Let's hope it devolves into a Lord of the Flies-esque power struggle but an ending in which they all have very strong consequences for their behavior... you can decide which character JD Vance is...

I personally think OSE is the easiest thing to run, which is why I chose it instead of C&C for AV. Regarding 5e, in both C&C and OSE the PCs are much lower powered & have fewer abilities, even when leveling up to mid/high levels, so it's a rough switch no matter what you go to. Get buy-in first 2/2

Also @beer-n-pizza.bsky.social I use Foundry and am unfamiliar with the C&C setup on R20 so I can't give an opinion on it one way or the other. Arden Vul was written for OSRIC/AD&D and has enough new creatures, spells, and items that no matter which VTT you use there will be some work. 1/2

C&C is a great system - I played it for years. The issue with C&C with respect to a module like Arden Vul is that C&C has no exploration rules. That is, no framework exists in the rules as written to support exploring a dungeon methodically. I have some I wrote up for C&C if you want them.

Thank you! I agree, the text is very wordy and hard to parse, which is why I do the highlighting with 3 colors. Even with that deficit, the product is a tour de force of great gaming

I try to keep my posts as spoiler free as possible- if there are obvious spoilers I usually note them… I’m glad you are enjoying Arden Vul - I’m loving it!

Crazy... and batshit crazy

Haha - sounds like a ton of missed opportunity there... apropos for Eve of Ruin, or so I hear

The Evernight info in 4e was just fantastic - I haven't bothered to look at Eve of Ruin because I'm just not interested in it... can you tell me what it says/has in it related to Evernight?

It allowed us to have much richer games in a living setting - even if our current adventure had nothing to do with the tensions between nations, and the possibility of war, if we have to travel through a place or negotiate with someone from THAT saber-rattling nation it was a whole different thing.

I don't NEED alignment to be in the game & I know it causes problems for a lot of people, but we haven't replaced it with anything nor have the designers given DMs advice on it. Making divine abilities just available in perpetuity because taking away divine power would be mean is not a good answer.

do not need to adhere to ANY code, whether it's an oath promise or stated fealty... those classes should get their powers and retain them evermore as well... which, for me personally, just guts the divine power source of any meaning. Removing alignment made way for this 3/3

And if you suddenly make it a RULE that once a cleric (or other divine caster) just retains their powers no matter what for the life of that PC, you have really reduced the 'meaning' of what a cleric is. And it then would follow that paladins and druids and other traditionally non-arcane casters 2/3

I think you heard a harsher statement than I meant - I wasn't saying alignment should be the primary way that divine caster's should have their casting adjudicated. What I was trying to say was historically clerics needed to be the same alignment to ensure favor with their chosen deity 1/2

Picture this: party of 4 PCs making a group check. Two roll and they get 17 & 18. Why should the other two even roll?
Answer: they don’t need to, which negates their PC’s choices/actions.
That’s the problem with 50% pass = group succeeds. I like Saltmarsh version you brought up.

pointy codpieces then!

Dragonlance, the story of the Knights of Solamnia and some large pointy sticks

LOL - cheeky lad - 2024 D&D uses Greyhawk CY 576... no wars, no Rary betrayal... no lost Almor - ALMOR HAS BEEN RESTORED - I repeat - ALMOR has been restored! The Almorian Patriots have prevailed!!!!