Re: (TFT) Pole weapons and pet peeves

[J&S <strngcrgonyc@earthlink.net>]

grabowski wrote:
> 
> I was reading Interplay #7 and it has an answer to that pesky pole weapons
> problem of doing double damage on a charge.
> 
> In Bill Gustafson's article on Pole Weapons (p.25), he mentions Paul Wagner
> suggested the double damage rule be changed to be like fencing.  Good idea!
> Gustafson also mentions a modification to the Melee rules, that in a charge
> the last two hexes moved through must be in a straight line.  Although, Bill
> does state that he doesn't use this rule in his own campaign in favor of
> having the pole weapon attacker going at least three hexes to prevent any
> wild moves on the hexgrid.
> 
> What do you all think?
> 
> Pet peeve
> Zombie rings:  Here is an magic item worth $3000.  This ring arrests the
> process of decay of 1 ST per day.  For some reason, TFT does not like its
> lesser undead because in order to have them for a long time they need zombie
> rings.  My peeve with this is the fact that the party destroys 10 zombies
> that reside in a tomb, they get 10 zombie rings for a possible $30,000.  Why
> fight dragon's when we can fight weaker undead and still make a buck?
> Because of this I shyed away from the use of these (skeletons/zombies)
> undead.  This was one rule the players wouldn't let me change.  I wonder why
> Steve created this rule.
> 
> Yours in Cidri,
> Justin
A GM could always have the rings deactivate at the "demise" of the
undead it was animating, therefore becoming nothing more than a 20
copper piece trinket.
Just an idea
SILAS
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"