th edition myself, but at the end of the day the rules are only rules, and little more than suggestions anyway. In 18 years of play we never once hit a wall of limitation on creativity, smoothness of gameplay, or story. Any rules system is only as strong as the people who play it. Granted we had to discard some stuff, make some stuff up, but it worked and it was fun. After almost 2 decades, it was time to quit. A new edition wouldn't have prevented that. Life happened. People got careers, families, what have you. People who cut their teeth on 1st Edition griped about 2nd. People who came up with 2nd griped on 3rd. And now the cycle of life continues. There's almost a Zen entropy to it.
  13. Do a google search for 'demi-metallics' and check out the technique tutorials on coolminiornot. Between the two you should get everything from realism to rust. Brushthralls also has some neat tricks for metal, including painting with a sponge.
  14. If you want to do that kit's instructions and minis it's probably just as well to get it together than separate. At least you'll have some extra paint. Miniature-giant sells the kit at a discounted price, but I'm not sure which version since they show the old box. They probably have the new ones if you ask specifically for it. If you didn't want to buy the kit but still wanted to learn the technique there are many web tutorials which can be used with any mini. I'd buy the kit anyway if it were me, but your mileage may vary. Edited to add: If you've done skintones and the NMM kit already, you already have the instruction for layering from kit 2. The NMM builds on and advances those basics and the Skintones kit is a much more detailed instruction than kit 2. I'm not sure it would be a lot of benefit to you technique-wise except for practice and some tips for layering odd colours like red. Fun kit all the same, but if you've been through 3 and 4 there probably isn't anything new in it.
  15. If you really want an aneurism... read 1st Edition. It's like 2nd, only messier. 2nd is easy if you're used to it, but coming off the new stuff it's probably a bit crazy. I actually prefer 2nd, but that might be mostly because it's what I'm used to and having spent a grand on it during the 90's I have little compulsion to change to a new money pit.
  16. Now I know where those Sri Lanka brushes came from. I wondered about that. All of my 0's from the LTP kits are those, including the survivor that still has a point after all the abuse. I didn't find them too bad, but the quality was all over the place. Some were good, some were just awful straight from the box. I had two detail brushes (10/0 and 5/0) from my last supply order come without sleeves and they were ruined in the package. They never did take a point. I would've got them replaced, but since I decided to switch to Kolinskys anyway I figured it wasn't worth the effort. The lifespan of synthetics is pretty short anyways.
  17. All painted up, that mini looks better than I thought. I'm partial to Tiviel, myself. But maybe this dude is worth getting, too. Excellent paint job. Nice to see Tieflings still kicking around even if their original Planescape setting isn't.
  18. The store may have an older version of the kit. The original version had Pro Paint screw-cap pots, this version has been discontinued since 2006. The second version comes in the same package but with Master Series dropper bottles replacing the Pro Paint. There should be a sticker or something on the outside announcing this. (All my LTP kits were bought at the same time -in September 2006- and came like this). The NMM kit should soon be re-done in a package similar to Kit 4, as Kits 1 & 2 are now re-done in that style. EDIT: I had to go find the insert sheet that came with mine and gave the MSP #'s. So here's what came in my Kit #3: 9070 Mahogany Brown 9074 Palamino Gold 9083 Highlands Moss 9057 Ashen Blue 9110 Oiled Leather 9038 Rainy Grey 9137 Blackened Brown 9037 Pure Black 9039 Pure White
  19. That looks like the old 1/48 Monogram (now under Revell) B-17. Ahhh, memories. If it is, that's neat because 1/48 is becoming an increasingly popular armor scale and that opens up many WW2-era possibilities.
  20. One of my 0's from one of the paint kits, even after 2 years of serious abuse, still holds a point. I don't know how, since the rest are definitely junked. But this one brush... he's a survivor! I'm looking forward to trying out the Kolinskys I ordered. Not W&N 7's yet, still just the Reaper ones, but they'll do while I swtich from good paint and bad brushes to good brushes and worse paint (I'm switching from MSP's to the old PP). I figure after some practice there I'll be ready to move up to the big leagues... good brushes and good paint! Edited to add: I bought my kits in 2006, so there may be some differences in some (or all) of them now. However, I still don't think any come with any primer so if you're thinking about these kits buying a bottle of brush-on primer if you don't already have any is a good idea too. I bought primer and a 20/0 detail brush along with my LTPK purchase and it made things easier.
  21. They are worth it, I have the first 4. I will note that Skintones is, literally, pretty much just that. You have bonus colours for finishing, but no instruction on layering techniques for them. So #2, "Skin and Cloth" might be a better first choice if you're fresh to layering and want the practice. Tsuko is very well suited for skintones, and Laurana for cloth. An alternative is to get both, study them, and combine the two into one project to practice with. Then after that you might want to take a crack at #3, non-metallic metals. Between those, you should get plenty of good instruction and practice with layering.
  22. I don't have those colours on hand so if Anne comes back and gives me the mix I'll try to do some up with the RPP's. I'll have some extra Walnut and Aged Red Brick. Some others in that approximate range, too. If that fails, though (a distinct possibility in my "lab") I'll give your suggestion a try and purchase those MSP colours. Thanks for the tip!
  • Create New...