[dungeoncrawl] Re: the Two Towers
- From: "widderslainte" <widderslainte@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <dungeoncrawl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:13:42 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dungeoncrawl-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:dungeoncrawl-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Grogan, Keith
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 14:19
> To: 'dungeoncrawl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: [dungeoncrawl] Re: the Two Towers
>
>
>
> I just read about this the other night on WotC site. I was
> going to email out to the group as well. Wasn't extensive
> play testing supposed to keep something like this from
> happening? Oh well. So this is 3rd and half edition, or version 3.5:)
I've heard it's more like 3.1 or 3.25. If you waste time (like I do) on
online message boards, you hear people complaining about the same stuff:
rangers, bards, harm, haste, CR's, attacks of opportunity. The official
3rd Edition FAQ/Errata document is like 85 pages long. Between Star
Wars, Cthulhu d20, and d20 modern, some of the descriptions and
explanations of rules are "better". I think they also pillaged a few of
the non-WotC d20 products for ideas. I think they may change the Ranger
to allow something like the d20 Modern 'talent trees'. The other rumour
I've heard is they're changing the negative hp stabilization check to
some sort of fortitude save instead of a straight percentage.
Supposedly the core books are due for a new print run this summer
anyways, so they felt it was a good idea.
Monte Cook is doing something similar, but with completely different
core classes and races.
S.
Other related posts:
