... True. :-) MichaelMessage 1 of 44 , May 3, 2006View SourceOn May 3, 2006, at 4:58 PM, Truth wrote:
> On 5/4/06, Michael <java_kensai@...> wrote:True. :-)
>> On May 3, 2006, at 4:17 PM, Frank Kliewe wrote:
>> I would think that the source documents -- in this case, the PHB, DMG
>> and MM, along with their errata -- would define the "standards". [If
>> WotC chooses to call one thing a "Sword (Short)" and another thing a
>> "Longsword", then those are the terms we should use regardless of the
>> fact that they don't follow the same syntax (and may thus be
>> unintuitive for someone who doesn't have the books).] The source
>> documents are relatively fixed and unchanging (aside from the
> Actually in our case I believe this should be the SRD, RSRD, and MSRD.
... But if you re running the CMP files, you shouldn t ALSO be running the SRD files. You should be using the PHB/DMG/MM sets from CMP as well as whateverMessage 44 of 44 , May 4, 2006View SourceOn May 4, 2006, at 4:41 AM, pkukwork wrote:
> Of course I'm mixing. Who is not ? I don't think many people run aBut if you're running the CMP files, you shouldn't ALSO be running
> "purely SRD" campaign, and I think that most people use at least the
> Complete Series from WotC in their campaign. At least this is what I
> find when I speak to most people I know or on mailing lists...
the SRD files. You should be using the PHB/DMG/MM sets from CMP as
well as whatever "addons" you're using.
It's that mixing of SRD and non-SRD (and PHB/DMG/MM in this context
are non-SRD as they're the CMP renditions of those books) that will
always always be a pain/nightmare/bugfest.