Customer Discussions > Dungeons & Dragons forum

Confused about future D&D supplements - anyone?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 40 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 1, 2011 5:42:26 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 1, 2011 5:48:49 AM PST
C. Wiggins says:
I'm trying to understand what happened or what is happening with future D & D books.

Okay, so they did a Martial Power 2, but there are currently no plans to do 2nd volumes of the other 'Power' books? They did a Dragon Magazine Annual 1 but there are no plans to do subsequent volumes? We have racial 'pamphlets' for the Dragonborn and the Teifling, but we're not going to get any for the other races? Why would they start these products without any intention of seeing them through? And now I'm seeing these boxed sets coming out that are further muddying the waters with regards to which rules are 'official' for lack of a better term.

Are their plans to go back and finish the series of books that they've started, or were they abandoned mid to late game in favor of this new direction? Do I have to subscribe to a monthly membership now as the only way to enjoy new core products? No more books on the shelves, only what I manage to print out from a website?

I'm very confused about what's currently going on at WotC and what the mindset/long-term plans are, but its been very frustrating after spending a couple of years (and hundreds of dollars) investing in the books... some help here?
Your reply to C. Wiggins's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
 

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 7:09:47 AM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
"Why would they start these products without any intention of seeing them through?"

Why would they continue to print them if they did not return a good margin? My guess is the answer is - they didn't sell enough. If they had, they would have continued to do them. Only a few feats and paragon paths (which were easily obtained thru the builder) and mainly fluff? No surprise the race books didn't take off - players of any RPG rarely spend on fluff.

" And now I'm seeing these boxed sets coming out that are further muddying the waters with regards to which rules are 'official' for lack of a better term."

Everything is official and compatible. They are trying to do something that sells. If box sets sell better than the old stuff, we're going to see box sets.

"Do I have to subscribe to a monthly membership now as the only way to enjoy new core products? No more books on the shelves, only what I manage to print out from a website?"

They will do what the market will bear. Core books will probably still be sold physically, but if supplemental content is needed, yet not profitable in print, yes - we could see a primarily digital model between the big core books that always sell.

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 7:23:49 AM PST
Esgaldil says:
Gurdgiel is right, and the simple answer is that yes, they changed their plans from what they had announced to a different set of priorities, and it does not appear that they have entirely settled on what their new direction will be. The good news is that there is a rather huge amount of available physical product right now. I think we can count on Heroes of Shadow being published as an actual book, and I expect it will have at least as much material as an Arcane Power 2 would have. The Essentials builds haven't given us much to tinker with for our existing characters, which was disappointing and confusing, but they have certainly expanded the variety of playable characters and accommodated certain playing styles that had been previously neglected, so I would have to count the Heroes of the Adjective Location books as being at least equal to if not greater than the lost Power supplements. I'm just glad Psionic Power managed to slide through as the gates were closing...

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 1, 2011 8:23:47 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 1, 2011 10:28:39 AM PST
C. Wiggins says:
"I'm just glad Psionic Power managed to slide through as the gates were closing..."

Heh - I hear you there. I was looking forward to a lot of things seeing print, like the new Familiars options, either in a new DM Annual or Arcane Power 2.

I guess I'm just old school in that I love books. The smell of them when they're new, the act of spreading them out, pouring through them and making notes... rather than having fistfuls of print-outs for when everyone doesn't have an ipad or laptop at hand. I'm sure that's the wave of the future, ipad-type e-readers replacing an entire collection of books with character builders running in the background. And I'm okay with that, completely, I was just REALLY hoping to get a complete set of books for 4th edition before lurching unceremoniously into something new.

I think I'm going to just run my games with the hardcover books as printed minus MP2 since none of the other power sources have parity with books of thier own. Ditto the races, though I had hoped that after those half-@ssed pamphlets we'd get a hardcover collection of all of the races in one volume. If players come across something they want to use specifically with their characters on DDi or in other supplements, we'll address them on a case-by-case basis but generally they will be accepted, and rather than arguing over never-ending erratta wrecking builds characters have enjoyed, we'll just continue to house-rule any disputes or inequities that come up.

I have to say that I have absolutely ZERO interest in any of the 'Essentials' stuff - and was completely turned off by the fact that WotC this time actually changed the direction of an edition before the edition was even finished. I doubt I'll buy another D&D product again, knowing the perpetual 'bait and switch' that is waiting. There is more than enough quality material produced IMO in current 4th Ed. hardcover books to run games in perpetuity... its just that I was a hard sell on the new 4th Ed. and JUST when I finally embraced it fully, they pulled the rug out from under my feet. At least, that's how it feels.

Thanks for responding, gentlemen. I know that the online world is a very different one from the world I grew up playing in, but I had hoped that the growth of MMO's would pull the power-gamers away and leave the RPG's to the storytellers among us... I never counted on the RPG creators chasing after them and leaving us to catch up.

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 9:01:46 AM PST
Esgaldil says:
Wiggins - You might want to take a second look at Martial Power 2 - there are some very nice options in there. I wish Marauder and Hunter Rangers had existed from the beginning. No point in throwing away one good book for the sake of a book that wasn't written...

You are, I trust, aware that Characters created using Essentials books are perfectly compatible with any 4e campaign. I agree that the business side of broken promises and unexpected changes has left a sour taste in my mouth, but the actual material in those books is quite fun once you understand what's in there.

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 10:33:56 AM PST
C. Wiggins says:
I guess I view it sort of like a top. You know, those whirlgig things our parents played with as children?

Well imagine one balanced on its point - that's 4th Ed (or 3rd) as it was created. Then WotC proceededs to place more and more stuff all along its edge in an effort to keep it perfectly balanced, which in turn requires still more stuff to be added to balance out the stuff that was added previously... that's the erratta and the '.5' crap... which only hastens its toppling by making it mor eand more unweildy.

Me, I'd rather maintain the top's balance by giving it a spin, letting the centrifugal force of players actually playing the game keep it balanced for a good long while... and worry less about the occaisional wobble and more about what I would like to introduce in its place when finally falls, the inevitable conclusion to allowing something to exhaust its own momentum.

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 3:25:35 PM PST
Bruul says:
The Essentials was a play to "de-complicate" D&D even further than 4e already does in my eyes. I tried the Executioner Assassin and I was wishing I had encounter powers by the second session. I loved the idea but don't feel it sits equally next to the classes that came before essentials. The essentials may be "balanced" but I don't think they are fun and interesting as the regular classes.

As far as future books go....I'm perfectly happy with what I have on my shelf now. I bought the Rules compendium and it sees regular use at my table. Beyond that the 2011 line up falls flat IMO. At this point I'm not really interested in more material in the direction they are heading. More Dark Sun I'd go for but I don't really need it. My game is cruising fine. It'll take years to fully try all the material already printed.

The digital products I'd like to see still. I got my Dark Sun/Essentials modded Character Builder so I'm good there. The visualizer would still be awesome, as would the game table. All the DM's out there still love the Monster Builder I'm sure. If the compendium was transportable I'd like it alot more.

Posted on Feb 1, 2011 9:46:06 PM PST
Esgaldil says:
Wiggins - Your first post seemed to be a complaint that some 4e books have not been published, and your third post seems to be a complaint that too many 4e books have been published. I also don't really understand the top analogy, despite loving tops. Are you suggesting that Martial Power 2 makes Martial Characters more powerful or more desirable in a way that harms the game?

Posted on Feb 2, 2011 9:11:57 PM PST
C. Wiggins says:
The top metaphor may have been a touch too esoteric - it was an allusion to the comulsive need to endlessly 'balance' things with never-ending erratta that only serves to make the game unwieldy instead of letting the momentum of gameplay and the players themselves deal with such things through house-rules and such.

I am disappointed only that they created a Power 2 book for Martial, granting a great many more options to martial characters without following through and doing the same for the other four powers, just as I am disappointed that they created additional options for two races and ignored the rest, just as I am disappointed that they published a Dragon Magazine Annual #1 and have now apparently decided that there will be no additional copies. I don't subscribe to DDI and prefer to use books rather than fistfuls of print-outs.

I get that this is a new world where things can be made available digitally and that that medium will increasingly become the norm... and that if things are available digitally there will naturally be far less incentive to buy a book and hence, far less incentive to publish one. But it was WotC that made the knowing decision to make things available online for a subscription and in so doing destroyed the market for hardcover books (which were excellent quality but stll overpriced imo). If they hadn't, I may well have gotten the books they promised us rather than being in put in the position to reject yet a new permutation of the game when the last one still hasn't been completed.

I'd also like to point out that by discouraging the publishing and buying of books, they are undermining an already struggling book market - most specifically gaming stores - and the idea of internet forums replacing these long-standing centers for gathering, meeting, playing and discovering new things disturbs me even more than the eventual disappearance of books.

Posted on Feb 7, 2011 7:31:19 AM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
I have to say, just got my reminder that my annual sub for DDI is coming up and I don't think I am going to continue.

I plan to pull all the Dragon/Dungeon PDFs I'm entitled to before I do (that I haven't already) and I plan to tool around with the character builder to see if it has changed enough to keep me - but with all the broken promises around the virtual table and the lack of a firm launch date (as far as I know) combined with what I personally find fairly lackluster Dragon/Dungeon and Book support recently, I doubt I'm going to resubscribe at all.

I'm ok with having a non-intelligent builder where I need to manually add abilities and the old monster build still works great for me, I just need to key stuff in.

This year will be interesting. I bought/am buying the Gamma World stuff, but otherwise I don't feel a burning need to buy much/anything on the D&D side - even though I'm running Dark Sun. For me it feels like 4E has hit it's saturation point similar to 3E and 3.5 did. I'll dip in for things here or there, but the core releases don't feel like "must haves" anymore. If a lot of other people feel the same, I wouldn't be surprised to see WotC announce some sort of shakeup soon - even if it's just 4.5 or 5E. (Though I doubt that will be what we see.)

I think we're definitely in for a transformational year - though most of it will probably just be announcement only.

Posted on Feb 7, 2011 7:58:20 AM PST
C. Wiggins says:
Just WAY too quick a turnaround IMO... its starting to feel like Magic the Gathering where the game is almost unplayable unless you stay up-to-date on endless erratta, essentially house-rule everything or hit a great big 'pause' button and say "this is the edition we're going to play with, with these rules and not those. Like deciding you're going to play 'Standard', 'Extended', 'Vintage', 'Legacy', etc. if only to keep the products you've spent hundreds of dollars on relevant.

Before it seemed like D & D would continue to be played in a particular edition until it lost its own sense of momentum through years of game-play. Now they can't even finish releasing one edition before 'tweaking' their way into a new edition. Its really starting to get absurd and seems incredibly disrespectful of the consumers.

I'm done with future D&D releases. I have everything for 3.0/3.5 and everything I could possibly need for 4.0. Both offer excellent playing potential indefinitely into the future. I'm done with the rat race, the bait and switch... all of it.

Posted on Feb 7, 2011 10:49:50 AM PST
Bruul says:
Agree with both of you. I've got enough material to play for years and not run out. If WotC pulls some kind of 4.5/5e switch-a-roo I'm out. I love 3e but made the switch to 4e for many reasons. I'm nowhere near burned out on 4e yet. I just can't see any justification for a new shake up.

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 2:35:37 PM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
I don't think WotC is twirling their moustache and laughing at us all - I don't see it as intentional. I just think they are floundering. Never assume malice when stupidity can explain something just as well. :)

They are trying to be successful, I just don't think they know how to do it anymore. (Granted that's not so different than the late TSR years really...)

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 2:51:06 PM PST
C. Wiggins says:
I think the miscalculation they've made is they are trying to appeal to an entire new generation of potential gamers at the expense of the existing players... most players now are in their 30's and grew up with 1st, 2nd and 3rd Editions, all of which seemed like natural evolutions of the previous incarnation. 4th Edition is very clearly a complete departure, and an obvious attempt to lasso in the Magic/WoW crowd with the miscalculation being that tabletop gaming could never replace their chosen diversion because they are two different things. If I want an MMO, I'm going to PLAY an MMO (or HALO for that matter), not an RPG trying to mimic one... meanwhile the pencil and paper crowd who have long been the consumer backbone of this industry, who played it through the social stigma of its infancy, whom have shelled out more money than they can calculate following the natural progression of the game, they are being marginialized.

I'm not pissed and I'm not taking it personally... I'm just disappointed, and I think the miscalculation by WotC is hastening the demise of the RPG community.

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 4:53:28 PM PST
Bruul says:
Don't get me wrong. I really enjoy the 4e rules set. When it first launched I was hesitant but after really giving it a solid test run I'm a big fan. With that said there are still times when I long for something a bit closer to 3e. This pops up mostly when my friends and I are talking about old campaigns and characters. What kills me is that there is so much that cannot be done in 4e that 3e did very well. On the flip side there isn't much that 4e gives that wasn't possible in the 3e rules set. The streamlined way it plays is great but in alot of ways is the very same thing that makes it feel like a MMO. Surges, roles, identical power structure. Great on some fronts, and less like the D&D we all grew up playing on others. I'm not trying to start the "4e isn't D&D" rants again, as my posts here clearly show I don't feel that way. What I am saying is that as 4e has hit its saturation point just like 3.5 did but did it in half the time. This is cause for worry.

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 7:08:09 PM PST
Esgaldil says:
Bruul - "What I am saying is that as 4e has hit its saturation point just like 3.5 did but did it in half the time." Why is that a bad thing, given that 3.x and earlier editions have become in no way obsolete? Is it not a service to the community to give us Enough as quickly as possible?

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 7:30:49 PM PST
K Fogy says:
Wizards of the Coast has over played the transition to fourth edition. Many will call me the old guard for this post, WotC should call me their base. It is the older gamers who have funded the company from the time we were young. Third edition made things very interesting, and made skill playing as important as class playing. I was reluctant to try it; I did, I loved it. I purchased the three book starter set for fourth edition and read through it. I saw what many have said, playable rules for an MMO converted to tabletop. That is backwards, and the wrong direction. Why do we still play table top in the time of computer MMOs? Simple, the game just cannot match the interactivity of table top. If you have searched in vain, as I have for MMOs that played like a table top with thousands of player, you know this. They are video games, maybe very fun, but not the same. There rules are designed to make ten thousandf characters equal in pursuit of quests and the growth of powers. I like that sometimes, and their rules reflect this, their style of play works, at least within reason. These new rules of fourth edition sought to capture that, thinking it modern. Those rules are not story based, they are based on set rules needed to run thousands of players. Quick, yes. Streamlined, yes. Now, look at yourself if you are posting here. While you might love fast information, easily searchable files, do you love a stream lined character for anything but combat? I don't. Extensive developement, detail, and personalization are why you spend hundreds of dollars to fill out a page of paper, or five or ten that you call character sheet.

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 7:39:26 PM PST
Bruul says:
I only see it as a negative due to what happened last time an edition became "saturated". Great for all of us right now but for wizards I'm not so sure. They are probably looking for ways to shake the game up which will eventually lead to yet another edition like when 4e came out. True that doesn't make 4e any less playable than 3.5 is right now and I am glad I very healthy set of options so soon after launch. It took quite awhile to reach this level of choice in 3e, years even. The short amount of time it took them to get to where we are now doesn't leave them alot of directions to go that will keep them in business.

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 7:51:16 PM PST
Bruul says:
Fogy-
Great post. You have pretty much hit on what I've been thinking about 3e vs 4e. They way everything is equal and balanced in that MMO way is what sours it. The speed and ease of play is great, I love the fast prep as a DM, and many other things make 4e a great game. We are having great fun playing Dark Sun each week in 4e.

What I miss about 3e is how a wizard sucked at low level but is the most powerful character at the high end. Spell books were handled much better in 3e. Some will say that is what made 3e broken, I disagree, I say it was the power creep and option saturation that broke it at the higher levels. The fact that people could meta game and optimize to make the most invincible of characters. I'm guilty of it, but it was fun at the time and fun is why we play. The move away from that has been good but I'd be lying if I said I don't want to play some version of 3e again, maybe pathfinder...

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2011 11:25:10 AM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
"I'm not pissed and I'm not taking it personally... I'm just disappointed, and I think the miscalculation by WotC is hastening the demise of the RPG community."

I don't think it's fair to put that on WotC. If the community only due to a single company, that's our fault and WotC should be lauded for keeping it alive.

White Wolf, Iron Crown, Pinnacle, West End Games, Paizo, Goodman Games, AEG, Steve Jackson, Palladium and a whole host of other companies put out some great games. White Wolf in particular was pretty close to or bigger than TSR/WotC at it's height of World of Darkness.

At some point I think we have to realize that it might not be them - it might be us. I think the RPG community is the one really hastening the demise of the RPG community. You can blame WotC, but are you buying other stuff instead? If WotC marginalized its core audience that badly and it's a viable industry, someone would have come in and picked up the business (or existing companies would have drawn in many of those people).

I think the reality is that pen and paper RPGs are a niche industry that has been further reduced by the advent of video games and MMO. A niche industry can survive and profit, but you have to have realistic expectations. There are things provided by RPGs that electronic games can't duplicate (yet), but the reality is the pros for those games and the ease of use drastically outweigh the loss of those aspects for most people.

People need to stop saying "if I wanted to plan an MMO..." and start looking at why people are playing MMOs and aren't playing tabletop RPG. They need to look at the strengths and weakness of each and see what they can learn from them.

As I've said before, I'm pretty passionate that this is the root issue, I only wish I had an answer - I'd be rich. But identifying and fix the issue are two very different things. I think ultimately the answer may be something that we as gamers don't think should be the answer. I'm reminded of the old Ford quote that if he asked what people had wanted, they would have said a faster horse. :)

Posted on Feb 9, 2011 4:41:46 PM PST
Bruul says:
Great point as usual PG. Do you think the the "re-invention" of the game was a good thing? I wonder if the game is better or worse for it. Would we all still be playing if 4e never existed? I know I would. Looking back with my 20/20 hindsight glasses on I think WotC would have retained more of their old fans and still drawn in new ones if the change wasn't so dramatic. 4e could have been more of a blend of 3.5 and some of the 4e ideas that are really cool. Take the best of both games to create the new edition.

Look at essentials, is that not a grab for how things were done in 3e? Most of what I like about 4e could be added into the old 3e class structure. Surges, skills, saves, spell durations, the bloodied condition, and probably more could easily be added to a 3e game. I know because I tried it myself before 4e fully launched. It was strange but worked. People missed the level of cusomtization that 3e allows. When 4e launched it was like picking chocolate or vanilla, it's much much better now of course. That skimpy first offering was a huge turn off to alot of players. I kept an open mind but as time goes on I'm starting to see the strengths and weaknesses much clearer in both systems. It took a few campaigns in 4e to really see where it shines versus where it is dull. There is so much I like about both games I'm kinda having a DM crisis as to where to go with my game. The urge to do a home brew smash up of the two systems grows stronger.

Posted on Feb 9, 2011 11:15:38 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 9, 2011 11:22:34 PM PST
I think as old school gamers our pespective on whether or not WoTC is "floundering" with 4e may be a bit skewed.
The other day while driving clear across the state i stopped in a barnes and nobles in the middle of no where to hit the head and stretch my legs for a bit. The gaming section had 4 entire shelves of well organized 4e products, and one shelf that was half whitewolf/paizo/FFG and half boxes of 4e game tiles. These stores don't set these displays up haphazardly.
Whats more jacksonville, FL, where i live, has at least six similar chain book stores with similar roleplaying sections (I've been to most of these store for one reason or another over the past 6 months).
On the other hand it has only one real gaming store (there are two others but one is in a flea market and exclusively sells cards, and the other is now 90% comics & collectibles with maybe 10 total gaming books left on the shelf). Granted in this one gaming store (which i love), the 4e section shelf is just one among many, but to the casual gaming public (and most new role players besides)?

I'm not trying to say they are busting any sales records, but to proclaim them dead in the water, or even in decline is just kinda silly at this point. The kinda market share and public recognition they get compared to our favorite niche products is ridiculous.

