It's called the Forgotten Realms because of Ed Greenwood's original concept-that of a magical, forgotten counterpart to Earth, with the few portals remaining being guarded by ancient families.
The first time was the setting competition, under which you only gave them the rights if you reached the stage where they paid you. That lead to Keith Baker's Eberron.
The second time was the FR novel competition, which lead to Kameron Franklin's Maiden of Pain. That they got the copyrights to, but there wasn't much you could do with your ideas otherwise, considering they owned all of the setting already.
I believe you mean once they absorbed TSR completely-Silver Anniversary stuff, for example, came out for 2e while WotC maintained TSR as a subsidiary.
And D20 really isn't a completely different game-it has its roots in TSR products(particularly, look at an Alternity character sheet and prepare to be very amused).
Additionally, please look at the year of Dragon immediately preceding the launch of 3e at Gen Con-there was plenty of creating D&D that went into the rules of 3e.
I'm not on the design team, but if you look at the historical evidence, it is pretty obvious 3e was designed to be D&D first and foremost-that's why D&D's rules staples(the class and level system, for one) are still there.
Um...we're discussing pen and paper roleplaying games. You know, the ones that spawned MMORPGs, the ones where the one rule is: "Your DM/GM/Storyteller. Whatever she says goes, and she is free to alter anything as she sees fit."
So, (Sliver Munches)Silver Marches didn't sell well, and yes, for awhile, the focus of the Forgotten Realms product line was on crunchy stuff-but the people who actually kept the line going rebelled, and we seem to be winning. There has been gradually decreasing amounts of crunch in FR books over the past year or so, and the next regional supplement, Mysteries of the Moonsea, is seeing a format change according to one of its' designers.
Roleplaying isn't just numbers-the numbers help things, but it is really about the stories-if you want it to be. If you want it to be about the numbers, then it is.
Except Gygax wrote the majority of the core rulebooks for 1e AD&D(Majority meaning, IIRC, he's the only person credited for all 3, even though there's some stuff from other people.)
"I have plenty to say But nobody listens because my cock is so big And the end of it glistens; so I'm famous for it "Freaky" is what everyone's name is for it"
However, in comparison, D&D is willing to throw out the entirety of the code base every 10 years or so and say to developers: You're working to our new system. No legacy programming framework cruft in our new system. (And the stuff that sticks around between editions is the stuff that *defines* D&D-without it, it would be like a GUI without the graphical part. During the really major revision that was 3e, a lot of thought went into this-for the history of all this, see the 3 years of Dragon immediately preceding 3e's release.)
1. The amount of balanced content in 3e is roughly the same as it was in 2e. If you have players that aren't planning on munchkining it out to Mars from wherever you are, and you know the 3e ruleset well, then everything is balanced. The same applies to 2e--and besides, you as a good DM read through every new supplement before allowing it in your game so you're prepared to use it in your game, right? No sense in letting the players use faith feats if you haven't thought about how you're implementing them in your game...
2. Pretty artwork? What, you mean finally giving DMs a picture for every monster to show the players? Or do you mean the dramatic quality increase in D&D artwork that has mainly come from having access to WotC's greater stable of artists mainly derived from M:tG?
3. I'm sorry, what realistic work does the Realms need to be updated to 3.5? What major component hasn't been updated yet? And please think realistically-there's no way in hell they can issue a new regional supplement for every area with each new edition, they don't have the printing capacity...
4. Wait, incompatible rules? Hm...I seem to be using content from my 3.0 books as well as my 3.5 ones perfectly fine-with the help of the free conversion tools they provided on wizards.com. Actually, the ones that provide the worst problems, I've found, are the 3.25 books released from January to whenever of 2003...specifically Savage Species and the Arms and Equipment Guide. Besides, that requires just a *bit* of work to get them into 3.5...nothing like the work needed for a conversion from, say, 2e to 3e. And hey, if it stops us from needing a 3e Skills and Powers series, I'm all for it.
The glory days were Gygax, and everything's gone down since then? O.o
That might have been when the game was the most popular, but the common consensus among most people deeply into D&D itself as a hobby is that 2e was the halcyon days everyone wishes we could return to...or rather, 2e content with the 3e ruleset.
Oh, and the slow and painstaking process of creating the most detailed fantasy world out there(The Forgotten Realms) has really only been happening since Gygax left...and if you're going to say that the Realms' framework restricts DMs from being creative, then I seriously invite you to look at a supplement again, which are dripping in unresolved mysteries for DMs to pick up and run with(like the Sorceress in Grey, or just what Nchaser's up to, or just what 1374's Roll of Years' name is alluding to, or what the Lady Penitent is doing, or why Khelben spun off the Moonstars(Tel'kiira) from the Harpers, although Stephen Schend's likely going to deal with that one in Blackstaff...)
Except that WotC's owned and been distributing the game for over 5 years now.
Hence, it's their game, argue as you may about their treatment of it since then.
Makers=the people who make the current game.
Sure, Gygax was responsible for part of the 1e AD&D and Original D&D rules, but the person with the greatest connection from those days to what's going on these days is Ed Bonny, of all folk, who ended up on the design team for the 3e MMII and Lost Empires of Faerun(and who posted some excellent Jhaamdathan material for the latter at candlekeep.com).
I'm curious...were any of the Finnish metal labels supporting this, and if so, which ones? I'd like to vote with my money properly, even if I'm buying it from a separate label.
Read SA's front page.
The *only* reason Lowtax used PayPal was so that he could get donaters' shipping addresses to ship free merchandise to them as a thanks for their donations.
Gender, and especially gender identity, is in the mind. Sex may not be, but gender is.
You do realize what the cure for gender identity disorder is, right? Letting transfolk undergo treatment so that all the parts of them finally match up? Everything up to and including shock treatment has been tried before and none of it has worked.
But Klinefelter's does make someone quite a bit more feminine, even if they aren't a full woman, as you term it.
Slashdot Mirror
but I generally find they don't survive very long past the one to the throat...
It's called the Forgotten Realms because of Ed Greenwood's original concept-that of a magical, forgotten counterpart to Earth, with the few portals remaining being guarded by ancient families.
No, I mean a player.
The two campaigns that immediately come to mind with that definition are:
-Arneson's original Blackmoor game
-Greenwood's Knights of Myth Drannor.
They've done this three times actually.
The first time was the setting competition, under which you only gave them the rights if you reached the stage where they paid you. That lead to Keith Baker's Eberron.
The second time was the FR novel competition, which lead to Kameron Franklin's Maiden of Pain. That they got the copyrights to, but there wasn't much you could do with your ideas otherwise, considering they owned all of the setting already.
The third time is this.
You're welcome.
*blows kisses*
Wrong.
I believe you mean once they absorbed TSR completely-Silver Anniversary stuff, for example, came out for 2e while WotC maintained TSR as a subsidiary.
And D20 really isn't a completely different game-it has its roots in TSR products(particularly, look at an Alternity character sheet and prepare to be very amused).
Additionally, please look at the year of Dragon immediately preceding the launch of 3e at Gen Con-there was plenty of creating D&D that went into the rules of 3e.
I'm not on the design team, but if you look at the historical evidence, it is pretty obvious 3e was designed to be D&D first and foremost-that's why D&D's rules staples(the class and level system, for one) are still there.
Oddly enough, every important-enough-to-affect-the-product-line D&D campaign has had at least one female in it, without fail.
Take it as you may.
We women *do* play D&D too.
That format is the standard-it's described at length in the DMG.
Why do they want adventures in that format?
So they can read them.
Anything else, and it's like giving someone spaghetti code without comments-needlessly hard on both of you.
Um...we're discussing pen and paper roleplaying games. You know, the ones that spawned MMORPGs, the ones where the one rule is: "Your DM/GM/Storyteller. Whatever she says goes, and she is free to alter anything as she sees fit."
Actually, that's not necessarily true. First, see http://www.candlekeep.com/library/rumors/rumor7.ht m .
So, (Sliver Munches)Silver Marches didn't sell well, and yes, for awhile, the focus of the Forgotten Realms product line was on crunchy stuff-but the people who actually kept the line going rebelled, and we seem to be winning. There has been gradually decreasing amounts of crunch in FR books over the past year or so, and the next regional supplement, Mysteries of the Moonsea, is seeing a format change according to one of its' designers.
Roleplaying isn't just numbers-the numbers help things, but it is really about the stories-if you want it to be. If you want it to be about the numbers, then it is.
Except Gygax wrote the majority of the core rulebooks for 1e AD&D(Majority meaning, IIRC, he's the only person credited for all 3, even though there's some stuff from other people.)
