I created Utan back when I was playing the original D&D boxed set (a few years ago for Table Top gaming -- No Internet then). He has evolved and been translated and updated to adventure in Boxed set, 1e (AD&D), 2e (AD&D), 3e, and 3e5. He's been around for a while ...
More information in PM (to keep the clutter down ...)
Posted on 2008-09-06 at 20:08:22.
Edited on 2008-09-06 at 20:44:22 by Utan the Orange
I appreciate the ones who are asking me to join their game, I really do And I thank you. However, I'm at a weakness when it comes to rules-based games. I don't do D&D anymore, I don't have any books (offline anyways), I'm through. However, I do remember a few things from AD&D 2e.
If a simple system with an easy learning curve is used, and very few things beyond a dice roller is required, maybe some DM/GM guidance can work?
Clint and Charles both are in the Guestbook at the Shaking Dragon Inn ...
You know about Vanna ...
Wow! I wish I knew how (or even who) could so turn someone off from playing D&D. Your writing here shows potential. Wonder if I (or anyone here) can talk you into a (as in one, as in short, as in simple) straight-up D&D game to show you not only good gaming, but good and competent ruling, world-building, and excellent help in character creation ...
I take it as a personal goal to re-add D&D to your gaming repertoire. I mean no offense, and if you are dead-set against it, I will drop it like a hot cannonball, but I hate to see talent go unchallenged ...
Posted on 2008-09-08 at 07:10:47.
Edited on 2008-09-08 at 07:34:10 by Utan the Orange
GUEST: Hah, I'm having trouble finding them. The names on the guest lsits are so weird.
D&D GAMING: It's possible. Just how would that work w/o guidebooks?
PALADIN: Here's are fun questions for you guys, whoever is looking at this thread, to think over. So, a paladin is a personage of good right? And they go in the way of trouble to defend the innocent and the way of people. So:
- How would they react in a hostage situation? Like someone is inches away from killling a child and the paladin is forced to disarm (hopefully that isn't against his/her ethos)?
- Would a paladin suddenly attack a white dragon (CE), say, driking at a pond? Or does the dragon have to be provocative?
Posted on 2008-09-08 at 22:23:47.
Edited on 2008-09-08 at 22:24:28 by CirroWolf
I try and try to get this across to people. Just because a Paladin is bound by the tenants of good and law, does not mean he's a moron blindly abject to brash heroics.
In a hostage situation, a Paladin is a perfect negotiator (high diplomacy skills w/ charisma) to try and see the hostage safely returned... THen he can proceed to smite said villain..
Dragon.. a Paladin would more likely withdrawl to gather an armed militia or provide intelligence on the situation instead of brazenly thinking they can take the dragon singlehandedly. He's not Required to throw his life away because a big evil monster appears, only handle it in the most positive way while sticking to the mandates of their faith.
Dragon: I kinda agree with Kaelyn here. But the Paladin's tenets don't usually say "suffer ye not Evil to live (at all)". If his quest is to rid the area of the dragon, or to punish it for a recent act, then he would, indeed, act as Kaelyn suggests.
Although, if he happens to run across the dragon by chance, and knows not if the dragon has committed an evil act, he may just ride on, allowing the creature his allotment of life. This act, and it's reasoning, is also within his tenets.
But, on a side note, the goody-two-shoes Paladin is not above kicking a dog for peeing on his favorite suit of armor. He is, after all, a free-thinking being and subject to emotions like anger. And sometimes the anger can/might erupt into violence, detrimental but not lethal .. .
Posted on 2008-09-08 at 23:16:18.
Edited on 2008-09-08 at 23:39:51 by Utan the Orange
Kaelyn: I'm glad you told me this. I thought LS was just an insulting slang word to describe LG or a boring good character in general. Now I see that it just reflects a brash hero like in many cartoons, but I just never thought about it.
UTAN: Ah, thank you Utan.
Hostage: Ohh...I forgot about that. Hmmm, would it be against ethos to agree to the demands of the captor after a deal is made (Like in most real-life cases when a ton of hostages are involved)?
Dragon: I do agree he/she would act if it was an obligation (to punish if it if attacked somewhere, rid the dragon if it's troublesome), but to attack it directly because it's "evil" just seems too provocative.
I know, they are still human. Maybe at least once, they broken a rule they didn't mean to.
Hostage: Against ethos to agree to a captor's demands AFTER a deal is made? No. Actually, that is the Paladin's make-up. Trustworthy, word-boind, truthful, that sort of thing is his or her mainstay. Paladin won't make a deal and then renege on it, but he may make a deal that is slightly ambiguous and could seem to be what the captor will settle for, but could be twisted to actually allow the Paladin to act within his "code". Tough to do, but fun to try.
Dragon: Here, I agree with you.
The Lawful component of his morals and ethics would prevent him from punishing something if he had no reason or knowledge that would justify said punishment.
The Good component of his make-up would justify allowing an intelligent and free-thinking creature (regardless if alignment) to live free and freely, as is it's right. Unless of course, his own life, or that of others, is in imminent danger from the creature ..