If it buisness for WoTC was that bad we'd see gaming shelves that looked alot more like they did in the ninety's during the decline of TSR. When DnD was just another title lost in between Vampire, Battle Tech, Shadow Run, GURPS, and RIFTS. DnD was in major decline at the time leaving that shelf space available for numerous games to muscle their way in and proclaim themsleves big guns in the industry. I'm just not seeing that now.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 11, 2011 8:25:26 AM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
"Great point as usual PG. Do you think the the "re-invention" of the game was a good thing? I wonder if the game is better or worse for it. Would we all still be playing if 4e never existed? I know I would. Looking back with my 20/20 hindsight glasses on I think WotC would have retained more of their old fans and still drawn in new ones if the change wasn't so dramatic. 4e could have been more of a blend of 3.5 and some of the 4e ideas that are really cool. Take the best of both games to create the new edition."

Only hindsight will truly tell, but my opinion is if we were still in 3.5, we would just be seeing a steady decline - maybe slow, but the game would be continuing to contract steadily.

4E was a gamble and may not have expanded things as it pushed away some player, but sometimes you need to gamble to find the right path and its not always the first one you choose. Maybe if TSR had taken a gamble they would still be around.

One thing that scares me is I don't see a lot of new ideas like we did between start of 2E and the start of 4E. When is the last time you saw new systems with a ton of supplements like Storyteller, Brave New World, 7th Sea, Legends of the 5 rings, Deadlands, etc... (sorry, but anything associated to warhammer doesn't count to me). The only healthy smaller systems I can think of off the top of my head are the Mutants and Masterminds system (build off d20 tho) and Burning Wheel (ie Mouseguard). There are some others but nothing that has reached a critical mass that it's a good system - most are trying to find some liscening tie (smallville, supernatural, etc...) and I can't remember the last big independant IP and rules set that has been successful.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 11, 2011 8:44:27 AM PST
P. Gurdgiel says:
"I think as old school gamers our pespective on whether or not WoTC is "floundering" with 4e may be a bit skewed."

Maybe, maybe not. I don't think the hobby will die completely or soon, but it is far from it's healthiest.

"If it buisness for WoTC was that bad we'd see gaming shelves that looked alot more like they did in the ninety's during the decline of TSR. When DnD was just another title lost in between Vampire, Battle Tech, Shadow Run, GURPS, and RIFTS. DnD was in major decline at the time leaving that shelf space available for numerous games to muscle their way in and proclaim themsleves big guns in the industry. I'm just not seeing that now."

But back them people were CREATING. D&D in decline doesn't automatically mean opportunity for startups - especially if the hobby is declining and many former players don't have the interest in finding an alternative and are just leaving.

The hobby completely dead? Heck no. Far from the 3E peak of health or WoD peak of health? Absolutely. Where it goes from here? I have no clue. But to be honest it feels pretty similar to the wanning TSR years at the moment (or closer to that than anything else).

Posted on Mar 4, 2011 6:27:20 AM PST
Well, on the upside, it looks like the material from the cancelled books is finally starting to percolated down into DDI, starting this month.

The Class Compendium's Warlord is getting put up this month. Next month, after too-long a wait, we will finally have Heroes of Shadow.

It feels like WotC's done some reorganization, and they're finally talking about the future again in a substantive way.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Dungeons & Dragons forum (204 discussions)

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Best D&D book? 16 Apr 18, 2012
Ah, the vibrant community 13 Feb 25, 2012
Where can I find miniatures? 24 Sep 5, 2011
Miniatures 14 Sep 5, 2011
Where to begin? (Returing to D&D after 20 years away) 1 Sep 1, 2011
Heroes of shadow 50 May 2, 2011
Confused about future D&D supplements - anyone? 39 Apr 30, 2011
Bringing Back the Full Attack! 21 Apr 29, 2011
So, Character Builder is going to be online-only... 54 Apr 22, 2011
Current Campaign, Any Edition Part 2 46 Apr 22, 2011
Gestalt 19 Apr 8, 2011
What's your D & D history? 74 Apr 1, 2011
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Dungeons & Dragons forum
Participants:  13
Total posts:  40
Initial post:  Feb 1, 2011
Latest post:  Apr 30, 2011

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions