The "Force" in D&D
Thomas Vincent
Greetings All,
I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D. I think
the concept would be kind of cool and give a neat twist to the standard
game. I have considered just using psionics but have never got around to
it. I vaguely recall the first person I ever played D&D with did something
like that way back in the late 70s or early 80s. Unfortunately, I also
recall he was a bit of a munchkin and it was way too powerful and
unbalanced. After having seen the way the "Force" is used in the new movie,
I have decided that it could be done properly and not be out of sync with a
fantasy setting. Any thoughts?
--
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
[Animal Farm, 1945]
"Diplomacy (noun): The patriotic art of lying for one's clan."
(James Ashton, Clan Ventrue)
arag...@home.com
The Black Dragon
>
> Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
> behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D. I think
> the concept would be kind of cool and give a neat twist to the standard
> game. I have considered just using psionics but have never got around to
> it. I vaguely recall the first person I ever played D&D with did something
> like that way back in the late 70s or early 80s. Unfortunately, I also
> recall he was a bit of a munchkin and it was way too powerful and
> unbalanced. After having seen the way the "Force" is used in the new movie,
> I have decided that it could be done properly and not be out of sync with a
> fantasy setting. Any thoughts?
How about this?:
1. Convert all Priest spells to Wizard spells as outlined for creating new
spells in the 2nd Edition DMG and do away with the entire Priest class
structure.
2. Remove the need for material and verbal components from all spells -- use
somatic components only, but enforce them heavily. The majority of Force powers
with physical effects have somatic components associated with them (Palpatine's
lightning was directed by his hands in ROTJ, Vader made strangling motions to
use his strangle power in ANH, Obi-wan throws his arm out to knock the battle
droids back in TPM, etc).
3. Use the Cleric "meditation" rules for re-acquiring spells rather than the
Wizard "spellbook study" rules, but the Wizard rules for learning spells
originally (ie you have to meditate to re-acquire your spells like a Cleric, but
you have to be taught them and successfully learn them before you can use them
the first time as a Wizard).
4. Allow the use of only one specific type of sword, but not the use of armor
(we'll assume that Darth Vader was an exceptional case -- the equivalent of Drow
or Elven platemail maybe with the rules for replacement limbs from Drow of the
Underdark thrown in? ;-).
Voila! Instant Force users. If you want to make this even more in keeping with
the Star Wars universe, require Jedi to be multi or dual classed Fighter/Mages.
I actually did this in a game I DMed about 10 years ago and, while the campaign
didn't last long because I moved before the year was out, it did prove to be
fairly well balanced and it was a fun exercise for a while.
When I did this, I moved all the Cleric spells to the Wizard list and followed
the guidelines above. As an example of how I handled things: Cure Light Wounds
(a 1st level Necromantic Cleric spell) became a 2nd level Necromantic Wizard
Spell of the same name and its effect dice dropped from a d8 to a d6. Basically,
any spells that didn't already exist in the Wizard lists when I moved the Cleric
spells over had one or two levels added to them when they were moved and had
their effect dice changed from d8's to d6's where appropriate.
I'm sure opinions on this will vary and others will have different ways of doing
this, but this was the most balanced method I could easily figure out at the
time. Doing things the other way around by moving the Wizard spells to the
Priest lists just made a munchkin priest and quite a few of the Priest's
abilities and benefits didn't seem to fit with the idea of a Jedi. The
Fighter/Mage idea seemed to work better and seemed a little more balanced to me.
- TBD
The Black Dragon
Just in case anyone would like justification for my method of doing things this
way, I'm going to reply to my own post...
> How about this?:
>
> 1. Convert all Priest spells to Wizard spells as outlined for creating new
> spells in the 2nd Edition DMG and do away with the entire Priest class
> structure.
There are alot of things that Jedi do that are clearly the realm of the Wizard
rather than the Priest -- even if you want to argue that a Jedi is closer to a
priest of a philosophy than a Wizard. The Priest class structure just had too
many spells associated with it that were too nature dependant. Looking through
the spell lists, it seemed much more appropriate in keeping with the powers of a
Jedi to convert some of the Priest spells to Wizard equivalents instead of the
other way around. If you've seen the new movie yet, it also becomes clear that
the Force is not derived from anything like a deity, but something much closer
to a component of wizardry.
> 2. Remove the need for material and verbal components from all spells -- use
> somatic components only, but enforce them heavily. The majority of Force
powers
> with physical effects have somatic components associated with them
(Palpatine's
> lightning was directed by his hands in ROTJ, Vader made strangling motions to
> use his strangle power in ANH, Obi-wan throws his arm out to knock the battle
> droids back in TPM, etc).
This one's relatively obvious. When do we ever see a Jedi reach for bat guano or
a bit of mouse fur before he uses a Force power? Also, every physical Force
power I can think of seeing in the 4 movies so far had some sort of somatic
gesture associated with it. The mind powers did not but then most mind affecting
spells do not either.
> 3. Use the Cleric "meditation" rules for re-acquiring spells rather than the
> Wizard "spellbook study" rules, but the Wizard rules for learning spells
> originally (ie you have to meditate to re-acquire your spells like a Cleric,
but
> you have to be taught them and successfully learn them before you can use them
> the first time as a Wizard).
Jedi don't have spell books (obviously), but they just can't "use the Force" for
something they've never been taught. The Force itself doesn't just start
speaking to them in a commanding voice that speaks common from the heavens. They
have to learn to use it from a Jedi Master and actually apprentice themselves to
another Jedi. So I thought a combination of the Priest and Wizard rules was
appropriate here to keep them in balance with the AD&D system.
> 4. Allow the use of only one specific type of sword, but not the use of armor
> (we'll assume that Darth Vader was an exceptional case -- the equivalent of
Drow
> or Elven platemail maybe with the rules for replacement limbs from Drow of the
> Underdark thrown in? ;-).
Other than Darth Vader, do we ever see a Jedi who wears what we would consider
encumbering armor? Or do we ever see a Jedi use something other than a
lightsaber as a weapon that he's really proficient in? Maul's saber could be
adapted to be a staff in AD&D, but that weapon is already allowed to Wizards.
Ignore the use of blaster pistols because most AD&D campaigns don't use guns.
> Voila! Instant Force users. If you want to make this even more in keeping with
> the Star Wars universe, require Jedi to be multi or dual classed
Fighter/Mages.
> I actually did this in a game I DMed about 10 years ago and, while the
campaign
> didn't last long because I moved before the year was out, it did prove to be
> fairly well balanced and it was a fun exercise for a while.
The multi/dual classed idea arose for a few reasons:
1. I felt that Clerics advance to fast to use the Cleric class as a base for the
Jedi. With all of the above thrown in, it just didn't feel right ("I have a bad
feeling about this..." ;-)
2. Requiring Jedi to be multi/dual classed seemed to balance them out a bit more
in keeping with their exhibited abilities while slowing their advancement down
enough to keep them from over-taking the rest of their party of PC's in both
skill and power.
> When I did this, I moved all the Cleric spells to the Wizard list and followed
> the guidelines above. As an example of how I handled things: Cure Light Wounds
> (a 1st level Necromantic Cleric spell) became a 2nd level Necromantic Wizard
> Spell of the same name and its effect dice dropped from a d8 to a d6.
Basically,
> any spells that didn't already exist in the Wizard lists when I moved the
Cleric
> spells over had one or two levels added to them when they were moved and had
> their effect dice changed from d8's to d6's where appropriate.
This was done because most Wizards spells seem to use d6 or d4 effect dice while
a lot of Cleric spells seem to use d8's. Just seemed more in keeping with the
Wizard if we kept the "new" spells limited to those same dice for consistency.
Also kept the Jedi idea a little more balanced.
> I'm sure opinions on this will vary and others will have different ways of
doing
> this, but this was the most balanced method I could easily figure out at the
> time. Doing things the other way around by moving the Wizard spells to the
> Priest lists just made a munchkin priest and quite a few of the Priest's
> abilities and benefits didn't seem to fit with the idea of a Jedi. The
> Fighter/Mage idea seemed to work better and seemed a little more balanced to
me.
Nothing really to note here. I felt the above changes kept things more balanced
and it seemed to work pretty well in play. :-)
> - TBD
- TBD (again)
Michael Scott Brown
>Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
>behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D.
Pssst. Psionics.
-Michael
Mr Nixx
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
>the concept would be kind of cool and give a neat twist to the standard
>game. I have considered just using psionics but have never got around to
>it. I vaguely recall the first person I ever played D&D with did something
>like that way back in the late 70s or early 80s. Unfortunately, I also
>recall he was a bit of a munchkin and it was way too powerful and
>unbalanced. After having seen the way the "Force" is used in the new movie,
>I have decided that it could be done properly and not be out of sync with a
>fantasy setting. Any thoughts?
Philosophy aspect... read up on some Taoism, Bhuddism and Gnostin Christianity
and you've got a real good head start.
As for the game aspect, psionics should work well. Remove what you feel is
innappropriate and add what you deem is necessary.
DAS
óóóóó
Death is Life's way of telling you you're fired.
nsda...@alpha.nsula.edu
powers I've seen used in the movies or read in the books are covered by
various psionic powers. Using psionics gets rid of memorization (or the
receiving of spells through a deity) and allows the character to use a power
(or the Force) many times, based on the psychic strength of the character
(ie, how in tune the character is with the force). Actually there is
already a class (or a fighter/psionicist kit perhaps) in existance... I
believe it uses a combination of fighter/psi skills, with limitations on
certain powers, etc. I've it somewhere on my other computer, so I could
probably locate it if anyone's interested; it's on the internet someplace
though.
Jack
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
Werebat
>
> Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
> behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D.
The J'Dai Knights exist in one of my alternate campaign worlds. They are
a group of Fighter/Psionicists. Many people have noted the similarities
between psionics and "The Force". I think you'd do well to still with
psionics instead of magic.
A campaign that used ONLY psionics, no priest or mage magic, would be
interesting. And probably the only way I'd ever figure out all the
nuances of psionics.
- Ron ^*^
--
Statistics do not lie. People lie. With statistics.
Sea Wasp
>
> Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
> behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D.
Bard Games' The Arcanum had Jedi Knights and Jedi Masters as actual
character classes... they were called Monks and Mystics, of course, but
if you read their "spell lists" it was clearly The Force.
--
Sea Wasp http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.html
/^\
;;; _Morgantown: The Jason Wood Chronicles_, at
http://www.hyperbooks.com/catalog/20040.html
Dragonpearl
--
Remove the dot in the word sybercom to mail me.
drg...@syber.com.net
Thomas Vincent wrote in message
<7Nx13.12141$vP2....@news.rdc1.tn.home.com>...
>
>Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
>behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D. I think
>the concept would be kind of cool and give a neat twist to the standard
>game. I have considered just using psionics but have never got around to
>it. I vaguely recall the first person I ever played D&D with did
something
>like that way back in the late 70s or early 80s. Unfortunately, I also
>recall he was a bit of a munchkin and it was way too powerful and
>unbalanced. After having seen the way the "Force" is used in the new
movie,
>I have decided that it could be done properly and not be out of sync with a
>fantasy setting. Any thoughts?
Andy Baker
Werebat wrote:
>
> A campaign that used ONLY psionics, no priest or mage magic, would be
> interesting. And probably the only way I'd ever figure out all the
> nuances of psionics.
>
> - Ron ^*^
>
I've played in a campaign like this, and it was a blast- the most fun I've
ever had in a game. We used a pretty heavily-modified psionics system (way
too long to post), which would probably be hard to keep balanced in a world
where psionics aren't dominant, but in this world it worked great. It was a
lot of fun to think "outside the box" in a world where science and reason
were dominant, and miracles still happened, but without the gods. All in all,
a -very- refreshing change, and the most enjoyable game I've ever played in
:)
Jyhadd
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
>behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D.
Pssst. Psionics.
I was just about to say that, oh well too late
Some guy you met before
: > 4. Allow the use of only one specific type of sword, but not the use of armor
: > (we'll assume that Darth Vader was an exceptional case -- the equivalent of
: Drow
: > or Elven platemail maybe with the rules for replacement limbs from Drow of the
: > Underdark thrown in? ;-).
: Other than Darth Vader, do we ever see a Jedi who wears what we would consider
: encumbering armor? Or do we ever see a Jedi use something other than a
: lightsaber as a weapon that he's really proficient in? Maul's saber could be
: adapted to be a staff in AD&D, but that weapon is already allowed to Wizards.
: Ignore the use of blaster pistols because most AD&D campaigns don't use guns.
Well that's not really a justification. Just because we don't see people
doing things doesn't mean they can't! Do we ever see Chewbacca going to
the bog? That doesn't mean he can't. It's just not used in the film. The
light-sabre is well-known as the most powerful weapon to a Jedi, and
therefore, why use anything else? It doesn't mean they couldn't possibly
be trained to use other things, just that they aren't because there is no
point, because a light-sabre is so good. But in an AD&D world, there is no
"super-sword" like that (unless you count magical swords which are usually
fairly hard to come by), so there is no reason why they couldn't train in
more than one sword...
Gio...@isla.net
> Well that's not really a justification. Just because we don't see
people doing things doesn't mean they can't.
Also it needs to be taken into consideration that in a fantasy world
situations have to be modifed acordingly. Yet most Jedi like
characters/kits that I have seen DONT wear armor because of the
Pscionist armor restriction imposed by that class.
> the light-sabre is well-known as the most powerful weapon to a Jedi,
and therefore, why use anything else? It doesn't mean they couldn't
possibly be trained to use other things, just that they aren't because
there is no point, because a light-sabre is so good.
True, but A jedi might also train in other weapons for
cultural/religious/political or social reasons depending on the
campaing.
(what? you dont know how to fence, shoot a bow or use a dagger? And you
call yourself a warrior? We have no need for such weaklings as
yourselves in our realms, go back and tell your Order that such
obviously poor warriors are not wanted in my realm...)
>But in an AD&D world, there is no "super-sword" like that (unless you
>count magical swords which are usually fairly hard to come by), so
>there is no reason why they couldn't train in
>more than one sword...
true, also what do you do when you dont have your lightsaber with you?
Hmm? Pretty fubared if you dont know how to use any other weapons.
(party leader: "So you dont know how to use any other weapon? Now that
your glowing swrod is useless, how are you going to defend yourself? We
already know your force powers, but here they are of no use to you...")
George
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Scott Metzger
Gio...@Isla.net wrote:
> (Some guy you met before) wrote:
>
> > Well that's not really a justification. Just because we don't see
> people doing things doesn't mean they can't.
>
> Also it needs to be taken into consideration that in a fantasy world
> situations have to be modifed acordingly. Yet most Jedi like
> characters/kits that I have seen DONT wear armor because of the
> Pscionist armor restriction imposed by that class.
Ah, but we do see Luke wear armor. He wears a Storm Trooper suit in the
original Star Wars.
> > the light-sabre is well-known as the most powerful weapon to a
Jedi,
> and therefore, why use anything else? It doesn't mean they couldn't
> possibly be trained to use other things, just that they aren't because
> there is no point, because a light-sabre is so good.
>
> True, but A jedi might also train in other weapons for
> cultural/religious/political or social reasons depending on the
> campaing.
The lightsaber is a Jedi weapon. In the original Star Wars, Kenobi
gives Luke a light saber and says "The lightsaber is the weapon of the
Jedi, alot more accurate than a clumsy blaster. A civilized weapon for
a more civilized time." Also, in Phantom Menace Anakin
recognizes Kenobi and the other guy(keep forgeting his name) as
being Jedi because he sees their lightsabers. However, Luke does use a
blaster often as well as one instance of explosives.
For AD&D purposes I would require a Jedi kit/class to specialize in a
sword of some sort, a Katana maybe. They can use other weapons but can
only specialize in this particular sword.
> (what? you dont know how to fence, shoot a bow or use a dagger? And
you
> call yourself a warrior? We have no need for such weaklings as
> yourselves in our realms, go back and tell your Order that such
> obviously poor warriors are not wanted in my realm...)
>
> >But in an AD&D world, there is no "super-sword" like that (unless you
> >count magical swords which are usually fairly hard to come by), so
> >there is no reason why they couldn't train in
> >more than one sword...
>
> true, also what do you do when you dont have your lightsaber with you?
> Hmm? Pretty fubared if you dont know how to use any other weapons.
>
> (party leader: "So you dont know how to use any other weapon? Now that
> your glowing swrod is useless, how are you going to defend yourself?
We
> already know your force powers, but here they are of no use to
you...")
>
> George
>
> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
>
*:> Scott
-------------------------------------------
Yo Yo Dyne Technologies, your source for RPG software
http://yoyodyne.virtualave.net/
Mark Horning
Scott Metzger <scottm...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>In article <7ieebc$uva$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Gio...@Isla.net wrote:
>> (Some guy you met before) wrote:
>>
>> > Well that's not really a justification. Just because we don't see
>> people doing things doesn't mean they can't.
>>
>> Also it needs to be taken into consideration that in a fantasy world
>> situations have to be modifed acordingly. Yet most Jedi like
>> characters/kits that I have seen DONT wear armor because of the
>> Pscionist armor restriction imposed by that class.
>
>Ah, but we do see Luke wear armor. He wears a Storm Trooper suit in the
>original Star Wars.
>
>> > the light-sabre is well-known as the most powerful weapon to a
>Jedi,
>> and therefore, why use anything else? It doesn't mean they couldn't
>> possibly be trained to use other things, just that they aren't because
>> there is no point, because a light-sabre is so good.
>>
>> True, but A jedi might also train in other weapons for
>> cultural/religious/political or social reasons depending on the
>> campaing.
>
>The lightsaber is a Jedi weapon. In the original Star Wars, Kenobi
>gives Luke a light saber and says "The lightsaber is the weapon of the
>Jedi, alot more accurate than a clumsy blaster. A civilized weapon for
>a more civilized time." Also, in Phantom Menace Anakin
IT has been a long time since I have seen the movie but I thought the line
was a lot more _elegant_ than a clumsy blaster.
Mark E. Horning "You can not enslave a free man. The most
Physicist you can do is kill him."
Phoenix AZ --Robert A. Heinlein-- (Free Men)
Michael Scott Brown
For those of you arguing weapon and armor requirements, a few notes-
Luke used sword *and* blaster and rifle in his day, which, barring
the occasional primitive weapon, encompassed the entirety of the
weaponry available to his era. However, it's pretty obvious that
he focussed on his lightsaber intensely. But, blaster weaponry is
ridiculously easy to use, so "nonproficient" usage is also possible.
Therefore, a limited or broad weapon selection are both justifiable for
a hypothetical jedi class - so make the decision based on what best
balances the character's power.
As to armor, notice that Luke never fought as a jedi in trooper armor;
he just wore it as a disguise and engaged in a firefight. Wearing armor
against instant blaster fire is very different from effectively using medeival
armor to deflect physical attacks; in this neccessarily passive role anyone
could benefit from such a defense without any training (as long as they
were strong enough to wear it).
A reasonable "jedi" probably has light armor, knowledge of a few weapons
(sword, staff, spear, bow), specialization in one weapon, and psionics
at L/2 or L/3, while advancing at the paladin/ranger pace. That sounds
about like the one I whipped up at some point in the past. :)
-Michael
Colin Fisher
>Ah, but we do see Luke wear armor. He
> wears a Storm Trooper suit in the
> original Star Wars.
But you're forgetting that Luke in A New Hope(Episode 4) wasn't a Jedi
in any sense of the word. He basically had a little bit of training
with Ben Kenobi on the Millineum Falcon and that was it. He only uses a
blaster for combat.
So far, in the 4 films, the _only_ Jedi to use any armor while fighting
would be Darth Vader.
>True, but A jedi might also train in other
> weapons for cultural/religious/political or
> social reasons depending on the
> campaing.
Agreed. It's hard to believe such a great warrior would stick with just
a lightsaber when they can take something else too. The lightsaber
would be what they specialized in.
>The lightsaber is a Jedi weapon. In the
> original Star Wars, Kenobi gives Luke a
> light saber and says "The lightsaber is
> the weapon of the Jedi, alot more
> accurate than a clumsy blaster. A
> civilized weapon for a more civilized
> time."
Just to pick nits here, Kenobi says this: " This is the weapon of a Jedi
Knight. Not as clumsy or as random as a blaster. An elegant weapon for
a more civilized time."
Not really important to your point, but I like that quote(I am reading
it from my Star Wars RPG book.)
> Also, in Phantom Menace Anakin
> recognizes Kenobi and the other
> guy(keep forgeting his name)
Qui-Gon Jinn, I believe is the name of Liam Neeson's character.
>as being Jedi because he sees their
> lightsabers.
True enough, but Qui-Gon also asks Anikan what if he killed a Jedi and
took his sword? One special thing about the lightsaber is it's weapon
speed. It would do massive amounts of damage and has little wieght. In
fact, in the Star Wars RPG, if a character isn't skilled in the weapon
and botches his roll, the character will have misjudged the weight of
the sword and slice himself(ouch!).
> However, Luke does use a blaster often
> as well as one instance of explosives.
But Luke wasn't a good Jedi until Return of the Jedi. He used little if
any powers in A New Hope and was a beginner at best in The Empire
Strikes Back.
>For AD&D purposes I would require a
> Jedi kit/class to specialize in a sword of
> some sort, a Katana maybe. They can
> use other weapons but can only
> specialize in this particular sword.
Sounds good. A katana, like a lightsaber, is extremely light and sharp
and can hurt one who isn't skilled in it's use. Of course, the katana
doesn't look as KeWL :-)
>true, also what do you do when you dont
> have your lightsaber with you? Hmm?
> Pretty fubared if you dont know how to
> use any other weapons.
Perhaps, but a decent Jedi should know plenty of force powers- like
telekinesis, telepathy, or the choke that Vader uses. Don't forget their
reflexes either. All in all, I'd say a Jedi without his lightsaber is
still one tough cookie.
Don
> So far, in the 4 films, the _only_ Jedi to use any armor while fighting
> would be Darth Vader.
As an aside, Vader's armor was actually lightsaber-resistant. You can
clearly see this in ESB where Luke hits him in the shoulder.
> > However, Luke does use a blaster often
> > as well as one instance of explosives.
>
> But Luke wasn't a good Jedi until Return of the Jedi. He used little if
> any powers in A New Hope and was a beginner at best in The Empire
> Strikes Back.
Luke tried to use a blaster to kill Jabba in ROTJ (this was when he fell
into the Rancor's pit).
- Don
Scott Metzger
> >
> >The lightsaber is a Jedi weapon. In the original Star Wars, Kenobi
> >gives Luke a light saber and says "The lightsaber is the weapon of
the
> >Jedi, alot more accurate than a clumsy blaster. A civilized weapon
for
> >a more civilized time." Also, in Phantom Menace Anakin
>
> IT has been a long time since I have seen the movie but I thought the
line
> was a lot more _elegant_ than a clumsy blaster.
>
> Mark E. Horning "You can not enslave a free man. The
most
> Physicist you can do is kill him."
>
> Phoenix AZ --Robert A. Heinlein-- (Free Men)
>
I did make a mistake. I think the quote should be "...more accurate than
a clumsy blaster. An elegant weapon from a more civilized time."
Michael Scott Brown
Don <umdu...@cc.UManitoba.CA> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 May 1999, Colin Fisher wrote:
>
>> So far, in the 4 films, the _only_ Jedi to use any armor while fighting
>> would be Darth Vader.
>
>As an aside, Vader's armor was actually lightsaber-resistant. You can
>clearly see this in ESB where Luke hits him in the shoulder.
Anything dense is. Just not *very*.
-Michael
Franz & Michael Köttl
374c0...@nexus.comcen.com.au...
> What bothers me is that both the armour of the stormtroopers and that of
> Darth Vader is clearly plastic - how does it deflect a blaster bolt, let
> alone a lightsaber? :P
It is plastic +5 ;-)
We have today plastics capable of amazing feats:
* a thin foil (0,2 mm) holding the weight of a man, but at the same time
being heated by a flame underneath.
* modern bulletproof vests are 100% plastics with nylon weave and teflon
inserts (there are also vests with ceramic inserts, but those are not 100%
plastic;-)
* ablating compounds on the heat-shield of spacecraft
I suppose in the far far future, there will be plastics capable of
withstanding blaster shots
--
Just some ideas.
Michael Köttl
Christopher Adams
Darth Vader is clearly plastic - how does it deflect a blaster bolt, let
alone a lightsaber? :P
Christopher Adams
A man of no fortune, and with a name to come.
And the Raven, never flitting, still is sitting, *still* is sitting,
On the pallid bust of Pallas just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming,
And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;
And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted - nevermore!
Sea Wasp
So you're saying that Jar-Jar's head would be able to stop the Death
Star cannon?
Michael Scott Brown
>> >As an aside, Vader's armor was actually lightsaber-resistant. You can
>> >clearly see this in ESB where Luke hits him in the shoulder.
>>
>> Anything dense is. Just not *very*.
>
>So you're saying that Jar-Jar's head would be able to stop the Death
>Star cannon?
<laughter>
-Michael
Christopher Adams
>
>We have today plastics capable of amazing feats:
>* a thin foil (0,2 mm) holding the weight of a man, but at the
>same time being heated by a flame underneath.
>* modern bulletproof vests are 100% plastics with nylon weave
>and teflon inserts (there are also vests with ceramic inserts,
>but those are not 100% plastic;-)
>* ablating compounds on the heat-shield of spacecraft
>
>I suppose in the far far future, there will be plastics capable of
>withstanding blaster shots
Okay. First of all, it's not like it seems like a *special* kind of plastic!
It's polyurethane, for Goddess' sake! :)
Second, they can't even make proper cotton!
Franz & Michael Köttl
> Okay. First of all, it's not like it seems like a *special* kind of
plastic!
Strong plastics don't have to _look_ like anything. Imagine paper
withstanding cannonballs ;)
> It's polyurethane, for Goddess' sake! :)
Nah. It _looks_ like polyurethane, because the designer of this armor was
enarmored to the retro-look :-)
>
> Second, they can't even make proper cotton!
>
Don't know which scene you are reffering too. :-( Please explain.
Nick Blas
KiM wrote:
> Colin Fisher wrote:
> > Sounds good. A katana, like a lightsaber, is extremely light and sharp
> > and can hurt one who isn't skilled in it's use. Of course, the katana
> > doesn't look as KeWL :-)
>
> Katana's would be an excellent choice for a substituite lightsaber. Both were
> unique and deeply spiritual weapons and both relied on sheer sharpness and
> cutting ability over weight. Of course the lightsaber was also more compact.
> :-)
Or maybe something along the lines of Gourry's Sword of Light from this fantastic
comedy anime called "The Slayers".
Basically, it's a hilt that brings forth a magical blade when called upon.
Nick.
Klaatu B. Nikto
> Vader is only really wearing armour because he doesn't have a choice in the
> matter, a lot of it his life support systems which allow him to breath etc and
> make up for injuries he suffered while slaying the various Jedi across the
> galaxy.
"Although the metamorphosis into Darth Vader is unclear, some tales
hold that his final fall occurred after a duel with his former teacher
Obi-Wan Kenobi. The battle was fierce and Anakin was horribly scarred
and grievously wounded, all remnants of Anakin had slipped away and he
was wholly one with the Dark Side. The remains of his shattered body
were supported by a fearsome armored suit and his burned face was
covered by the mask of Darth Vader."
From: http://www.wcug.wwu.edu/~paradox/vader.html
The actual story will be revealed for certain whenever Episode III
comes out. Whatever the reason, Vader wears the armor to survive
not out of choice.
Klaatu
--
"Sometimes I think the surest sign that there's intelligent life on
other planets is that none of it has tried to contact us."
- Calvin, "Calvin and Hobbes"
towo...@concentric.net
>> cutting ability over weight. Of course the lightsaber was also more compact.
>Or maybe something along the lines of Gourry's Sword of Light from this fantastic
>comedy anime called "The Slayers".
Uh, what do you think the inspiration for the Sword WAS? 8)
--
Jason
http://www.cris.com/~towonder/
Sailor Moon V at http://www.cris.com/~towonder/fanfic.shtml
Sith Lords really need to stay away from wells.
KiM
> So far, in the 4 films, the _only_ Jedi to use any armor while fighting
> would be Darth Vader.
>
Vader is only really wearing armour because he doesn't have a choice in the
matter, a lot of it his life support systems which allow him to breath etc and
make up for injuries he suffered while slaying the various Jedi across the
galaxy.
I believe the main reason why Jedi do wear armour is for them it is simply
redundant, there is no armour which can stop a lightsaber (well short of some
Mech like device) and they use their light sabers to deflect laser blasts.
Armour heavy enough to block a laser blast more efficently than a light saber
would only hinder their use of the light saber in battle (forcing them to rely
on blasters and defeating the whole point of the light saber).
If taken into AD&D era I would say it would be acceptable for them to wear light
armours (up to elven) chain since they would want some defense against normal
weapons since it is somewhat effective and would not hinder them. Certainly I
would not allow them a suit of field plate or such.
> True enough, but Qui-Gon also asks Anikan what if he killed a Jedi and
> took his sword? One special thing about the lightsaber is it's weapon
> speed. It would do massive amounts of damage and has little wieght. In
> fact, in the Star Wars RPG, if a character isn't skilled in the weapon
> and botches his roll, the character will have misjudged the weight of
> the sword and slice himself(ouch!).
>
In the novels written after the books (whether or not you count them as part of
the story) it is explained that much of a Jedi's skill with a light saber comes
from his connection with the Force, hence how they can deflect laser blasts
(which would certainly be beyond the abilities of any normal human) so in short
while someone else could own a light saber, he wouldn't be able to wield it
effectively and would be better off just using a blaster (saving himself from an
accidental beheading)
> Sounds good. A katana, like a lightsaber, is extremely light and sharp
> and can hurt one who isn't skilled in it's use. Of course, the katana
> doesn't look as KeWL :-)
Katana's would be an excellent choice for a substituite lightsaber. Both were
unique and deeply spiritual weapons and both relied on sheer sharpness and
cutting ability over weight. Of course the lightsaber was also more compact.
:-)
> Perhaps, but a decent Jedi should know plenty of force powers- like
> telekinesis, telepathy, or the choke that Vader uses. Don't forget their
> reflexes either. All in all, I'd say a Jedi without his lightsaber is
> still one tough cookie.
Agreed. Especially since they can use their abilities to disarm their opponents
and put them on equal ground, just as Vader ripped the pistol from Han's hand in
Cloud City. Now had Vader had the desire to he coudl very easily have shot Han
with his own weapon, the same would apply with swords and other weapons in AD&D.
--
KiM <q960...@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/7756/index.html
"Only two things are limitless. The universe and human stupidity, and we're not
quite sure
about the universe yet." - Albert Einstein
Christopher Adams
>
>Don't know which scene you are reffering too.
>:-( Please explain.
Just look at Luke Skywalker's clothes . . . the boy's wearing canvas for
half the film! :)
Franz & Michael Köttl
> >> Second, they can't even make proper cotton!
> >
> >Don't know which scene you are reffering too.
> >:-( Please explain.
>
> Just look at Luke Skywalker's clothes . . . the boy's wearing canvas for
> half the film! :)
Aah! I see.
But consider, that cotton wears out faster than canvas or linen. For a poor
farmer on a desert planet this is an important consideration. Luke wears the
working clothes of a peasant on a desert planet.
He just never got time for a change :-)
Christopher Adams
>farmer on a desert planet this is an important consideration. Luke wears
the
>working clothes of a peasant on a desert planet.
>He just never got time for a change :-)
Mwahaha . . . he was wearing canvas ALL THE TIME! Except when he was in that
hokey flightsuit :)
Duane VanderPol
<scottm...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>I did make a mistake. I think the quote should be "...more accurate than
>a clumsy blaster. An elegant weapon from a more civilized time."
"What is it?"
"Your father's lightsaber. This is the weapon of a Jedi Knight. Not
as clumsy or random as a blaster. An elegant weapon for a more
civilized age."
Duane VanderPol
Castle of the Glowing Sky
home.earthlink.net/~duanevp
Duane VanderPol
wrote:
>KiM wrote:
>
>> Colin Fisher wrote:
>> > and can hurt one who isn't skilled in it's use. Of course, the katana
>> > doesn't look as KeWL :-)
>>
>> Katana's would be an excellent choice for a substituite lightsaber. Both were
>> unique and deeply spiritual weapons and both relied on sheer sharpness and
>> cutting ability over weight. Of course the lightsaber was also more compact.
>> :-)
The fighting style for the lightsaber is, of course, strictly
done up for what looks good on film, but unless I'm horribly mistaken
it's based on the martial art of Kendo, which is the "practice"
version of Katana fighting using rataan weapons in place of a real
sword.
>Or maybe something along the lines of Gourry's Sword of Light from this fantastic
>comedy anime called "The Slayers".
>
>Basically, it's a hilt that brings forth a magical blade when called upon.
...or Thundarr the Barbarian's Sun Sword.
"Ariel! Ukla! Let's ride!"
"There can't be more than fifty of them. I won't be hurt.)
:-)
Christopher Adams
>>Light from this fantastic comedy anime called "The Slayers".
>>
>>Basically, it's a hilt that brings forth a magical blade when
>>called upon.
>
> ...or Thundarr the Barbarian's Sun Sword.
I think that the producers of "Goltar and the Golden Lance should sue George
Lucas for stealing the design of Darth Maul's saber. Interestingly enough,
though, I've seen a still from the film where Maul is using only one "blade"
. . .
Christopher Adams
>>Light from this fantastic comedy anime called "The Slayers".
>>
>>Basically, it's a hilt that brings forth a magical blade when
>>called upon.
>
> ...or Thundarr the Barbarian's Sun Sword.
