RE: [DL] Thoughts on Old Pete {Spoilers}

[Allan Seyberth <darious@darious.com>]

At 02:41 AM 4/15/2003 +0000, you wrote:
 >No disrespect to the author was intended. If it was perceived, I apologize.
 >My personal opinion was that Stone should have had more attacks at higher
 >bonuses in addition to damage reduction. The fact was that the average
 >player im my party had more going for them statwise than the book gave to
 >Stone. Also, I am not anti-D20. D20 allows for an infinate number of
 >crossovers. I am sorry to all those I have offended with my debate on Stone.

Thhuppppttt!!!!

:-)

It was a good thread, a valid point, and the end result is that the actual 
role of Stone in campaigns is much better defined.
And the final and only truly valid point was that your players had a blast 
taking him down.

Thanks for the thread in the first place.



-------------------
Allan Seyberth
darious@darious.com

Superior, they said, never gives up her dead
When the gales of November come early!
                 -Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald