tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post1085183478280078602..comments2024-03-23T05:46:31.832-07:00Comments on Power Score: Dice, Camera, Action: Episode 10 - Curse of StrahdSeanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07263753821685936593noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post-70336840440218276002017-05-24T17:38:32.136-07:002017-05-24T17:38:32.136-07:00Hi Sean,
I noticed you have a picture of the Abbo...Hi Sean,<br /><br />I noticed you have a picture of the Abbot and Vasilka in your post. I wanted to show that picture to my players, so I combed my Curse of Strahd book front to back and couldn't find it anywhere. Is it from the book? If so can you tell me what page it's on? Thank You.<br /><br />PatrickPatrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01253508040294257255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post-59195260173812987482016-06-09T14:57:42.904-07:002016-06-09T14:57:42.904-07:00Pitfiend: Yeah it is pretty crazy! It confused me ...Pitfiend: Yeah it is pretty crazy! It confused me during the session, too. Maybe he'll clue Strix in next session. Seanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07263753821685936593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post-5995025194201564292016-06-09T03:22:40.115-07:002016-06-09T03:22:40.115-07:00How very odd, all resurrection spells were reclass...How very odd, all resurrection spells were reclassified as necromancy spells in the 5th edition even though only clerics can cast them. In fact all spells were reclassified as part of one of the Arcane schools of magic. This could be a source of great confusion as evident by Strix's reaction in this last session. Chris should have mentioned this was a novel design for cleric spells instead of allowing his players to reach conclusions based on past assumptions regarding how D&D works.Pitfiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14740481386756287860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post-84247059699119391042016-06-08T22:42:06.644-07:002016-06-08T22:42:06.644-07:00Pitfiend: It really was a great episode! I was con...Pitfiend: It really was a great episode! I was confused about the necromancy, too. I looked at raise dead on page 270 of the PH - it is a necromancy spell! At least, that's the category. The deva has the power to raise once per day, but the spell is technically necromancy. A far as Nate, maybe he's just the "watcher" type. Almost every group I've ever been in has at least one. Watchers have been some of my most loyal, dependable players. Nate is definitely hard to read. Alignment is always tricky.. that's why I love the 4e Unaligned option. You could just opt out and do your thing. Thanks!<br /><br />Seanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07263753821685936593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-422181426312081107.post-13683268129985028342016-06-08T15:59:40.208-07:002016-06-08T15:59:40.208-07:00I was looking forward to this episode and it sure ...I was looking forward to this episode and it sure delivered. I do have some observations though that bothered me while watching it.<br /><br />First would be Paultin's unresponsiveness, he has been so passive this time around to the point his presence in this session was completely unnecessary. It is as if he's lacking any sort of initiative and is merely there for the ride, might as well been a spectator.<br /><br />Second would be Chris's intriguing decision to reveal the Abbot's casting of the raise dead spell as the work of necromancy. Despite being corrupted by Strahd's malicious suggestions, the Deva's source of spell-like abilities should still draw on the divine, as it said itself "I need no book". Its hard for me to rationalize how a celestial Deva could channel necromantic arcane powers without becoming a fiend. Fallen angels are still angels, or they are devils - a necromantic deva? doesn't sit well with me, but hey, it's Chris's game. <br /><br />Lastly, describing the Abbot's alignment as evil is a testament to the problematic nature of D&D's alignments system. While I'll certainly say the Abbot is mad and certainly misguided we can't say his intentions are malicious, he's certainly not sadistic, greedy or power hungry. He may have allowed himself to dabble in forbidden arts to attempt to do good, but as far as I call tell he hasn't crossed the line into hurting the innocent to achieve this goal. Sure he experimented on the Belviews and turned them into Mongrelfolk but he only wanted to give them what they wanted and cure them of leprosy. Sure he have them steal body parts for his flesh golems which is questionable but the dead could hardly need them anymore. Sure he tries to appease Strahd, but only so he can change his dark nature. While I'd be hard pressed to describe him as Chaotic good (questionable means to a righteous end)I'd probably put him in the neutral segment. Evil is reserved for the selfish and sadistic, not the misguided. Pitfiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14740481386756287860noreply@blogger.com