Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
Lemon-Lime
Aug 6, 2009


I will now deconstruct (i.e. "look at in no particular detail") this:

Red_Mage posted:

How it is about lying to the players, cheating the rules, manipulating the system, saying no, making poo poo up as you go along, ripping off everything you can find at almost every opportunity, forgetting about preparation, and generally being a total bastard.

Out of those, bending the rules, manipulating the system, improvising and stealing liberally from other sources make you a better DM 100% of the time. Lying to the players is how you maintain the illusion of freedom and cover up for not bothering to write up bits of the setting. Saying no is a skill you need to prevent the people who think CN is the Random alignment from completely derailing the plot, so that can also help in certain situations. I wouldn't call forgetting about preparing your session a good DMing tip but a book that deals with how to save a session when you didn't have the time to prepare would at least be worth a skim-through. And depending on context, "being a bastard" could be interpreted along the same lines as "saying no:" sometimes necessary and something which you shouldn't be afraid of doing in the right circumstances, but the art is in identifying those circumstances.

So yeah, I know it's going to be about how you should try to kill your players at every opportunity, but :devilsadvocate:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Angry Diplomat
Nov 6, 2009

Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

ansob I'm gonna counter-devil's-advocate you for a sec here

Ansob. posted:

Out of those, bending the rules, manipulating the system, improvising and stealing liberally from other sources make you a better DM 100% of the time.

gotta disagree with this, those will make you a better dm if you are already a good dm. if you are a bad dm they will make you a worse one because you will probably use them for railroading and arbitrary pc deaths

Ansob. posted:

Lying to the players is how you maintain the illusion of freedom and cover up for not bothering to write up bits of the setting. Saying no is a skill you need to prevent the people who think CN is the Random alignment from completely derailing the plot, so that can also help in certain situations.

You actually shouldn't really have to lie since if you're making it up as you go then whatever you're saying is true anyway. that sounds ridiculous but it's legit, if you're already an improv-heavy dm your players will expect you to make poo poo up on the fly anyway and they'll have more fun that way. unless I'm misunderstanding your interpretation here

saying no is unfortunately a necessary skill, yeah. you should usually stick to the "yes, but" approach, but some people are just abusive or dumb and will wreck the game for other players if you don't tell them to lay off

in conclusion: this will be a book by rpgpundit

LGD
Sep 25, 2004



rantmo posted:

Well Jiu-jitsu and la Savate with a healthy dose of various walking stick/umbrella defenses of the day (Bartitsu's two main en garde poses are variations of smallsword stances). The rapier really was a brutal implement of slicing down to the bone (itself derived from the estoc, which was designed to ignore plate armor by punching through it like it wasn't a thing), it's really not until you get to the smallsword that you get the really fancy point-work.

For further reading on this tangent none of you care about read Alfred Hutton's badass work The Sword and the Centuries.

Uh- "the rapier" evolved and varied over the course of several centuries from a generalized cut-and-thrust weapon to one that was entirely focused around stabbing. The term "rapier" itself covers a lot of territory (basically a boatload of highly varied western European swords from 1500 to the late 1700s) and is fairly anachronistic. And no sword type was ever designed to "ignore" loving plate armor by just "punching through it like it wasn't a thing". Along with slashing attacks that's the sort of thing plate was designed to counter and something it was generally excellent at- barring attacks targeting weak joints and things like a coup de gras against someone on the ground where their attacker could put their entire weight behind the blow. That's why most estocs had long grips and/or ricassos- you need a lot of leverage to do anything against someone wearing plate with a sword and any sword designed to do that sort of thing is necessarily going to be a compromise.

Not dissing on the badassitude of a sword that can essentially be used as a 4 foot long metal spike, but the protective properties of most armors are severely underrated (especially plate) and the relative virtues of swords frequently oversold. Swords totally own but historically they've often been the weapons of choice against enemies who are less-than-completely protected by armor (i.e. hacking up peasants and the like). Of course you probably know all of this, but anytime anybody says something like "this sword type just went through plate armor like nothing man" it tends to raise my hackles since such views are usually put forth by ignorant people with katana fetishes.

Which, as long as I'm sperging out hardcore in grognards.txt, is a real problem I have with games like L5R where I'm expected to believe that there are large standing armies that frequently fight battles in formation all using slashing swords against well-armored opponents when they have access to perfectly good spears and other polearms.

Turing sex machine
Dec 14, 2008

I want to have
your robot-babies


Red_Mage posted:

backpedaling since new books were announced.txt
Any good quotes about this?

quote:

It is a book telling all of the dirty truths about being a GM, and how its almost always the opposite of what all those "good GMing" guides tell you to do. How it is about lying to the players, cheating the rules, manipulating the system, saying no, making poo poo up as you go along, ripping off everything you can find at almost every opportunity, forgetting about preparation, and generally being a total bastard.
Yeah, I've seen all of these before in other GM guides or compilations of GM advice. Except they didn't call them hardcore devious GM tricks for bastards from HELL.

Tekopo
Oct 24, 2008

When you see it, you'll shit yourself.




Aren't the "Politically Incorrect Guide" series of books basically right-wing conservative re-writes of history?

Tekopo fucked around with this message at 11:51 on Jun 11, 2010

Lemon-Lime
Aug 6, 2009


Angry Diplomat posted:

You actually shouldn't really have to lie since if you're making it up as you go then whatever you're saying is true anyway.

I gotta admit, I was doing a little creative interpretation of "lying" to make my argument work.

Also, I'm not sure about

Angry Diplomat posted:

those will make you a better dm if you are already a good dm.

I mean, if you advertise railroading as a good thing (because you're dumb) then yes, but I think it's possible to present them in a way that's essentially saying "whatever you do, having fun should be the highest goal and if it means fudging rolls or lowering monster stats or whatever then do it" which is a message that even newbie DMs can understand and which non-newbie but terrible DMs should have forcefully drilled into their heads.

But yeah, I've no doubt that it won't end up being something like this.

e; I just Googled RPGPundit, is this guy for real because

quote:

To me, probably the worst of all possible alignment systems is the kind you see in D&D, Palladium, etc. These are fixed alignments, that are restrictive at best ("you can't do that! You're Lawful Neutral!"), or utterly useless at worst ("I can do anything! I'm Chaotic Neutral!").
Holy poo poo, I didn't know the people stupid enough to think that alignment defines behaviour instead of the other way round still existed.

Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 12:07 on Jun 11, 2010

happyelf
Nov 9, 2000

by mons al-madeen


Tekopo posted:

Aren't the "Politically Incorrect Guide" series of books basically right-wing conservative re-writes of history?
Yes, they include such wonders as 'the crusades were a defensive war'.

Turing sex machine
Dec 14, 2008

I want to have
your robot-babies


Ansob. posted:

Holy poo poo, I didn't know the people stupid enough to think that alignment defines behaviour instead of the other way round still existed.
"A guy in my group does something that pisses everyone off but he says he has to because of his alignment" is a recurring problem on D&D help forums.

Fat Twitter Man
Jan 24, 2007

by R. Guyovich


Gr3y posted:

Is Trollman just jealous that he didn't think of the basic 4e mechanics first?

if you look at all his Tome rules that the Gaming Den people slobber over, he says things like that fighters should have special daily powers and does things like classify abilities by power source, one of which is "Extraordinary", for things that break the laws of physics but don't have a magical explanation. that's why all his whines about 4e are about really minor stuff like how the books are formatted. he doesn't have substantial criticism, it's just sour grapes.