I think that the producers of "Goltar and the Golden Lance" should sue
George Lucas for stealing the design of Darth Maul's saber. Interestingly
enough, though, I've seen a still from the film where Maul is using only one
"blade" . . . does he not always use the "staff version"? Don't reply if you
think it would spoil anything.
CK
> "blade" . . . does he not always use the "staff version"? Don't reply if
you
> think it would spoil anything.
I don't think it'll spoil anything to say. In one scene, the staff gets cut
in half, and Maul keeps on fighting with half (which is of course, one
lightsaber).
CK
MARK JOHNSON
CK wrote in message <7io5pp$sng$1...@news.fsu.edu>...
How could it spoil anything after you've already seen the shots and all of
the media hype? The damn book was out (with about 5 different covers, and
also a couple of kids picture versions) before the movie even opened.
I think the double-bladed lightsaber is supposed to be a surprise for the
big final battle. When Maul is introduced, he and Jinn fight briefly, and
IIRC he fought with only one blade.
A'koss
Klaatu B. Nikto <std...@shsu.edu> wrote in message
news:374E0F36...@shsu.edu...
> KiM wrote:
> > Vader is only really wearing armour because he doesn't have a choice in
the
> > matter, a lot of it his life support systems which allow him to breath
etc and
> > make up for injuries he suffered while slaying the various Jedi across
the
> > galaxy.
>
> hold that his final fall occurred after a duel with his former teacher
> Obi-Wan Kenobi. The battle was fierce and Anakin was horribly scarred
> and grievously wounded, all remnants of Anakin had slipped away and he
> was wholly one with the Dark Side. The remains of his shattered body
> were supported by a fearsome armored suit and his burned face was
> covered by the mask of Darth Vader."
Actually, from what I've heard, Anakin takes a lava bath in his fight with
Obi-Wan, but pulls himself free using the Force and suvives on nothing but
hate... The Emperor recovers the body (what little is left of it) and gives
him the armor/replacement limbs.
A'koss!
Floyd Shinn
Naturally, it would use Psionics as the "Force", but what I'm working on is a
multiclass 1st edition Monk/Psionicist. These two classes I've found are
complimentary to each other and actually solve the question of armor (as a Monk
has a natural AC that decreases as level goes up). As soon as I have all the
details hammered out I'll be posting a complete description on this newsgroup.
In fact, I'd very much like some feedback from everyone else on ways to balance
the character, as well as knowledge as to whether this has ever been done.
Here's an interesting twist to consider as well: one of my players and I are
developing a weapon equivilant to the LightSaber. It would be a sword hilt
requiring a special crystal (which the character must quest for, it can never be
given) that would be able to receive PSPs from the character. Once charged, it
could be activated (costing a certain amount of PSPs), emitting a Psi Blade that
would act as a longsword in combat. It would cost a certain amount of PSPs from
the blade for every use (for example, 1 PSP to activate, one PSP per point of
damage dealt in combat). When the PSPs are used up the blade would become
nonfunctioning, and would require recharging by the PC, by funneling PSPs from
himself into the blade. What do you guys think? Please post any questions or
comments you have!
Floyd
Thomas Vincent wrote:
> Greetings All,
> I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
> behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D. I think
> the concept would be kind of cool and give a neat twist to the standard
> game. I have considered just using psionics but have never got around to
> it. I vaguely recall the first person I ever played D&D with did something
> like that way back in the late 70s or early 80s. Unfortunately, I also
> recall he was a bit of a munchkin and it was way too powerful and
> unbalanced. After having seen the way the "Force" is used in the new movie,
> I have decided that it could be done properly and not be out of sync with a
> fantasy setting. Any thoughts?
> --
>
> "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
> [Animal Farm, 1945]
> "Diplomacy (noun): The patriotic art of lying for one's clan."
> (James Ashton, Clan Ventrue)
> arag...@home.com
Woo
news:3751A732...@tntech.edu...
Damn, that's a good idea. Question, though - why does it have to be a
"special" crystal?
Suggestion: they use a regular (ha!) gemstone, one of the more valuable ones
(diamond, ruby, emerald, etc.).
The PC must already have psychic blade. (Assuming that psychic blade hasn't
been changed - I'm using CPsiB and PO:S&P - this limits them to 6th level
or higher.)
If they have Empower (and of course are high enough level), they can create
the sword.
If not, they must seek out a more experienced psionic (NPC, likely) that
DOES and get his assistance somehow, which may require a seperate quest of
some sort.
SirAyastar
Because in all the Star Wars books it's required.
>Suggestion: they use a regular (ha!) gemstone, one of the more valuable
>ones (diamond, ruby, emerald, etc.). The PC must already have psychic
>blade. (Assuming that psychic blade hasn't been changed - I'm using
>CPsiB and PO:S&P - this limits them to 6th level or higher.)
Psychic Blade doesn't really model the lightsabre very well. Dimension
Blade is a much better model. Of course it's a Psychoportation power and
Jedi haven't got much of a rep for poofing around the universe. A
rewritten one for Jedi only with a level requirement would probably
work better.
>If they have Empower (and of course are high enough level), they can
>create the sword.
Ponder, Ponder, Ponder. Anybody who's a Star Wars geek or has one
as a friend will know that to become a true Jedi one must build a lightsabre
of thier own. But requiring Empower would restrict them to 11th level or
higher.
>If not, they must seek out a more experienced psionic
>(NPC, likely) that DOES and get his assistance somehow, which may
>require a seperate quest of some sort.
And would fit the "There's always two, a master and an apprentice." bit
quite nicely.
I'd suggest that Jedi start out with a lightsabre as a psionic item. Start it
out with somewhere around 21 psps stored in it. When the Jedi picks
up the Rectacle power let him increase that stored amount by half the
amount he's gained on a level for each level gained. When he get's
empower let him build his own, adding other powers if he likes (Fighting
Trance and what not) and increasing the stored amount the full amount
each level.
What I'm going for here is letting the Jedi have his little sword but putting
limits on it. Frankly being a Jedi with no lightsabre sucks. Especially if
you limit them on weapon choice and what not. Having to wait until
6 or 9th level to even begin learning that weapon is just horrible.
The Dimension blade power from The Will and the Way. Not a nice
thing:
Dimension Blade
Power Score: Con+1
Initial Cost: 6
Maintenance Cost: 5/round
Range: 0
Preparation Time: 0
Area of Effect: one weapon
Prerequisites: duo-dimension
A psychoporter can use her control of dimensions to make her sword into
an infinitely sharp blade by making it two-dimensional. Almost any
hand-held weapon can be altered with this power, even bludgeoning
weapons such as hammers or maces. Only jointed, chain, or rope weapons
(such as whips, flails, or nunchuks) cannot be made into dimensional
blades.
While this power is in effect, the psionicist's weapon ignores any armor
worn by the victim. Only Dexterity and magical protection apply. For
example, a gladiator with an 18 Dexterity in hide armor is AC 6 instead of
AC 2. In the case of monsters, the DM must decide if the creature's Armor
Class is due to thick, armor-like hide or natural quickness. In addition, the
blade gains a +2 to hit and a +2 to damage rolls. The dimension blade can
also be used to cleanly sever inanimate objects, such as an opponent's
weapon, a stone pillar, or the axle of a wagon. Any object struck by a
dimension blade must make an item saving throw versus disintegration or
be sliced in half.
Power Score: The dimension blade scores double damage in addition to
all other benefits.
20: The weapon the psionicist is trying to affect shatters, inflicting 1d4
damage on the psionicist.
"Nobody ever said anything worth Quoting" --Anonymous
Return my address to its undiluted capitalist state from its present
misguided state, go ahead the computer says you should and the
computer is your friend.............Right?
Michael Scott Brown
>I are developing a weapon equivilant to the LightSaber. It would be a
>It would cost a certain amount of PSPs from the blade for every use
>(for example, 1 PSP to activate, one PSP per point of damage dealt in combat).
That gets too expensive. I wound up doing the following:
Devotion: Lightsabre (Psychokinetic Devotion) MAC 10 Cost: 1+ psp/rnd
This devotion allows the Jedi to activate the lightsaber effect,
creating a weapon of glowing, crackling force energy (the same substance
from which a Wall of Force is created). The force-stuff is razor thin and
vibrates, providing it with impressive cutting power.
The forceblade generated by lightsabre does the same damage as its
standard weapon equivalent. However, it gets +3 Speedfactor/+1 Phase.
For each additional PSP spent *per round*, the Jedi can intensify the
energy level of his weapon and the weapon gains a +1 to hit or to damage.
A power check must be made with a -1 penalty per bonus point to do this.
These plusses are considered magical with regard to enchanted hitting.
After reaching +3/+3, +8 more Psps and a power check of -10
will convert the blade to a weapon of Sharpness.
Example: A character's lightsaber is modelled after a Bastard sword.
When he uses his power, he spends 1 PSP/round to have what is
effectively a Fast bastard sword. Fair, simple. He can increase
his expenditure of PSPs to 7/round to have a Fast bastard sword +3,
but he has to make a power check at -6.
If he needed mega heroics, 15/round gets him a blade of sharpness
if he can make the -10 power check.
Note: for my campaign, I let this devotion convert the blade of
one type of weapon *into* the lightsaber (ie; normal sword,
normal sword .. hey! It's glowing! .. normal sword...), in addition
to bursting the blade from a psionically enchanted artifact such
as is traditional. I wanted the jedi to be able to rely on
a normal weapon for the bulk of his adventuring, reserving the
lightsaber ability for the most dire challenges.
-Michael
Woo
news:19990530222124...@ng-fx1.aol.com...
> >Damn, that's a good idea. Question, though - why does it have to be a
> >"special" crystal?
>
> Because in all the Star Wars books it's required.
That's not my point. Floyd isn't necessarily creating a Jedi (did he say it?
no, he said "multiclass 1st edition Monk/Psionicist").
And I know that Star Wars requires it - but last time I looked, this ain't
Star Wars (idea: Spacejammer Wars.... *nah*).
> Psychic Blade doesn't really model the lightsabre very well. Dimension
> Blade is a much better model. Of course it's a Psychoportation power and
> Jedi haven't got much of a rep for poofing around the universe. A
> rewritten one for Jedi only with a level requirement would probably
> work better.
Possibly, but Dimension Blade requires a regular weapon to work - can't make
air 2D.
> Ponder, Ponder, Ponder. Anybody who's a Star Wars geek or has one
> as a friend will know that to become a true Jedi one must build a
lightsabre
> of thier own. But requiring Empower would restrict them to 11th level or
> higher.
10th level, according to my book - still pretty high, I know - and even if
they acquire help, the psychic blade would still require level six...
> >If not, they must seek out a more experienced psionic
> >(NPC, likely) that DOES and get his assistance somehow, which may
> >require a seperate quest of some sort.
>
> And would fit the "There's always two, a master and an apprentice." bit
> quite nicely.
Sort of - not quite what I had in mind, although if the PC has a "master"
then with my methods he could ask his master.
> "Nobody ever said anything worth Quoting" --Anonymous
Ben Franklin said it, I believe.
SirAyastar
>SirAyastar <siray...@aol.communist> wrote in message
>news:19990530222124...@ng-fx1.aol.com...
>> >Damn, that's a good idea. Question, though - why does it have to be a
>> >"special" crystal?
>>
>> Because in all the Star Wars books it's required.
>
>That's not my point. Floyd isn't necessarily creating a Jedi (did he say it?
>no, he said "multiclass 1st edition Monk/Psionicist").
>And I know that Star Wars requires it - but last time I looked, this ain't
>Star Wars (idea: Spacejammer Wars.... *nah*).
He didn't say it. He (Floyd Shinn) said
"I'm in the middle of developing a character class that would do this."
in response to (Thomas Vincent):
"I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D."
He didn't say he wanted Jedi per se but it was quite obviously implied.
>> Psychic Blade doesn't really model the lightsabre very well.
>> Dimension Blade is a much better model. Of course it's a
>> Psychoportation power and Jedi haven't got much of a rep for poofing
>> around the universe. A rewritten one for Jedi only with a level
>> requirement would probably work better.
>
>Possibly, but Dimension Blade requires a regular weapon to work - can't >make
air 2D.
Like I said slightly modified. Perferrably it'd come from the actual psionic
item I mentioned before so it is possible to disarm these 'Jedi' like people.
However this opens up a good BS opportunity for the crystals. For
whatever reason when they are subjected to the Dim Blade power they
don't change shape themselves but project a 'platonic edge' into the air
in a direction above them. The deal with making the sabre is knowing
how to ensure the edge goes in the right direction and is movable without
slicing yourself to bits. All BS but it'd work.
>> Ponder, Ponder, Ponder. Anybody who's a Star Wars geek or has
>> one as a friend will know that to become a true Jedi one must build a
>> lightsabre of thier own. But requiring Empower would restrict them to
>> 11th level or higher.
>
>10th level, according to my book - still pretty high, I know - and even if
>they acquire help, the psychic blade would still require level six...
You don't get a science at 10th level. There is no mention of 'reserving'
slots and a case could be made for allowing it or not. Reserving them for
powers which by the standard write-up require a high level slot makes
me leery. If it's mentioned in S&P I'll stand corrected, uncaring but
corrected.
>> >If not, they must seek out a more experienced psionic
>> >(NPC, likely) that DOES and get his assistance somehow, which may
>> >require a seperate quest of some sort.
>>
>> And would fit the "There's always two, a master and an apprentice." bit
>> quite nicely.
>
>Sort of - not quite what I had in mind, although if the PC has a "master"
>then with my methods he could ask his master.
True and it seems to be par for the course to get a sabre from your
master beforehand.
>> "Nobody ever said anything worth Quoting" --Anonymous
>
>Ben Franklin said it, I believe.
I'm unaware of it if he did. Sounds like him though. Besides I like the
inherant irony in the manner it's written here.
"Nobody ever said anything worth Quoting" --Anonymous
Return my address to its undiluted capitalist state from its present
Zachary Zulkowski
the "Force" is a chanelling power and psionics isn't.
another hmm,
doing a "Star Wars" campaing translated into Ad&d tech level....
Have the main government be the "Republic", another one the "Trade
Federation".
(easier than it looks, SW is heroic fantasy after all.)
Auric
> >> Ponder, Ponder, Ponder. Anybody who's a Star Wars geek or has
> >> one as a friend will know that to become a true Jedi one must
build a
> >> lightsabre of thier own. But requiring Empower would restrict
them to
> >> 11th level or higher.
> >
> >10th level, according to my book - still pretty high, I know - and
even if
> >they acquire help, the psychic blade would still require level
six...
>
> You don't get a science at 10th level. There is no mention of
'reserving'
> slots and a case could be made for allowing it or not. Reserving
them for
> powers which by the standard write-up require a high level slot
makes
> me leery. If it's mentioned in S&P I'll stand corrected, uncaring
but
> corrected.
No, you're right - S&P says that they get one at 8th, then one at
11th.
That means that either they somehow hold out that new science for two
full levels (requiring 300,000 experience points, not to mention DM's
approval) or else they wait until level 11 (requiring 200,000
experience points, from 10 to 11). Either way, that's a pretty long
time. *IF* you did it by the book.
Alternatively, there could be a skill maybe - "craft lightsaber"
perhaps, or a specialized combination of weaponsmith and maybe
jeweler- that could be combined with a lower-level version of empower
to allow the budding jedi to build his lightsaber.
*OR* - perhaps they start with a reguler sword and dimension blade
(which requires duo-dimension). At level 6, they gain psychic blade
and thusly are able to "power" their sword. Finally, at level 11 they
gain empower and are able to complete their blades. This remains
within standard D&D rules without having to create specialized
psionics and such - and in this case, rather than having to quest for
the special crystal, the psionicist would instead be able to directly
empower the weapon itself - no crystal needed.
-- Auric
Je casserai la gueuele à cette putain de machine!
(I'm going to beat the sh*t out of this f*cking machine!)
Auric
news:tIh43.29424$M12....@news.rdc1.bc.wave.home.com...
That's what I heard - that battle 'tween Obi-wok (oops, sorry -
Obi-WAN) and Vader occurs on the rim of an active volcano. It blows up
(or perhaps it's an earthquake of related origin), Kenobi falls out,
Vader falls in and is crisped.
Be interesting to see how they pull that one past the censors without
an "R" rating...
Franz & Michael Köttl
> >But consider, that cotton wears out faster than canvas or linen. For a
poor
> >farmer on a desert planet this is an important consideration. Luke wears
> the
> >working clothes of a peasant on a desert planet.
> >He just never got time for a change :-)
>
>
> Mwahaha . . . he was wearing canvas ALL THE TIME! Except when he was in
that
> hokey flightsuit :)
Day 1: travelling in working clothes to find R2-D2, later to Mos Eisley
(inbetween no time to change from working clothing to good clothing, and BTW
they are all burned;)
Day 2: travel to Alderaan (or its remains) - still no new clothing in sight,
captured on death-star, change to stormtrooper-uniform and change back to
only other clothing you have (guess? yes! Tatooine-peasant-working
clothes:-)
Day 3: arrive at Rebel base and change to pilot-overall
Day 4: victory ceremony with new, yellow leather jacket, white shirt and
black trouser (IIRC)
daryn brown
Auric wrote:
> That's what I heard - that battle 'tween Obi-wok (oops, sorry -
> Obi-WAN) and Vader occurs on the rim of an active volcano. It blows up
> (or perhaps it's an earthquake of related origin), Kenobi falls out,
> Vader falls in and is crisped.
>
Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
DB3 "...fly you fools..."
Some guy you met before
and upon receiving it, gives it to someone else??
"The quest is go upstairs without tripping on any of the steps, and get
it!"
Floyd Shinn (frs...@tntech.edu) wrote:
: I'm in the middle of developing a character class that would do this.
: Naturally, it would use Psionics as the "Force", but what I'm working on is a
: multiclass 1st edition Monk/Psionicist. These two classes I've found are
: complimentary to each other and actually solve the question of armor (as a Monk
: has a natural AC that decreases as level goes up). As soon as I have all the
: details hammered out I'll be posting a complete description on this newsgroup.
: In fact, I'd very much like some feedback from everyone else on ways to balance
: the character, as well as knowledge as to whether this has ever been done.
: Here's an interesting twist to consider as well: one of my players and I are
: developing a weapon equivilant to the LightSaber. It would be a sword hilt
: requiring a special crystal (which the character must quest for, it can never be
: given) that would be able to receive PSPs from the character. Once charged, it
: could be activated (costing a certain amount of PSPs), emitting a Psi Blade that
: would act as a longsword in combat. It would cost a certain amount of PSPs from
: the blade for every use (for example, 1 PSP to activate, one PSP per point of
: damage dealt in combat). When the PSPs are used up the blade would become
: nonfunctioning, and would require recharging by the PC, by funneling PSPs from
: himself into the blade. What do you guys think? Please post any questions or
: comments you have!
: Floyd
: Thomas Vincent wrote:
: > Greetings All,
: > I was curious if anyone has ever converted the philosophy and ideas
: > behind the "Force" from Star Wars into a workable format for D&D. I think
Floyd Shinn
Some guy you met before wrote:
> What do you mean, it can never be given? What if someone quests for it,
> and upon receiving it, gives it to someone else??
>
> "The quest is go upstairs without tripping on any of the steps, and get
> it!"
<snip>
> It would be a sword hilt, requiring a special crystal (which the character must
> quest for, it can never be given) that would be able to receive PSPs from the
> character.
<snip>
For a few reasons:
1. It would have to be an extremely RARE and VALUABLE jem, as that is required for the
Receptacle Discipline (or Empower, but I'm working on a way around that).
2. It would be an initiation rite. To become a Jedi, every initiate must build his own
LightSaber. In a similar vein, every Psionic Monk (J'Dai) would be required to
construct his own PsiBlade.
3. As the gem is rare and valuable--perhaps even a certain gem that is valuable for no
other reason: it could be extremely ugly, but would have the "psionic potential"
required for the PsiBlade--it would probably be located in far off lands, in
forbidding areas, etc. This would be left up to the DM. This would provide an
excellent adventure hook for DM's, and provide a sense of accomplishment for the
player.
All this said, I suppose it COULD be given, by someone who had just found it, but I'd
say that only those interested in the quick and easy path (Dark side, anyone???) would
accept it.
Floyd
Floyd Shinn
> 2. It would be an initiation rite. To become a Jedi, every initiate must build his own
> LightSaber. In a similar vein, every Psionic Monk (J'Dai) would be required to
> construct his own PsiBlade.
I forgot to mention, that in the class I'm building, the PC isn't allowed to be called a
J'Dai until around 5th level, at which time he should have completed his PsiBlade. This
isn't a requirement, of course, as some may not prefer to use a PsiBlade. But it is a
right of passage into the ranks of J'Dai
Floyd
Auric
news:3755168B...@ElSegundo.ncr.com...
> Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
um......
Who's Gandalf?
Arivne
One of the major characters in J.R.R. Tolkien's books: "The Hobbit" and
The Lord of the Rings trilogy (The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two
Towers, The Return of the King). His story is way too long to go into in
detail, so for full information you should read the books.
The short version is that he was the main organizer of resistance to the
evil Dark Lord Sauron's attempt to conquer Middle Earth. He had magical
powers (sort of like a mage, but never shown fully) and had an quirky
personality (sometimes arrogant, sometimes friendly). He looked and
sounded a lot like Elminster in the FR setting.
In the Fellowship of the Ring he fought a powerful monster called a
Balrog (which appeared in early DnD before legal problems forced TSR to
change it to the Balor Type VI demon). During the combat he and the
Balrog fell into a deep pit, and he did not appear again until the next
book (The Two Towers).
Arivne
Sean Callahan
Auric wrote...
> > Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
>
> um......
> Who's Gandalf?
PHILLISTINE! [gva]
But seriously...he was the wizard in "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the
Rings."
-sc (Stilvin)
Master of Trivia
Larry Mead
: daryn brown <d...@ElSegundo.ncr.com> wrote in message
: news:3755168B...@ElSegundo.ncr.com...
: um......
: Who's Gandalf?
You've got to be kidding, right?
DMgorgon
--
Lawrence R. Mead Ph.D. (Lawren...@usm.edu)
Eschew Obfuscation! Espouse Elucidation!
www-dept.usm.edu/~physics/mead.html
Craig T. Dalrymple
Arivne wrote in message <37565C30...@home.com>...
>
>
>Auric wrote:
>>
>> daryn brown <d...@ElSegundo.ncr.com> wrote in message
>> news:3755168B...@ElSegundo.ncr.com...
>> > Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
>>
>> um......
>> Who's Gandalf?
>He looked and
>sounded a lot like Elminster in the FR setting.
>
>Arivne
Not to be entirely too picky but Elminster looks and sounds a lot like
Gandalf! We know which came first in this chicken and egg question!!! :)
Craig
Paul Suliin
says...
> Auric (stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com) wrote:
> : um......
> : Who's Gandalf?
>
> You've got to be kidding, right?
Sadly, Larry, he may not be.
>SET CODGERMODE = ON
Young players today aren't raised on the meat and potatoes of heroic
fantasy like you and I were. They're as likely to learn about AD&D
through a Dragonlance novel as they are to finish the Lord of the Rings
and think "Wow! How can *I* do some of those things?"
I tell you, if kids today had to come up the hard way, like we
did...walking to the gaming store ten miles through the snow. Uphill.
Both ways! They'd have some respect for us old gamers then, you betcha.
>SET CODGERMODE = OFF
Basically, Tolkien's estate needs to come out with a new edition <G>.
--Paul
--
Fred Flintstone was a Hanna-Barbarian.
Lan
Auric wrote in message <04q53.13838$Fz2....@news.rdc1.az.home.com>...
>daryn brown <d...@ElSegundo.ncr.com> wrote in message
>news:3755168B...@ElSegundo.ncr.com...
>> Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
>
>um......
>Who's Gandalf?
>
>
I am Gandalf, and Gandalf is ME!!!
A wizard stronger than Elminster....
( -- Hobbit - J.R.R. Tolkein -- Also Lord of the Rings Trilogy - and
Similarrion )
Erik Ward
stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com says...
>
>daryn brown <d...@ElSegundo.ncr.com> wrote in message
>news:3755168B...@ElSegundo.ncr.com...
>> Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
>
>um......
>Who's Gandalf?
>
>
Is this one of the trolls in front of the balrog? Or is this a serious
question?
I just have a hard time fathoming playing AD&D and NOT knowing who Gandalf is.
In the event this is not a troll, read the granddaddy of all fantasy -- _The
Lord of the Rings_ triloge and _The Hobbit_, by J.R.R. Tolkien. All questions
will be answered therein (regarding Gandalf, balrogs, etc)
the Nightshade,
Erik Ward
John J Jackson
> > Sounds like Gandalf and the Balrog to me...
>
> um......
> Who's Gandalf?
>
--
John Jackson
jjac...@umail.ucsb.edu
Larry Mead
: In article <7j5pq0$spo$5...@thorn.cc.usm.edu>, lrm...@orca.st.usm.edu
: says...
: > Auric (stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com) wrote:
: > : um......
: > : Who's Gandalf?
: >
: > You've got to be kidding, right?
: Sadly, Larry, he may not be.
: >SET CODGERMODE = ON
: Young players today aren't raised on the meat and potatoes of heroic
: fantasy like you and I were. They're as likely to learn about AD&D
: through a Dragonlance novel as they are to finish the Lord of the Rings
: and think "Wow! How can *I* do some of those things?"
: I tell you, if kids today had to come up the hard way, like we
: did...walking to the gaming store ten miles through the snow. Uphill.
: Both ways! They'd have some respect for us old gamers then, you betcha.
: >SET CODGERMODE = OFF
: Basically, Tolkien's estate needs to come out with a new edition <G>.
: --Paul
From one curmudgeon to another, that's a marvelous idea. With the advent
of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
into (a trilogy) of movies.
Christopher Adams
Tolkien. I find his books unreadable and his fantasy world cliched -
although I know the reason for that last is most likely that I read too many
rip-offs before I tried to read Tolkien himself.
To be REALLY honest, and at the risk of branding myself flamebait, I will
declare that I find Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance novels to be far more
entertaining, pleasurable to read, and just plain cool than anything Tolkien
wrote. Except maybe for the long version of "Hey Diddle Diddle."
Undying, migrating elves indeed . . .
Christopher Adams
A man of no fortune, and with a name to come.
And the Raven, never flitting, still is sitting, *still* is sitting,
On the pallid bust of Pallas just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming,
And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;
And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted - nevermore!
Ac4851
>of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
>into (a trilogy) of movies.
i'm about 90% certain that it is already in the works in some form. don't ask
me about details, paltry things that they are.... just buzz i've been hearing..
live action btw
andy
CK
> i'm about 90% certain that it is already in the works in some form. don't
ask
> me about details, paltry things that they are.... just buzz i've been
hearing..
> live action btw
Tis true:
http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/lordoftherings.html
CK
Staffan Johansson
> From one curmudgeon to another, that's a marvelous idea. With the advent
> of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
> into (a trilogy) of movies.
It's already in the works. They're being filmed in New Zealand, with
Peter Jackson (AFAIK, no relation to Steve) directing.
--
Staffan Johansson (bal...@geocities.com)
"There was always something that needed transferring from A to B or, of
course, to the bottom of the C."
-- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather.
Brvheart
Larry Mead <lrm...@orca.st.usm.edu> wrote in message
news:7j8f8c$41e$5...@thorn.cc.usm.edu...
> Paul Suliin (bes...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> : In article <7j5pq0$spo$5...@thorn.cc.usm.edu>, lrm...@orca.st.usm.edu
> : says...
> : > Auric (stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com) wrote:
> : > : um......
> : > : Who's Gandalf?
> : >
> : > You've got to be kidding, right?
>
> : Sadly, Larry, he may not be.
>
> : >SET CODGERMODE = ON
> : Young players today aren't raised on the meat and potatoes of heroic
> : fantasy like you and I were. They're as likely to learn about AD&D
> : through a Dragonlance novel as they are to finish the Lord of the Rings
> : and think "Wow! How can *I* do some of those things?"
>
> : I tell you, if kids today had to come up the hard way, like we
> : did...walking to the gaming store ten miles through the snow. Uphill.
> : Both ways! They'd have some respect for us old gamers then, you betcha.
> : >SET CODGERMODE = OFF
>
> : Basically, Tolkien's estate needs to come out with a new edition <G>.
>
> : --Paul
>
> of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
> into (a trilogy) of movies.
>
> --
> Lawrence R. Mead Ph.D. (Lawren...@usm.edu)
> Eschew Obfuscation! Espouse Elucidation!
> www-dept.usm.edu/~physics/mead.html
I could see them remade myself, but I do own copies of the Lord of the Rings
and The Return of the King
on video.
Brvheart
Patrick M. Berry
> Paul Suliin (bes...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> : Basically, Tolkien's estate needs to come out with a new edition <G>.
>
> From one curmudgeon to another, that's a marvelous idea. With the advent
> of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
> into (a trilogy) of movies.
It is being done. The first film is in preproduction at this moment.
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie.htm
mike
there is a triology of movies in the works. Live action being filmed in
England I believe. Personally I'm looking forward to theses movies. I
can't wait to see a cgi Golem. Yess my pressiouss, you naught Baginess
Brvheart wrote:
>
> Larry Mead <lrm...@orca.st.usm.edu> wrote in message
> news:7j8f8c$41e$5...@thorn.cc.usm.edu...
> > Paul Suliin (bes...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> > : In article <7j5pq0$spo$5...@thorn.cc.usm.edu>, lrm...@orca.st.usm.edu
> > : says...
> > : > Auric (stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com) wrote:
> > : > : um......
> > : > : Who's Gandalf?
> > : >
> > : > You've got to be kidding, right?
> >
> > : Sadly, Larry, he may not be.
> >
> > : >SET CODGERMODE = ON
> > : Young players today aren't raised on the meat and potatoes of heroic
> > : fantasy like you and I were. They're as likely to learn about AD&D
> > : through a Dragonlance novel as they are to finish the Lord of the Rings
> > : and think "Wow! How can *I* do some of those things?"
> >
> > : I tell you, if kids today had to come up the hard way, like we
> > : did...walking to the gaming store ten miles through the snow. Uphill.
> > : Both ways! They'd have some respect for us old gamers then, you betcha.
> > : >SET CODGERMODE = OFF
> >
> > : Basically, Tolkien's estate needs to come out with a new edition <G>.
> >
> > : --Paul
> >
> > From one curmudgeon to another, that's a marvelous idea. With the advent
> > of computer aided cinematography, it is about time that these be made
> > into (a trilogy) of movies.
> >
Christopher Adams
shooting in New Zealand. As far as I know, they aren't actually filming yet,
but casting is supposedly underway - Tom Baker has screentested for Gandalf,
according to an oft-repeated rumour.
Ac4851
>but casting is supposedly underway - Tom Baker has screentested for Gandalf,
>according to an oft-repeated rumour.
this would be interesting.... do you think he could play it straight enough?
obviously he could do the impish humor standing on his head....
andy
Severion8
Have you ever seen his movie "Freaks", he can more than pull off a straight
role.
Severion
Lost from the sight of common eye
Hidden from viewing or from spy
I am unseen, i am not found
Until my voice drops veil to ground
Robert Baldwin
<ad...@syd.comcen.com.au> wrote:
>I'm going to have to be honest and say that I really, really don't like
>Tolkien. I find his books unreadable and his fantasy world cliched -
>although I know the reason for that last is most likely that I read too many
>rip-offs before I tried to read Tolkien himself.
>
>To be REALLY honest, and at the risk of branding myself flamebait, I will
>declare that I find Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance novels to be far more
>entertaining, pleasurable to read, and just plain cool than anything Tolkien
>wrote. Except maybe for the long version of "Hey Diddle Diddle."
>
>Undying, migrating elves indeed . . .
Flamebait? No, just pitiable.
I suspect that the lack of enthusiasm for Tolkien in our hobby's newer
participants is a combination of bad rip-offs and the poor quality of
(US) educational institutions which leave their victims ill-prepared
for reading anything more complex than USA Today. <sigh>
--
Saint Baldwin, definer of the unholy darkspawn.
"Everyone dies someday; the trick is doing it well."
"Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out" [MSB].
-
Spam Satan! www.sluggy.com
Remove the spam-block to reply
CK
> I suspect that the lack of enthusiasm for Tolkien in our hobby's newer
participants is a combination of bad rip-offs and the poor quality of (US)
educational institutions which leave their victims ill-prepared for reading
anything more complex than USA Today. <sigh>
Ah, oh great one St. Baldwin. Allow me to bow to your superior taste. No
one is allowed to dislike Tolkien in your eyes, because of US education.
Let me just tell you.... there is a thing such as personal preference or
taste. Because one does not like Tolkien does not mean that they are wrong.
It is called an OPINION. There is nothing in the world that everyone likes,
and it doesn't make those people wrong.
In addition, as a student (and former student), I am insulted by your
comments on U.S. education. It's always interesting to note that media
always focuses on problem schools. I can tell you there are a lot of
exceptions to this "rule" that American schools are not a good place for
learning. I (not to toot my own horn too much) am an extremely fast reader
who has read a variety of different books on a plethora of subjects. In
fact, I would say there are few people in my state that read as much as I do
(I've won several contests for comprehensive book reading in places I've
lived). There are many people like me, and I find that comments like your
own from people uneducated on schooling in every area of the United States
is an insult to myself and other students.
There are problems with education in the U.S., yes. That does not make the
fact that some do not like Tolkien wrong, nor does it make them uneducated
clods.
CK
CK
example of education, I have to say that it should have been "are an insult
to myself..."
Sidhain
very weak characterizations.
99% of "Game" related fiction is just like it, the characters have little or
no personality besides what could be defined on a character sheet (the
Official AD&D sheets) They uses way to much "Deux es Machina" and pretty
much lack any real orginality. NOt all Game tied novels are like this. Some
are better but Dragonlance is not one that was any better than the rest...
Weis and Hickmen have written other books that are good. But Dragonlance was
Pathetic IMO.
Sidhain
>fact that some do not like Tolkien wrong, nor does it make them uneducated
>clods.
Well as an American and a college student I'd probably agree Not liking
Tolkien is probably a sign of some form of deficit, whether it's
intelligence, imagination, or just taste....depends on EACH person.
I have met people who don't like Tolkien for a number of reasons, and for
the most part I can't say much for their intellect, but those are people I
have met, it does not mean everyone who reads and Dislikes Tolkien are
stupid...
Paul Suliin
says...
> I'm one of the most widely-read people of my age (eighteen) that I know. I'm
> not trying to brag; I just want to set it straight from the start that I'm
> not some immature, inexperienced kid raised on nothing but pulp crap. I'm a
> huge fan of Shakespeare and even Stephen King :)
I do think, Christopher, that you need to give Tolkien a decent chance.
He is a meticulous storyteller, with a depth that it sometimes takes
several readings to appreciate. And yes, he can seem cliched -- mainly
because so many people since his time have tried to imitate him. But he
was among the first, and still among the greatest.
Paul Suliin
sid...@earthlink.net says...
> Personally I found Dragonlance by Weis and Hickman, poorly plotted, with
> very weak characterizations.
> 99% of "Game" related fiction is just like it, the characters have little or
> no personality besides what could be defined on a character sheet (the
> Official AD&D sheets)
I'd tend to agree, though I might not be *quite* as hard on game fiction
as you are. And some of the Shadowrun books are actually quite decent.
But on the whole, my take on game fiction is that it's not well-written
if you can hear the dice rolling.
Paul Suliin
transparent imitation of Tolkien, don't you? Or perhaps you don't, if
you've never actually read the Lord of the Rings. I never cared for
Shannara myself, because I had read "the original" and so found them
wanting.
It's unfortunate that a teacher tried to force-feed you the Hobbit.
First of all, any book a student is ordered to read automatically has a
large hill to climb in getting him to like it. And second the Hobbit is
not one of Tolkien's best works. It was written for children perhaps a
bit younger than 7th grade (4th or 5th grade, I would guess), and
especially for a bright student in the 7th grade it doesn't present much
challenge. I read it myself when I was about 12, then read the Lord of
the Rings about a year later, and re-read them about once a year
thereafter until I was in college. I'd strongly recommend that you read
LotR first, *then* The Hobbit if you want a bit of back-story. And bear
in mind that LotR doesn't really hit its stride (or its Strider -- little
in-joke there) until about page 100.
I do know that most younger gamers cut their teeth on Tolkien's many
imitators, as you did with the Shannara series. That was the half-
serious kernel behind by joking comment to Larry. But it's never too
late to go back and see what the fuss is about.
CK
"Well as an American and a college student I'd probably agree Not liking
Tolkien is probably a sign of some form of deficit, whether it's
Well, I would like to clarify that I do like Tolkien. I own a lot of
Tolkien and Tolkien inspired works. But really, I don't believe it's wrong
to dislike Tolkien. For example, I use my friend, who shall remain
nameless. He doesn't like Tolkien (I asked), he goes to Harvard, he was our
DM for many years (with the best campaign out of all of the ones my friend
ran), and he like a lot of the better fantasy that is recommended by people
in this newsgroup. I don't think he has a lack of intelligence,
imagination, or taste, just because he dislikes Tolkien. People don't like
Shakespeare, people don't like Dickens, people don't like a variety of
writers, who are geniuses in their own rights. That doesn't make those
people stupid, it doesn't make them unimaginative, and it doesn't mean they
necessarily have bad taste. It's just a matter of like and dislike.
Floyd Shinn
with people who don't like one book or the other, and those that don't like
Tolkien are certainly entitled to their opinion (even if they're wrong!). And I
agree that most game related fiction is crap with recycled characters. Hell,
most ppular authors like Clancy, King, and the like all use the same characters
with different names. But when you say that DRAGONLANCE had poor characters, I
simply cannot remain silent! I personally loved Dragonlance BECAUSE of the
characters, especially Fizban, Sturm, Laurana, and Tasslehoff. I thought most
characters were well fleshed out and interesting, although I'll admit that some
did seem a little cliche. Regardless, each of the characters had a distinct
personality, with their own motives and desires in the books. Certainly beats
any Stephen King (or worse, Piers Anthony!!) novels where characters are all the
same with different names.
Sidhain wrote:
> Personally I found Dragonlance by Weis and Hickman, poorly plotted, with
> very weak characterizations.
> 99% of "Game" related fiction is just like it, the characters have little or
> no personality besides what could be defined on a character sheet (the
Christopher Adams
>>for Gandalf, according to an oft-repeated rumour.
>
enough?
I think Mr. Baker is eminently capable of doing the "meaningful
pronouncement" stuff . . . :)
Christopher Adams
A man of no fortune, and with a name to come.
An old, mad, blind, despised, and dying king -
Princes, the dregs of their dull race, who flow
Through public scorn - mud from a muddy spring;
Rulers who neither see, nor feel, nor know,
But leechlike to their fainting country cling,
Till they drop, blind in blood, without a blow.
Christopher Adams
>I suspect that the lack of enthusiasm for Tolkien in our hobby's newer
>participants is a combination of bad rip-offs and the poor quality of
>(US) educational institutions which leave their victims ill-prepared
>for reading anything more complex than USA Today. <sigh>
Good work, St. Baldwin. Check the origin of my messages next time. I've
never even set foot in a US territory.
I'm one of the most widely-read people of my age (eighteen) that I know. I'm
not trying to brag; I just want to set it straight from the start that I'm
not some immature, inexperienced kid raised on nothing but pulp crap. I'm a
huge fan of Shakespeare and even Stephen King :)
I have read some of Tolkien, and what I said in my original post stands.
mike
>
> I'm going to have to be honest and say that I really, really don't like
> Tolkien. I find his books unreadable and his fantasy world cliched -
> although I know the reason for that last is most likely that I read too many
> rip-offs before I tried to read Tolkien himself.
>
> To be REALLY honest, and at the risk of branding myself flamebait, I will
> declare that I find Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance novels to be far more
> entertaining, pleasurable to read, and just plain cool than anything Tolkien
> wrote.
by far surpasses them in story, depth, and sheer wonder. This is not
to say tolkien is without falt he does tend to ramble on in his
descriptions who needs 4 pages to describe a forest?
W and H are fantasy light very enjoyable to read but no body.
Auric
news:MPG.11c059024...@news.earthlink.net...<quotes me...>
> > You've got to be kidding, right?
>
> Sadly, Larry, he may not be.
>
> >SET CODGERMODE = ON
> Young players today aren't raised on the meat and potatoes of heroic
> fantasy like you and I were. They're as likely to learn about AD&D
Rings
> and think "Wow! How can *I* do some of those things?"
> >SET CODGERMODE = OFF
SET %CUDGELMODE%=THUD
My "heroic fantasy" isn't *nearly* as boring as the Hobbit series - I
was supposed to read _The Hobbit_ back about 7th grade or so - maybe a
bit later, maybe not - and I put the book down halfway into the first
chapter and decided to take a failing grade on that part.
Why? Because it's *DRY AS CHALK.* (to me, anyway)
The heroic fantasy that I started off with was (as is normal for *my*
generation) Star Wars - but I didn't read the books until I was in
high-school. The heroic fantasy that I first read was _Sword of
Shannara_ (again, back in 7th grade) and it absolutely gripped me.
Once I had read that, I just *had* to read _Elfstones_ and _Wishsong_.
I was saddened by the demise of the druid, I was heartened by the
various victories, blah blah blah. When the second Shannara series
came out (in high-school) I rushed out to buy those - and had to wait
two weeks; they were sold out. I moved on to other series, most
notably the Pug series (the actual name of which I can never remember)
but I *NEVER* *EVER* even thought of trying the Hobbit series.
My introduction to D&D came much earlier than that, though. A friend
invited me over to try out this "new" kind of game he had found. It
was something called "Dungeons and Dragons." (Of course, I immediately
thought of the cartoon...) I went over to give it a try, and next
thing I know my mother's calling me up, telling me I'm late for
dinner.
Did I like this interesting game that had no boards, no pieces to move
around, and 42 different kinds of dice? You bet. I spent time in
school working out uses for spells, ways to enter cities unseen, evil
empires. My art classes saw me creating various (and usually totally
unrecognizable - I have the artistic ability of a slug) D&D-type
stuff. If we were to spend the day drawing, I'd often make a funky
dungeon map. (This was in grade school - after 6th grade I never again
took an art class.) When I moved on to computer classes, instead of
doing the things the teacher wanted us to (i.e. 10 PRINT "This is a
computer. It can do many things." - actual line from the book) I'd be
trying to write a random character creator. In drafting class, when we
were supposed to be working on perspective, I'd give it as perspective
from a bend in a tunnel.
But I *NEVER* *EVER* even thought of the Hobbit series.
SET %CUDGELMODE%=WHACK
So there - nyaaah.
-- Auric
Je casserai la gueuele à cette putain de machine!
KiM
> Flamebait? No, just pitiable.
> I suspect that the lack of enthusiasm for Tolkien in our hobby's newer
> participants is a combination of bad rip-offs and the poor quality of
> (US) educational institutions which leave their victims ill-prepared
> for reading anything more complex than USA Today. <sigh>
Actually I think the lack of enthusiasm for Tolkien comes from personal taste
rather than reading ability. Anyone who wants to play AD&D regularly had better
be able to read and understand complex passages of text otherwise he's never
going to get through a rule book.
That and in my experience if people really enjoy reading then once they find
something they like they teach themselves how to, my own brother is now working
his way through the familiy collection of novels by Robert Ludlum, Wilbur Smith
and Tom Clancy after he taught himself how to read with comic books (he was a
high school drop out). The first real novel he read was by Ludlum.
Put simple Tolkien is an author of the old school of literature and his books
read very much like historical essays on the world of which he writes.
Personally I enjoyed the Hobbit and think it's a great novel, but I never got
into The Lord of Rings because I felt he got to caught up with his meticulous
details that Tolkien fans love.
Personally I prefer a little more movement, action etc to happen in my books and
find it painful to read 10 pages about how a town was designed, just the same as
I find it painful to read 10 pages describing a five minute sword fight between
Drizzt and Atremis, but a Tolkien fan friend of mine in the group thinks those
are the best parts of Bob Salvatore's books.
That and timing is important. If you're a fantasy buff, you probably already
know a lot of the information described in Tolkien's books because when he wrote
them, he was breaking new ground and he needed to explain to people what elves
were and how they lived. Many of the being in his books (elves, dwarves,
hobbits and goblins) have become the archetypes for fantasy.
If you started you interest in fantasy by playing AD&D, reading all about elves
(especailly now they have things like The Complete Book of Elves etc), reading a
few game novels etc then picked up Tolkien you'd find a lot of what you've read
about through all the other books all compressed into pages of unending
information. However if you started on Tolkien, you'd probably find him much
more interesting.
All depends on what rocks your boat. With most younger people today they like a
lot of action, excitement and drama (hence why a lot of modern films are little
more than eyecandy with two bits plots), and while you will find that in
Tolkien's books, you have to wade through masses of static descriptions to get
to it, which is wonderful if like that sort of thing.
--
KiM <q960...@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/7756/index.html
"For those who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like." -
Abraham Lincoln
Dave Harper
<stre...@NOSPAM.hotmail.com> wrote:
>No, you're right - S&P says that they get one at 8th, then one at
>11th.
>That means that either they somehow hold out that new science for two
>full levels (requiring 300,000 experience points, not to mention DM's
>approval) or else they wait until level 11 (requiring 200,000
>experience points, from 10 to 11). Either way, that's a pretty long
>time. *IF* you did it by the book.
An idea might be to have a devotion equal a half-power science
- either the MAC is much worse, or the effects are halved. Then, when
the character learns a science, they can 'upgrade' the power, gaining
a free devotion in its place (so they're like any other psionic of
that level). This would be better, IMHO, to show the creation of new
powers than simply appearing one day. "Hey, look what I can do!"
(fireball) "Um...why didn't you do that yesterday, when the orcs
attacked?" "I didn't know how."
Dave
"I am the cat. You will not say 'HEY!' to me." -Dream
"Something smells good, and I'm not sure if it's me.
<sniff> Yep, it is." -Sharon
"Look! Stop poking holes in my theories!" -Me
"But it's fun! Like popping bubble wrap!" -Heather
Christopher Adams
>He is a meticulous storyteller, with a depth that it sometimes takes
>several readings to appreciate. And yes, he can seem cliched -- mainly
>because so many people since his time have tried to imitate him. But he
>was among the first, and still among the greatest.
Does reading "The Fellowship of the Ring" and halfway through "The Two
Towers" count as a chance?
Sea Wasp
>
> I'm going to have to be honest and say that I really, really don't like
> Tolkien. I find his books unreadable and his fantasy world cliched -
> although I know the reason for that last is most likely that I read too many
> rip-offs before I tried to read Tolkien himself.
>
> To be REALLY honest, and at the risk of branding myself flamebait, I will
> declare that I find Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance novels to be far more
> entertaining, pleasurable to read, and just plain cool than anything Tolkien
>
> Undying, migrating elves indeed . . .
If you find it cliche'd, as you say, it's because you aren't doing what
a REALLY well-read person does with such literature; read it in the
context of when it was written. Were Tolkien's concepts original? In
their essence, no. Tolkien was attempting to write a mythology which was
peculiarly suited to England, which had virtually no native myth cycles
(save possibly the Arthur legend). Therefore, he incorporated his
knowledge of history, linguistics, and other mythologies to create a
myth cycle which used the English sensibilities and combined them with
the archetypal elements common to all ancient mythologies. He used and
smoothly combined material from Celtic, Judeo-Christian, Greek, and
Norse mythology into a unified whole, in an effort that has not been
matched to this day. It took him 40 years, so it's not surprising.
As far as "fun to read", that's always a matter of taste. The first
Dragonlance books I find fun to read. The LotR is harder going; it's
written with a considerably larger vocabulary and assumes a different
class of readership. The Hobbit is somewhat easier, although it assumes
yet another class of reader; it's written more for the old-style English
child than for a modern American adolescent (there's a considerable
similarity between the Hobbit's writing style and the style of, say, E.
Nesbit). However, I get much more enjoyment out of LotR because there is
FAR more depth to the world. DLance is a very nice RPG world, but any
depth it has is a very, very pale echo of Tolkien's -- and it owes an
immense debt TO Tolkien for whatever depth it has. This is NOT to say
that Dragonlance is, as many snobs would have it, utterly unoriginal and
without merit; it has some entertaining and sometimes even original
moments. However, DLance and most of the other fantasy on the market
would not exist had not Tolkien existed... and been SUCCESSFUL with his
work.
Tolkien's writing is much more leisurely paced, and draws on a huge
body of work which we only really got to see after his death. It is this
which makes LotR a much more solid work than essentially anything which
has come since. By comparison, I've spent over 20 years working on my
own world, Zarathan, but despite the fact that it's quite detailed and
worked out on many levels, it STILL can't come close to what Tolkien
achieved, and would not even exist had Lord of the Rings not been
written.
--
Sea Wasp http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.html
/^\
;;; _Morgantown: The Jason Wood Chronicles_, at
http://www.hyperbooks.com/catalog/20040.html
Sea Wasp
>
> >I do think, Christopher, that you need to give Tolkien a decent chance.
> >He is a meticulous storyteller, with a depth that it sometimes takes
> >several readings to appreciate. And yes, he can seem cliched -- mainly
> >because so many people since his time have tried to imitate him. But he
> >was among the first, and still among the greatest.
>
> Does reading "The Fellowship of the Ring" and halfway through "The Two
> Towers" count as a chance?
Perhaps. You should know that while we think of it as three books,
Tolkien considered Lord of the Rings a SINGLE book with three parts.
I'll also admit that I find "The Two Towers" to be the hardest part of
LotR to read; it, like many other things, suffers from Mid-Trilogy
syndrome.
Larry Mead
: I'm going to have to be honest and say that I really, really don't like
: Tolkien. I find his books unreadable and his fantasy world cliched -
: although I know the reason for that last is most likely that I read too many
: rip-offs before I tried to read Tolkien himself.
: To be REALLY honest, and at the risk of branding myself flamebait, I will
: declare that I find Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance novels to be far more
: entertaining, pleasurable to read, and just plain cool than anything Tolkien
: wrote. Except maybe for the long version of "Hey Diddle Diddle."
Odd - I find just the reverse: Tolkien is the original, clever fantasy
tale, and Dragonlance simply puts me to sleep.
[snip]
Larry Mead
: >I do think, Christopher, that you need to give Tolkien a decent chance.
: >He is a meticulous storyteller, with a depth that it sometimes takes
: >several readings to appreciate. And yes, he can seem cliched -- mainly
: >because so many people since his time have tried to imitate him. But he
: >was among the first, and still among the greatest.
: Does reading "The Fellowship of the Ring" and halfway through "The Two
: Towers" count as a chance?
No - you must finish them. :)
DMGorgon
Ian R Malcomson
>: Does reading "The Fellowship of the Ring" and halfway through "The Two
>: Towers" count as a chance?
>
>No - you must finish them. :)
Then read The Silmarillion, and *then* re-read LotR. That's a fair
chance :-)
--
Ian R Malcomson
"Children weep and widows wail; our education systems fail; to hide our guilt we
build more jails; and we shall build still more" - Motorhead, "March or Die"
Domicus Website, for all things Ian R Malcomson: http://www.domicus.demon.co.uk
Ian R Malcomson
>Tolkien was attempting to write a mythology which was
>peculiarly suited to England, which had virtually no native myth cycles
>(save possibly the Arthur legend).
Eh? Quite a bit of Tolkien's work was based on the mythologies and
legends of the people of England (and Britain) - note that Tolkien
managed to miss out virtually *all* of the Arthurian romances from ME,
while still basing a fair bit on British mythology (the possible Arthur
- Merlin parallels in Aragorn - Gandalf being the exception). For
instance, the legendary "promised land" of the West, the fall of mankind
from something more mystical to something more mundane, and so forth. A
good mix of Celtic and Anglo-Saxon mythology got mixed in with Tolkien's
work.
Why do you believe we have "virtually no native myth cycles"?
>Therefore, he incorporated his
>knowledge of history, linguistics, and other mythologies to create a
>myth cycle which used the English sensibilities and combined them with
>the archetypal elements common to all ancient mythologies. He used and
>smoothly combined material from Celtic, Judeo-Christian, Greek, and
>Norse mythology into a unified whole, in an effort that has not been
>matched to this day. It took him 40 years, so it's not surprising.
40 years well spent, IMO :-)
> As far as "fun to read", that's always a matter of taste. The first
>Dragonlance books I find fun to read. The LotR is harder going; it's
>written with a considerably larger vocabulary and assumes a different
>class of readership. The Hobbit is somewhat easier, although it assumes
>yet another class of reader; it's written more for the old-style English
>child
read: one who's mind has not been vapourised by Nintendo, The Simpsons,
and kitch American sitcoms :-)
>than for a modern American adolescent (there's a considerable
>similarity between the Hobbit's writing style and the style of, say, E.
>Nesbit). However, I get much more enjoyment out of LotR because there is
>FAR more depth to the world. DLance is a very nice RPG world, but any
>depth it has is a very, very pale echo of Tolkien's -- and it owes an
>immense debt TO Tolkien for whatever depth it has. This is NOT to say
>that Dragonlance is, as many snobs would have it, utterly unoriginal and
>without merit; it has some entertaining and sometimes even original
>moments. However, DLance and most of the other fantasy on the market
>would not exist had not Tolkien existed... and been SUCCESSFUL with his
>work.
Basically, Tolkien gave the fantasy genre of literature a respectability
it did not previously have. There are a fair few pre-Tolkien fantasy
works out there, but most were underground affairs.
> Tolkien's writing is much more leisurely paced, and draws on a huge
>body of work which we only really got to see after his death.
Which kept Christopher Tolkien busy for a while :-) The 12-volume
"History of Middle-earth" is quite entertaining, believe it or not. And
the works of "The Simarillion" and "Unfinished Tales" are in a class
unto themselves.
Mark Horning
Sidhain <sid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>There are problems with education in the U.S., yes. That does not make the
>>fact that some do not like Tolkien wrong, nor does it make them uneducated
>>clods.
>
>
>
>Tolkien is probably a sign of some form of deficit, whether it's
>intelligence, imagination, or just taste....depends on EACH person.
>the most part I can't say much for their intellect, but those are people I
>have met, it does not mean everyone who reads and Dislikes Tolkien are
>stupid...
>
>
>
>
The bigest problem with _The Felowship of the Ring_ is that nothing
happens for 50 pages. I read the trillogy in third grade and recently
decided to re-read them as an adult. The beggining is DULL. Once you get
through the party and something actualy starts happening the books get a
lot better.
Mark E. Horning "You can not enslave a free man. The most
Physicist you can do is kill him."
Phoenix AZ --Robert A. Heinlein-- (Free Men)
Ian R Malcomson
>>this would be interesting.... do you think he could play it straight enough?
>
>role.
As long as he manages to refrain from offering Orcs jellybabies :-)
Ian R Malcomson
>Auric, you do realize that the Shannara series was an absolutely
>transparent imitation of Tolkien, don't you? Or perhaps you don't, if
>you've never actually read the Lord of the Rings. I never cared for
>Shannara myself, because I had read "the original" and so found them
>wanting.
I quite like the Shannara stuff. Nice story, fairly interesting
characters, good on-train entertainment :-)
>It's unfortunate that a teacher tried to force-feed you the Hobbit.
>First of all, any book a student is ordered to read automatically has a
>large hill to climb in getting him to like it.
We "had" to do the book in 2nd year Juniors (absolutely no idea what
that equates to in American terms - about age 8), but we also had the
excellent radio dramatisation thrown to us, too (Bernard Cribbins et
al). We read it as a class, in "serial fashion", and that was it:
captivated from the start to the finish. Then one of my schoolteachers
lent the "Gormenghast" trilogy to me (Mervyn Peake), and I've never been
the same since :-)
I don't think *having* to read a book at school (or being force-fed
them) necessarily puts people off reading them (or their sequels). I
had to do a fair bit of Shakespeare to pass my English Literature exams,
and still love Shakespeare to bits. Mind you, I had to do Silas Marner,
too, and *that* book I don't think I'll *ever* pick up again.
Unless my insomnia starts getting too wild :-)