"I have plenty to say
But nobody listens because my cock is so big
And the end of it glistens; so I'm famous for it
"Freaky" is what everyone's name is for it"
---Buck 65, "The Centaur"
However, in comparison, D&D is willing to throw out the entirety of the code base every 10 years or so and say to developers: You're working to our new system. No legacy programming framework cruft in our new system.
(And the stuff that sticks around between editions is the stuff that *defines* D&D-without it, it would be like a GUI without the graphical part. During the really major revision that was 3e, a lot of thought went into this-for the history of all this, see the 3 years of Dragon immediately preceding 3e's release.)
1. The amount of balanced content in 3e is roughly the same as it was in 2e. If you have players that aren't planning on munchkining it out to Mars from wherever you are, and you know the 3e ruleset well, then everything is balanced. The same applies to 2e--and besides, you as a good DM read through every new supplement before allowing it in your game so you're prepared to use it in your game, right? No sense in letting the players use faith feats if you haven't thought about how you're implementing them in your game...
2. Pretty artwork? What, you mean finally giving DMs a picture for every monster to show the players? Or do you mean the dramatic quality increase in D&D artwork that has mainly come from having access to WotC's greater stable of artists mainly derived from M:tG?
3. I'm sorry, what realistic work does the Realms need to be updated to 3.5? What major component hasn't been updated yet? And please think realistically-there's no way in hell they can issue a new regional supplement for every area with each new edition, they don't have the printing capacity...
4. Wait, incompatible rules? Hm...I seem to be using content from my 3.0 books as well as my 3.5 ones perfectly fine-with the help of the free conversion tools they provided on wizards.com. Actually, the ones that provide the worst problems, I've found, are the 3.25 books released from January to whenever of 2003...specifically Savage Species and the Arms and Equipment Guide. Besides, that requires just a *bit* of work to get them into 3.5...nothing like the work needed for a conversion from, say, 2e to 3e. And hey, if it stops us from needing a 3e Skills and Powers series, I'm all for it.
The glory days were Gygax, and everything's gone down since then? O.o
That might have been when the game was the most popular, but the common consensus among most people deeply into D&D itself as a hobby is that 2e was the halcyon days everyone wishes we could return to...or rather, 2e content with the 3e ruleset.
Oh, and the slow and painstaking process of creating the most detailed fantasy world out there(The Forgotten Realms) has really only been happening since Gygax left...and if you're going to say that the Realms' framework restricts DMs from being creative, then I seriously invite you to look at a supplement again, which are dripping in unresolved mysteries for DMs to pick up and run with(like the Sorceress in Grey, or just what Nchaser's up to, or just what 1374's Roll of Years' name is alluding to, or what the Lady Penitent is doing, or why Khelben spun off the Moonstars(Tel'kiira) from the Harpers, although Stephen Schend's likely going to deal with that one in Blackstaff...)
Except that WotC's owned and been distributing the game for over 5 years now.
Hence, it's their game, argue as you may about their treatment of it since then.
Makers=the people who make the current game.
Sure, Gygax was responsible for part of the 1e AD&D and Original D&D rules, but the person with the greatest connection from those days to what's going on these days is Ed Bonny, of all folk, who ended up on the design team for the 3e MMII and Lost Empires of Faerun(and who posted some excellent Jhaamdathan material for the latter at candlekeep.com).
The open call is for design, not development-the development test was just for fun.
I'm curious...were any of the Finnish metal labels supporting this, and if so, which ones? I'd like to vote with my money properly, even if I'm buying it from a separate label.
Those of us who were stupid enough to get the exercise models walked for 6 hours, then played with it for 5 minutes.
And if you want to read about all of this with a very good story to boot, read Neal Stephenson's the Barock Cycle...you won't be disappointed.
Those can be changed, too...look up "facial feminization surgery".
Read SA's front page. The *only* reason Lowtax used PayPal was so that he could get donaters' shipping addresses to ship free merchandise to them as a thanks for their donations.
Is this the KDE project's competitor to Microsoft OneNote or something?
Gender, and especially gender identity, is in the mind. Sex may not be, but gender is.
You do realize what the cure for gender identity disorder is, right? Letting transfolk undergo treatment so that all the parts of them finally match up? Everything up to and including shock treatment has been tried before and none of it has worked.
But Klinefelter's does make someone quite a bit more feminine, even if they aren't a full woman, as you term it.
ISNA: http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency provides a stunningly different set of statistics.
And does it matter to this discourse if she does have a penis?
Trust me on this: Transfolk are not trying to be deviant. They really, really wish they weren't. But they've got to live with it, and that's it.