Angry Diplomat
Nov 6, 2009

Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

LGD posted:

And no sword type was ever designed to "ignore" loving plate armor by just "punching through it like it wasn't a thing".

not that it necessarily matters in the context of a fun rpg but yes, full plate was a pretty hardcore defense, to the point where two heavily-armoured knights in close combat would sometimes end up just wrestling with each other and trying to stab ice picks into gaps or joints in the armour because gently caress trying to bludgeon through that much metal

I remember finding some ridiculous japanophile rant somewhere about how a katana could bisect a knight in full plate, and I was all "what in the world"

vvv this is why the d20 modern allegiances system is infinitely better. it's more of a short, flexible "what does your character value?" than anything else vvv

Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 12:56 on Jun 11, 2010

Lemon-Lime
Aug 6, 2009


Turing sex machine posted:

"A guy in my group does something that pisses everyone off but he says he has to because of his alignment" is a recurring problem on D&D help forums.

I honestly thought it was common knowledge by now that alignment is just a convenient shorthand for expressing general trends in character behaviour in a way that's easy for the DM to assign mechanical elements to, and that people understood that it's not meant to exhaustively catalogue every little thing your character does but that it's instead a very gross, very broad approximation of their ideology.

Seriously, the only time I've ever seen people blame their behaviour on their character alignment in the last five years has been trolls online and complete beginner DMs who didn't know any better. I guess I must live a sheltered life or something, or else I've mentally turned off to every single person who actually believed that alignment somehow restricts how your character behaves.

rantmo
Jul 30, 2003

A smile better suits a hero





LGD posted:

Uh- "the rapier" evolved and varied over the course of several centuries from a generalized cut-and-thrust weapon to one that was entirely focused around stabbing. The term "rapier" itself covers a lot of territory (basically a boatload of highly varied western European swords from 1500 to the late 1700s) and is fairly anachronistic. And no sword type was ever designed to "ignore" loving plate armor by just "punching through it like it wasn't a thing". Along with slashing attacks that's the sort of thing plate was designed to counter and something it was generally excellent at- barring attacks targeting weak joints and things like a coup de gras against someone on the ground where their attacker could put their entire weight behind the blow. That's why most estocs had long grips and/or ricassos- you need a lot of leverage to do anything against someone wearing plate with a sword and any sword designed to do that sort of thing is necessarily going to be a compromise.

One of the things I really like about the rapier is that as a weapon it was constantly evolving. The thing that really made it possible; a thin, very long and very sharp blade were the huge improvements in metallurgy from the era. I probably overstated the punching power of the estoc and the falling out of style that occurred around that time was also due to improvements in ranged weapons, but still, a half-broadsword/half-rapier is a bad-rear end weapon. I agree that the katana fetish is a loving tiring and obnoxious thing.

Tekopo
Oct 24, 2008

When you see it, you'll shit yourself.




This is quite an interesting site about one of the old rapier masters of the 16th century: http://www.salvatorfabris.com/SalvatorFabris.shtml

Gerund
Sep 12, 2007

He push a man




Yesterday, I received my copy of Pathfinder #32: Rivers Run Red, the second part of the new Kingmaker Adventure Path. Unlike previous Adventure Paths, this one is much more open-ended, in terms of allowing the PCs to explore various locations Ė and meet various combat encounters Ė in almost any order, and largely determine the pace of the adventures themselves.

This issue is significant, however, in that it has the rules for building, sustaining, and expanding a kingdom. About a dozen pages long, the rules are very intuitive, measuring a kingdomís stability, loyalty, and economy over time, while also keeping track of unrest. PCs (or NPCs) can occupy one of eleven various official roles (from ruler to general to royal assassin, and others), which have effects on the four aforementioned scores (Stability, Loyalty, Economy, and Unrest).

But thatís not all. Various activities can be undertaken, but most cost Build Points (the abstraction of your kingdomís wealth). So by spending BPs, you can make various edicts (promoting your rule, throwing festivals, or raising/lowering taxes) and engage in new acts of expansion and/or construction. Hence, you can build a new library in your city, and it will raise your kingdomís Economy and Loyalty by +1, but it will cost you 6 BP to construct.

Of course, none of this happens in a vacuum. Every month the ruler must make various checks to determine the state of the kingdom, pay the Consumption Cost (where a certain amount of BPs must be paid as the simple monthly cost of keeping your kingdom up and running), and check for unexpected events happening, among other things. So yeah, these rules do a pretty good job of letting you run your own kingdom in the Pathfinder RPG.

Recently, though, I came across something rather amusing. On a thread on the Paizo messageboards, one person noticed that among the various official roles, the ďrulerĒ one allowed for up to two characters to occupy it at the same time, e.g. a king and queen ruling together. This is different from all the other roles, which can only be held by a single person at a time.

What was so amusing though was that this poster joked about the nationís ruler having a harem instead of a co-ruler. This generated some gentle ribbing from the other posters, and even from Paizoís own James Jacobs himself, but of course there wasnít any sort of rules-based answer. Thatís not the sort of thing that the mechanics for running a kingdom Ė which necessarily includes some level of abstraction Ė are designed to deal with.

I got a good laugh from the idea of having rules for a harem among the kingdom-building mechanics, though, and so just for fun I thought Iíd make some up. So here they are, the rules for making your kingdom include a royal harem:

quote:

Harem: A harem is a collection of individuals dedicated to serving the realmís ruler in a personal capacity, usually as confidants, entertainers, and concubines. Establishing a harem is a type of promotion edict. It does not grant a Stability bonus; instead, having a harem grants the ruler a +1 circumstance bonus to his Charisma score when adding his Charisma bonus to the nationís statistics (see the ruler entry under Leadership Roles). Establishing a harem increases a kingdomís Consumption by 2 BP.

A ruler may increase the size of his harem. This edict may be made multiple times, and the Charisma bonus and the Consumption costs stack. If a realm has two rulers, only one gains this Charisma bonus, though the second ruler may start a separate harem to gain a bonus for themselves.

Sexy, ainít it?

The above rules serve as an adequate representation of the costs and benefits of having a harem. Namely, that itís an extravagance that has little practical value to the kingdom as a whole. After all, paying for a lavish lifestyle for several people who donít do anything but be available when the ruler wants to be entertained can be quite expensive, but doesnít really do much for the nation, besides serving to make the ruler seem more virile.

Iíve deliberately ignored the specifics regarding how many individuals are in the harem, what their levels are, etc. Those details are simply too minute to make a difference in the kingdom rules Paizo has written. For those who want such particulars however, I recommend the following: a harem has 1d4+2 individuals (each of whom has a Charisma score of 12+1d6), with 1d3 NPC levels each (usually expert, but if you have it I recommend using 4 Winds Fantasy Gamingís courtesan NPC class, from Paths of Power). This increases by another 1d4+2 individuals each time the harem edict is used.

And there you have it Ė rules for one of the perks that comes with wearing the crown. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it worth it? Well, thatís up to you to decide, because making the big decisions is what you do now: youíre the king.

Halloween Jack
Sep 11, 2003

Let your word be "Yes, Yes" or "No, No"; anything more than this comes from the evil one.




I have to admit, I always thought games that had rules for establishing some kind of domain and then being able to buy "upgrades" for it are fun, as long as they're not too complicated. Shadowrun had a strong "pimp my whatever" element and I liked being able to customize my safehouses with the Sprawl Survival Guide.

Zereth
Jul 8, 2003




Halloween Jack posted:

I have to admit, I always thought games that had rules for establishing some kind of domain and then being able to buy "upgrades" for it are fun, as long as they're not too complicated. Shadowrun had a strong "pimp my whatever" element and I liked being able to customize my safehouses with the Sprawl Survival Guide.
But did the Sprawl Survival Guide have mechanical benefits and prices for maintaining a harem?

Halloween Jack
Sep 11, 2003

Let your word be "Yes, Yes" or "No, No"; anything more than this comes from the evil one.




No, but you could save money on your rent by having an eco-conscious hydroponic garden. Shadowrun, the StuffWhitePeopleLike.com edition.

crime fighting hog
Jun 29, 2006


Halloween Jack posted:

StuffWhitePeopleLike.com edition.

oh my god it's a real site

Angry Diplomat
Nov 6, 2009

Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

shadowrun was awesome as heck for being able to just quietly sperg out in the corner with a pencil and a sheet of paper while someone else was taking up the gm's time. "oh, the decker is getting ready to pull a complicated hack? oh well I'll just settle down over here and figure out a way to fill up an entire sheet with awesome gadgets, in fine print, spending no more than 2000 nuyen"

then on the next run you laugh and laugh because your staggering profusion of tiny, niche-applicable accessories allows you to balls something up for the gm once every half-hour

my gm doesn't let me choose gear without express approval anymore

Liesmith
Jan 29, 2006

by Y Kant Ozma Post


Maarak posted:

Maybe 500 years, and that had alot less to do with being brutal assholes.

this book is not well regarded academically.

That said the Weaboo Fighter stuff is bullshit not because Europeans had martial arts, but because mythical europeans had martial arts. The term "Feat" as it is used in D&D, i.e. a special warrior trick, is rooted in stuff like the Tain Bo Culagne where Cuchulain fights a whole army on his own and before every fight does tricks (explicitly called feats) with jumping 50 feet in the air or tooling around with his spear, stuff nobody else can do. These aren't just feats like a one off demonstration of strength or whatever, he can do these things basically at will.

And in that tradition fighters generally own the gently caress out of wizards

Hob_Gadling
Jul 6, 2007

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS


Grimey Drawer

Liesmith posted:

And in that tradition fighters generally own the gently caress out of wizards

Yes, until wizards kill everyone in the offending nation to hunger and disease. Heroes are only cool because they stop this.

Gr3y
Jul 29, 2003


Angry Diplomat posted:

shadowrun was awesome as heck for being able to just quietly sperg out in the corner with a pencil and a sheet of paper while someone else was taking up the gm's time. "oh, the decker is getting ready to pull a complicated hack? oh well I'll just settle down over here and figure out a way to fill up an entire sheet with awesome gadgets, in fine print, spending no more than 2000 nuyen"

then on the next run you laugh and laugh because your staggering profusion of tiny, niche-applicable accessories allows you to balls something up for the gm once every half-hour

my gm doesn't let me choose gear without express approval anymore
When people were talking about Amethyst in the 4e thread I was trying to explain how 4e just doesn't have the framework to allow a creative PC to bring the GM to tears like Shadowrun does.

For sheer rear end in a top hat capability I don't think any game approaches Shadowrun's ability.

Helena P Blavatsky
Oct 17, 2003

onward to victory


Gr3y posted:

When people were talking about Amethyst in the 4e thread I was trying to explain how 4e just doesn't have the framework to allow a creative PC to bring the GM to tears like Shadowrun does.

For sheer rear end in a top hat capability I don't think any game approaches Shadowrun's ability.

Depending on how clever the players are and how suggestible the GM is, I think oWoD Mage ranks up there with Shadowrun. With the right combinations of spheres you could pretty much trivialize anything if you were willing to take the paradox or could find a way around it.

Liesmith
Jan 29, 2006

by Y Kant Ozma Post


Hob_Gadling posted:

Yes, until wizards kill everyone in the offending nation to hunger and disease. Heroes are only cool because they stop this.

No, actually that never ever happens in any myth because wizards usually die as soon as a warrior looks at them. At best they are alien beings like demigods or sidhe who use their wizardry to change their shape and fight poo poo

its true that sometimes they have badass powers like killing everything they look at with their evil eye or parting the nile to get some chick's brooch back, but generally they are there to tell the young warrior his fate and get out of the way while he accomplishes his destiny.

Super Waffle
Sep 25, 2007

I'm a hermaphrodite and my parents (40K nerds) named me Slaanesh, THANKS MOM

Since we've been talking about Nazis, how offensive is it to take real-world events and gussy them up with fantasy trimming?

If, say, I wanted to slather the world in a 4e fantasy pastiche and replace modern era technology with Eberron-style magic, would it be offensive for Hitler to be a warlock whose ultimate plan is to use an ancient Roman ritual to siphon the souls of innocent Jews to fuel his apotheosis?


(Also you have to get the assistance of Rasputin's ghost to stop the ritual.)

((Also Himmler, Goebels, and most of the higher echelons of the S.S. are death knights.))

Speleothing
May 6, 2008

Spare batteries are pretty key.

Super Waffle posted:

Since we've been talking about Nazis, how offensive is it to take real-world events and gussy them up with fantasy trimming?

If, say, I wanted to slather the world in a 4e fantasy pastiche and replace modern era technology with Eberron-style magic, would it be offensive for Hitler to be a warlock whose ultimate plan is to use an ancient Roman ritual to siphon the souls of innocent Jews to fuel his apotheosis?


(Also you have to get the assistance of Rasputin's ghost to stop the ritual.)

((Also Himmler, Goebels, and most of the higher echelons of the S.S. are death knights.))

Fortunately, I realized we haven't been talking about nazis, and that this is a copy-paste.

Because that is terrible poo poo.

Halloween Jack
Sep 11, 2003

Let your word be "Yes, Yes" or "No, No"; anything more than this comes from the evil one.




Super Waffle posted:

Since we've been talking about Nazis, how offensive is it to take real-world events and gussy them up with fantasy trimming?

If, say, I wanted to slather the world in a 4e fantasy pastiche and replace modern era technology with Eberron-style magic, would it be offensive for Hitler to be a warlock whose ultimate plan is to use an ancient Roman ritual to siphon the souls of innocent Jews to fuel his apotheosis?

I thought about doing an alternate-history WWII game where Germany remained impoverished and France rose to become a fascist state under the influence of the Yellow Sign and calling it Inglourious Hasturds, so you're in the clear.

Bieeanshee
Aug 21, 2000

Not keen on keening.




Grimey Drawer

I don't feel so bad about my Pendragon/CoC crossover titled 'Cthulhu: the Once and Future Thing', now.

Kerison
Apr 9, 2004

by angerbot


Bieeardo posted:

I don't feel so bad about my Pendragon/CoC crossover titled 'Cthulhu: the Once and Future Thing', now.

oh man

OH MAN

Karandras
Apr 27, 2006



Speleothing posted:

Fortunately, I realized we haven't been talking about nazis, and that this is a copy-paste.

Because that is terrible poo poo.

It is a TGD home grown grognard quote as well

Angry Diplomat
Nov 6, 2009

Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

the holocaust is basically never a good thing to involve in a game's storyline but doing the indiana jones thing and using nazis as generic bad guys who die in droves can actually be great (in the appropriate setting)

for example: there's a rad as hell quest arc in the army of darkness rpg that involves going through time to ww2 and fighting nazi deadites to stop their evil ritual to summon a zombie frost giant or some poo poo. if I remember right it really lays on the camp factor, encouraging the gm to talk in awful german accents and play the deadites as gormless, easily-duped mooks (so exactly like in indiana jones) and the whole thing just comes across as being the same perfect blend of warped hilarity and goofy horror that characterizes the evil dead series

I always wanted to run that module for my group so I could have them fight a zombie dragon using spitfires

shotgunbadger
Nov 18, 2008

WEEK 4 - RETIRED


I dunno it seemed like the dude was just kinda asking in a really clumsy way how he should handle a general idea of a tyrant using innocent people's deaths to fuel his magic on a huge scale, if he keeps it general and doesn't sperg out about the death camps or whatever it could be decently done, and if it's not done as some "LOL SURPRISE HIS NAME IS HITLER" horse poo poo.

Though hosed if I know nearly every dude who tries to use a nothitlerbutreallyishitler baddie has been a creepy gently caress, maybe I'm just feeling forgiving due to being sick and looped up on meds.

Malachamavet
Jan 12, 2009

Above the gigantic mouth is an eye as big as a shield that stares at you with pure hate



Obligatory.

shotgunbadger
Nov 18, 2008

WEEK 4 - RETIRED


Malachamavet posted:


Obligatory.

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck

yoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooou

Maarak
May 23, 2007


Liesmith posted:

this book is not well regarded academically.

care to point me in the direction of some good criticism?

Red_Mage
Jul 23, 2007
I SHOULD BE FUCKING PERMABANNED BUT IN THE MEANTIME ASK ME ABOUT MY FAILED KICKSTARTER AND RUNNING OFF WITH THE MONEY


The sad part is portraying the holocaust as having actual strategic value of some sort (summon an elder god, necromancy etc...) is a less horrific and depressing then portraying it for what it was.

Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide are pretty unacceptable things to include in an
pre:
Befoul
Transmutation [Evil]
Level: Clr 8, Corruption 8
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 minute
Range: Touch
Area:Water in a volume of 100
ft./level by 100 ft./level by 10
ft./level (S)
Duration: Permanent (see text)
Saving Throw: None (see text)
Spell Resistance: No
The caster makes water (or other
liquid) foul and mildly poisonous. All
creatures with 1 HD or less that are in
the water at the time of casting die
immediately. Anyone drinking this
water must succeed at a Fortitude
saving throw or take 1d4 points of
Constitution damage. Any creature
immersed in this water must make a
saving throw as if drinking it.
If the caster affects only part of a
larger body of water, the befouled water
mixes with the pure water. If the entire
body of water is no more than four
times the size of the affected area, all
the water in the body of water is
befouled 24 hours later, but the damage
from drinking or swimming in the
water is only 1d2 points of Constitution
damage. If the body of water is more
than four times the affected area but
less than twenty times the affected area,
after 24 hours all of the water tastes
foul. If the entire body is larger than
twenty times the affected area, the
fouled water mixes with the clean
water and loses all effect after 24 hours.
Material Component: A dead fish and
a drop of poison.
Stay Classy Monte Cook.

Red_Mage
Jul 23, 2007
I SHOULD BE FUCKING PERMABANNED BUT IN THE MEANTIME ASK ME ABOUT MY FAILED KICKSTARTER AND RUNNING OFF WITH THE MONEY


Also who does this remind us.

Pipe of Grief: This long smoking pipe, when filled with
tobacco and lighted, can create a single 5-foot-radius cloud
that remains for 3d8 minutes, once per day. The cloud stays
in place for the duration unless acted on by a magical force
such as a gust of wind. Anyone within the cloud except the
user must succeed at a Will save (DC 17) or take a Ė4 morale
penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability
checks for 10 rounds.

Mikan
Sep 5, 2007


Red_Mage posted:

oh my god. someone buy this when it comes out. it will be DMG2, but written by a grognard who hates fun.

As long as it's not ridiculously expensive I will buy it and post extensively about it.

NorgLyle
Sep 20, 2002

Do you think I posted to this forum because I value your companionship?



Mikan posted:

As long as it's not ridiculously expensive I will buy it and post extensively about it.
I wish we had more people who obviously loathed 4th edition writing 3rd party supplements. Those are good comedy. Whatever happened to John Wick? Isn't it about time that the bar got raised?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Angry Diplomat
Nov 6, 2009

Winner of the TSR Memorial Award for Excellence In Grogging

mikan pledges to give money to rpgpundit, scientists baffled