The new "Expedition to..." series: has anyone checked it out?

RPGPundit · July 30, 2007, 09:34:48 PM

Quote from: Arsenic CanaryYou know, that's so weird...I have a 3.0 Manual, and it's not there.

Huh. Oh well. I guess I just have a flawed copy.

In the 3.0 Monster Manual, Beholders are on page 24 and 25.

RPGPundit

James McMurray · July 30, 2007, 09:55:48 PM

They're also in the 3.5 version. They're not in the SRD.

Abyssal Maw · July 30, 2007, 10:22:07 PM

Beholders are in there. Both in the 3.0 version and the 3.5 version. Both in early versions (I have first printings of 3.0) and later printings.

beeber · July 30, 2007, 10:32:13 PM

didn't WotC keep beholders out of the SRD for IP reasons? product identity, or whatever it is? i seem to recall them, mind flayers, and maybe a few more from the MM didn't carry over to the SRD

Caesar Slaad · July 30, 2007, 10:50:30 PM

Quote from: beeberdidn't WotC keep beholders out of the SRD for IP reasons? product identity, or whatever it is? i seem to recall them, mind flayers, and maybe a few more from the MM didn't carry over to the SRD

Yep... mind flayers, beholders, displacer beasts, carrion crawlers, githyanki, githzerai. And one more, I'm sure... but I just can't place it...

Melan · July 31, 2007, 01:27:28 AM

Quote from: RPGPunditAre these just remakes of the old products, or are they radically new? Are they interesting? Well designed?

RPGPundit

I know I was turned right off the entire series when I read that in Expedition to Ravenloft, the designers turned Leif Lipsiege, the hunchbacked accountant, from a zero-level nobody to a combat monster. That's wrong! All wrong! That's yet another sign of why I am not so much into official 3.5 products anymore. So - well made mechanically, but probably "balance-correct" and "overdesigned". I don't think you'd like that sort of thing. Also, Expedition to Ravenloft uses the "delve format", which boosts page count for little real gain, and probably warps design priorities.

Melan · July 31, 2007, 01:28:55 AM

Quote from: Caesar SlaadYep... mind flayers, beholders, displacer beasts, carrion crawlers, githyanki, githzerai. And one more, I'm sure... but I just can't place it...

Yuan-ti and drow.

Settembrini · July 31, 2007, 01:29:54 AM

As a delve-format victim, I´m strongly against it. It leads to encounter chains instead of real modules or even dungeons.
Nifty, interesting encounter on a string of beads.

BUT: Our bead-string Master says it really is easy to use. He likes it.

EDIT: For a really good rehash of old-school dungeoneering for 3.x, I recommend Thieves of Fortress Badabaskor. It´s an especially good example of how CR as a concept has nothing to do with forced balancing.

estar · July 31, 2007, 07:57:10 AM

Quote from: SettembriniEDIT: For a really good rehash of old-school dungeoneering for 3.x, I recommend Thieves of Fortress Badabaskor. It´s an especially good example of how CR as a concept has nothing to do with forced balancing.

Like those dragons I see.

Rob Conley

P.S. Find Stephen Colbert yet? He is a guest star you know.

Settembrini · July 31, 2007, 07:58:19 AM

I laughed out loud.
Searching for truthiness, that was a good one!

Caesar Slaad · July 31, 2007, 08:40:41 AM

Quote from: MelanYuan-ti and drow.

Yuan Ti. Not drow (though references to Lolth are closed).

There's still one more. Just can't think of what it is...

beeber · July 31, 2007, 09:46:56 AM

Quote from: Caesar SlaadYuan Ti. Not drow (though references to Lolth are closed).

There's still one more. Just can't think of what it is...

your namesake?

took me a while, you cheeky frog :haw:

Caesar Slaad · July 31, 2007, 10:10:30 AM

Quote from: beeberyour namesake?

took me a while, you cheeky frog :haw: