| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Arivia |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 00:58:29
Click.
So, for lack of anything better to do apparently, we're going for Complete Series II! Go Wizards! Oh, I can't wait! *quietly starts weeping* |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 28 Apr 2006 : 02:51:33
Complete Scoundrel is vaguely discussed by one of the authors in this thread on the Paizo board:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dnd/general/mikeAndWesAreCompleteScoundrels
I imagine as the book gets closer to coming out, the general jocularity might die down a bit and actual tid bits might emerge . . . or not. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 13:16:39
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Cough,
This thread has gotten off topic. :)
Indeed.
I've continued the discussion here:- http://candlekeep.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6768
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 06:41:37
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Hmmm... I'm not sure we're talking about the same construct here. I'm referring to soulmechs from the Dragonstar setting.
Here are some relevant URLSs:- http://tonday.com/dm-info/dragonstar/races/soulmechs.htm
and:- http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/dsfaq.html
Oh, man oh man did I get confused. Yeah, I thought you meant something from SJ, sorry. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 06:32:44
Cough,
This thread has gotten off topic. :) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 06:18:20
Hmmm... I'm not sure we're talking about the same construct here. I'm referring to soulmechs from the Dragonstar setting.
Here are some relevant URLSs:- http://tonday.com/dm-info/dragonstar/races/soulmechs.htm
and:- http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/dsfaq.html
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 06:03:48
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Well, as you know... stats and 3e rules aren't my thing. So perhaps I'm seeing difficulty in a potential conversion for the soulmech where there shouldn't actually be one? I wouldn't really know...
If you can help though... I'd be curious to see what you come up with.
What SJ sourcebooks does this appear in? Can't promise anything soon, but I can at least try to get the supplements to do it. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 05:27:41
quote:
Originally posted by Arivia
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Indeed I do. The problem though, is converting them in a way that makes them applicable for proper D&D rules.
What's the problem? I might have an idea or two.
Well, as you know... stats and 3e rules aren't my thing. So perhaps I'm seeing difficulty in a potential conversion for the soulmech where there shouldn't actually be one? I wouldn't really know...
If you can help though... I'd be curious to see what you come up with.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 05:25:27
The Gond-forged armor? Yes. But it's not really relevant for this... since the armor itself is supposed to be an awfully powerful artifact and one that causes incredible suffering on the part of the wearer. That's not something I want for the Sage NPC.
|
| Dargoth |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 04:47:10
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
You know I love the soulmechs! 
Indeed I do. The problem though, is converting them in a way that makes them applicable for proper D&D rules.
Didnt Gond already do that in Prince of Lies? |
| Arivia |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 04:40:19
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Indeed I do. The problem though, is converting them in a way that makes them applicable for proper D&D rules.
What's the problem? I might have an idea or two. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 03:45:00
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
You know I love the soulmechs!
Indeed I do. The problem though, is converting them in a way that makes them applicable for proper D&D rules.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 03:30:35
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Only if they update autognomes in there as well . . .
That'd be nice... and I'd have another valid option for the now past-retired NPC of the Sage in my campaign (who doesn't want to embrace lichdom, the deathless type, or any other type of immortality that relates to undead).
Of course, there's always the soulmech  .
You know I love the soulmechs!
I did have an autognome NPC I created, back in the day. He was originally a tinker gnome, but had experienced a slight mishap... I've since scrapped his original backstory, since I was something of a munchkin back then. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Apr 2006 : 02:16:27
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Only if they update autognomes in there as well . . .
That'd be nice... and I'd have another valid option for the now past-retired NPC of the Sage in my campaign (who doesn't want to embrace lichdom, the deathless type, or any other type of immortality that relates to undead).
Of course, there's always the soulmech .
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 23:38:21
Just remember Ed's words on Giant Space Hamsters:
quote:
Re. space hamsters and Wooly Rupert’s response: “Let me guess, they're actually extradimensional beings making amazingly subtle experiments on humans, right?”
To this, Elminster replies, “Indeed. And that should lead ye to readily accept this advice of mine, freely given ye: don’t breed with them, no matter what they offer ye. Just don’t.”
What he had to say about tinker gnomes I won’t pass on, even in this broadminded and tolerant forum. :}
|
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 23:33:05
Hm . . . a racial class progression . . . paragon giant space hampster classes . . . giant space hampster PrCs . . . wait . . . half- giant space hampsters, maybe?!?
It boggles the mind. |
| Alaundo |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 23:30:54
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Archwizard
It is certainly about time for a book on giants or fey or classical monstrous humanoids like centaurs and minotaurs.
Or even... Complete Giant Space Hamster!  
 Now that would be interesting  I'd certainly pick that one up without a second thought!
Say Wooly, mayhaps ye should take it upon thyself to put such a tome together. Nobody knows Giant Space Hamsters as much as thee |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 23:17:38
Complete this...complete that.... my AD&D campaigns ran fine without 'em...I guess when the change to 3.5 will come I can make do with basically 'only' the FR material and be quite content for a long time.
We seem to be getting to the same point of supplement 'inflation' we had back in the TSR days... but at least back then I didn't have to pay ungodly amounts of cash to purchase just 3 books or whatnot. Sure, there is eye-candy, but do I need all of that candy? And for that matter can you get rotten eyes by consuming too much eye-candy?
If they were to release them at a reasonable price, I might consider buying some, but what would my players, most of whom aren't that firm in English, do? Hell the German PHB 3.5 costs about 40% more than the English version... I dread to know what the translations of these books cost. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 23:07:56
Only if they update autognomes in there as well . . . |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 22:56:29
quote:
Originally posted by Archwizard
It is certainly about time for a book on giants or fey or classical monstrous humanoids like centaurs and minotaurs.
Or even... Complete Giant Space Hamster! |
| Vainelus |
Posted - 26 Apr 2006 : 22:24:16
My play group stopped purchasing complete series books shortly after 3.0 sword and fist style books. The Races of Series, I have liked for it's mechanics, but I could go for less new races being introduced. The monster series has been okay, although I was surprised how Liches and Vampires got glazed over in favor of Zombies, Skeletons, and ghouls in the undead book. I would rather see more Races of or monster books, but to be honest I would really prefer more campaign setting specific books even if they had to class themed something like Warriors of Faerun, Divine casters of Greyhawk or even Robot Ninjas of Eberron. At least then, the material would have some useful information outside of game mechanics and give some indication why the prestige class exists. Rather than....Daggerspell mage...hmm I wonder what this does....oh it attacks with daggers and cast spells who would have ever guessed from the title .
PS- I am sorry if Robot Ninjas is offensive to Eberron fans, but I just could not resist that title rolls of so naturally. I mean it sounds far more catchy than Warriors of Faerun or Divine casters of Greyhawk . |
| Archwizard |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 17:04:14
Yes, a races book, a terrain book, or a book on specific monsters (Draconomicon type) would be more interesting. It could even be something like Lords of Madness II to cover the other types of aberrations that didn't make it into the first one. They can even use the name Codex Anathema this time. It is certainly about time for a book on giants or fey or classical monstrous humanoids like centaurs and minotaurs.
I think the complete series books might have been better organized if they were like the Complete Handbooks of 2e, at least since this is what they are heading towards anyway but in a less straightforward manner. Complete Warrior for fighters, Complete Crusader - Paladins, Complete Priest - Cleric, Complete Mage - Wizards, etc.
Hopefully this series doesn't sell so well that we'll get Complete Round III, Complete Scallywag anyone? |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 15:57:13
Sorry, for coming up with this after I just posted, but in retrospect I was thinking . . . what could WOTC put out that would be a better alternative to the "complete II" series?
So far they started the terrain series. I don't know how they sold, but I would rather see a Terrain book on forests, swamps, mountains, anything that they could do well, come up with some logical magic items and monsters for, etc.
There is still a lot they could do with the "Draconomicon" type books as well. A book on giants or one about humanoids, focusing on them as opponents, and showing what kind of beasts they might take as pets or guards would be interesting, as well as reintroducing, officially, some of those gods that have been missing since 2nd edition . . . Skiggaret anyone? |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 15:52:13
I actually wish they would do more "Races of" books, since in 3.5 its much more possible to play other races, and for DMs to use races with classes as well. Then again, the best thing about "Races of the Dragon" was the kobold treatment.
So what are the next "Complete II" books going to be . . . "Complete Proseletyzer"? "Complete Lug"? |
| Jindael |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 14:24:39
This book targets my interests directly; much more than Complete Mage, so it will almost certainly end up on my shelf. And, to be honest, I don't find this "trend" to be at all surprising. What surprised me, actually, is that the first set of Complete Books were so broad; I was really expecting a much more defined focus per character class.
I wonder if the complete series is going to get as particular as to start doing a Complete Elves, and Complete Dwarves?
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 13:50:03
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Ditto. It's getting like the Complete X Handbooks of 2E. Though I could see them for the races and the initial classes (Warrior, Thief, Cleric, etc), after a while it started getting ridiculous. Complete Scoundrel? I'll not even flip thru it. 
I'll certainly take a look -- but only because I'm curious, at this point, about it's possible content.
Once we learn more, that position will likely change since I have the feeling this tome will be just an excuse for publishing more roguish-based PrCs and plenty of *new* feats  .
|
| martynq |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 12:12:15
I guess this was pretty inevitable. It has been stated in the past that books aimed at players (rather than just the DM) sell much better. These "Complete" books fit pretty much with that philosophy.
Martyn |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 12:03:43
Out of all of the bonus classes included in the Complete books Id probably only allow the War Mage (Suitable for an arcane branch of the Church of Tempus)and maybe the Knight class (Especially if its "Cavalieresque") |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 11:25:23
quote:
Originally posted by Alaundo
Well met
Hmmm, I actually winced when I saw this. One of the last things I wanted to see was this "Complete" series getting out of hand. I was quite happy at the initial four books in the series but then wondered where this was actually going when Complete Mage was announced and made me ponder the content in comparison to Complete Arcane. Alas, this tome is likely to be the third D&D tome I will leave on the shelf. If this trend continues, I can see my D&D core purchases being quite low through 2007
Ditto. It's getting like the Complete X Handbooks of 2E. Though I could see them for the races and the initial classes (Warrior, Thief, Cleric, etc), after a while it started getting ridiculous. Complete Scoundrel? I'll not even flip thru it. |
| Archwizard |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 08:53:14
quote:
Originally posted by Arivia
Heh, don't I know...I had a rather bad run-in on WotC a few weeks ago on the Future Releases board...that one ended on Saturday, I think.
Eh, don't let it get to you. there are some people with overly strong opinions on message boards sometimes.
quote:
Originally posted by Arivia
Anyway:
Can anyone think of any actual rules bits they wouldn't mind seeing covered in this supplement? A 3.5 treatment of the garrote rules would be nice, from a rules-cases standpoint.
Nothing major really. Though I dispise the way the Ninja and related classes were presented, like PrCs such as the Ghost-faced killer, which were edited to follow similar guidelines. I found them bland. I think the AEG or even the OA take on ninja is a more balanced version of the warrior based and mystical based ninja stereotype.
Maybe more materials for assassin types, and not just the Assassin PrC, but options for non-evil assassins.
What about various takes on the Merchant Prince, or different things about the shady fence, street thug, the roguish swashbuckler type, etc. Possibly some epic material.
Certainly more gear and equipment, I remember the Complete Thieves' Handbook in 2e had lots of interesting items for thieving and anti-thieving.
|
| Alaundo |
Posted - 25 Apr 2006 : 08:27:15
Well met
Hmmm, I actually winced when I saw this. One of the last things I wanted to see was this "Complete" series getting out of hand. I was quite happy at the initial four books in the series but then wondered where this was actually going when Complete Mage was announced and made me ponder the content in comparison to Complete Arcane. Alas, this tome is likely to be the third D&D tome I will leave on the shelf. If this trend continues, I can see my D&D core purchases being quite low through 2007 |
