Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Deviant Dagger and NachaCanada Recent Activity
Deviant for 7 Years
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 37 Deviations 2,071 Comments 5,258 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

Eve, Amber and Whitney by Daggerhammer
Mature content
Eve, Amber and Whitney :icondaggerhammer:Daggerhammer 8 18

Favourites

Captive 66 tiny straightjacket by Bound-to-please
Mature content
Captive 66 tiny straightjacket :iconbound-to-please:Bound-to-please 179 15
Naomi and Nacha by BoundPretties
Mature content
Naomi and Nacha :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 199 22
Jun and Kelly by BoundPretties
Mature content
Jun and Kelly :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 249 80
The Alorian Empire by alexichabane The Alorian Empire :iconalexichabane:alexichabane 97 89
Literature
The Imperial Map Expansion prt2
Korin
The oldest and wealthiest house, Korin is the center of banking and trade in the Empire. They are the oldest allies of the Alorians, and as such they enjoy the same high standards of technology and medicine as the core systems.
While there are obvious disparities of wealth between the various social classes, its never been made more apparent than in Korin. Each world that houses members considered to be of "noble" birth or even those with enough wealth have palaces floating above the ground trended by commoners. Even more off-putting is that members of the noble class refuse to walk from place to place if they can help it, instead relying upon hover chairs to see them to their destinations. If they must walk it is along pre-approved carpeted paths that for a commoner to step upon means a one-way trip to the Pits.
Militarily speaking they stay out of conflicts that arise from other houses, but in the same breath if money is to be gained from it they will absolutely lend one
:iconWhiteRavenLord:WhiteRavenLord
:iconwhiteravenlord:WhiteRavenLord 7 17
Literature
The Imperial Map Expansion
Tol-Bayren
The House of Tol-Bayren rule over a vast and populous collection of systems. They hold an uneasy peace with their arch-rivals of Tol-Malium after centuries of bitter warfare. Both houses were conquered and absorbed into the Alorian Empire, and now must continually supply them with soldiers and resources.
Known for their quality manufacturing and technology, the citizens of Tol-Bayren are typically pledged to service in the Imperial Navy.
Old Bayren sits outside the edge of the Empire and remains fiercely independent.
Planetary Guide
-Pentos
-Simm
-Callum
-Wyland
-Baldarin
-The Ashen Fields
-Ral
-Offerin
-Tarsis
-Kanari
-Nethyria
-Yainia
-Yosporia
-Vol-Vuiliv
-Teitune
-Zieria
-Sheron
-Drall
-Elm-rath
-Owin
-Vol-Iboss
-Baynides
-Tario
-Giyliv
-Speorus
-Vol-Taitis
-Vol-Crov
-Liathania
-Vol-Roumia
-Troforia
-Vuplov
-Jaolara
-Vatine
-Iepliea
-Ustruna
-Vol-Plarvis
-Ocleshan
-Vol-Sciri
-Vol-Riama
-Uli
High Lady Tol-Bayren rules the system from her throne on the world
:iconWhiteRavenLord:WhiteRavenLord
:iconwhiteravenlord:WhiteRavenLord 8 11
Annabelle is the Damsel by BoundPretties
Mature content
Annabelle is the Damsel :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 337 292
Nacha's Hucow by BoundPretties
Mature content
Nacha's Hucow :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 396 79
Domme Duel by BoundPretties
Mature content
Domme Duel :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 120 106
NACHA AND KELLY, Thank You All by BoundPretties
Mature content
NACHA AND KELLY, Thank You All :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 188 38
NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 6: STAY AND PLAY by BoundPretties
Mature content
NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 6: STAY AND PLAY :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 278 58
Skull Chalice spacemarine color scheme. by WhiteRavenLord Skull Chalice spacemarine color scheme. :iconwhiteravenlord:WhiteRavenLord 3 18 NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 5: WHY NOT BOTH by BoundPretties
Mature content
NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 5: WHY NOT BOTH :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 346 43
COMMISSION - The Cursed Alchemist by darkshadowartworks COMMISSION - The Cursed Alchemist :icondarkshadowartworks:darkshadowartworks 126 15 NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 4: A PONY TAIL PLUG! by BoundPretties
Mature content
NACHA AND KELLY, Chapter 4: A PONY TAIL PLUG! :iconboundpretties:BoundPretties 396 69
Captive 57 by Bound-to-please
Mature content
Captive 57 :iconbound-to-please:Bound-to-please 290 32

Activity


Eve, Amber and Whitney
From BoundPretties doing the sketch sale, roughly based on three of my favorite adult starlets.  Names are in reverse order from the picture because reason!  Hee!
Loading...
This is one I discussed with a friend of mine just tonight!  If you play Dungeons and Dragons or Pathfinder, you may find this interesting!  If not..... well, this may still be interesting.

A DM I know has two parties he regularly runs for.  One is a desert party with a barbarian, a monk, a wizard, a bard, a ranger, and a paladin.  The other is a north europe kind of region with a fighter, a druid, a wizard, a cleric, a rogue, and a paladin.  They are both from level 8 to 11, depending on the character, averaging out to about 9.  Of note the desert party's monk is powerful, but the northern party's fighter is the sole level 11 character, and he has extremely good equipment compared to everyone else on the field.  He is also chaotic evil working towards a good alignment..... having him is a risk to the party because he could probably kill them all in dire circumstances, but the paladin has talked the others into letting the man TRY to redeem himself.

The Desert party encounters a man on the run, a metal smith, claiming that he is being pursued by a group of adventurers who wish to take him back to his home city where he will be enslaved.  They take up the cause of the man in the interests of preventing slavery, since they have to constantly fight this particular inhumanity in their own back yard, as the cities DON'T trade in slaves but the nomadic bands tend to.

The northern party is pursuing an individual who took a very large loan out from a local lord and signed a contract stating that if he failed to repay the sum loaned, he would work for the lord as a smith to the tune of one year per thousand gold owed (which, given what a smith typically makes in a year, is generally a pretty generous payback plan!).  This amounts to six or so years of labour, in which time he makes no money but has shelter and food.  Of note the man also left a family behind, and the Lord COULD have taken the eldest son instead of the father, but chose instead to hire the party to fetch the man.

The two parties meet and size each other up, each looking at the situation from their own perspective.  To the Desert party, there is a strangely mixed party of characters including a thief, some kind of barbarian priest, a holy man of a heathen god, a holy knight of a different heathen god, a weird fellow bedecked with scrolls and charms, and some warrior who is quite evil.  To the northerners there is a much more uniformly good party with a hulking bruiser, some oddly serene athletic fellow, a woman with a bunch of strange instruments, a man with a tall banner proclaiming faith to a heathen god, a woman with a very impressive bow, and some strange portly fellow on a floating carpet.  They meet and discuss their situation.

Note that.  They MEET and DISCUSS.  Already this is an atypical D&D campaign, now isn't it?  Hee!

The northern party explain the conditions of the contract signed by the smith, including producing a duplicate copy which was also signed.  The southern party explains their stance on slavery.  Much arguing commences between various members of the groups, including quite a lot of needling of the evil fighter by the opposing barbarian and the bard.  The two wizards seem involved in their own discussions, the druid and ranger spend their time comparing environs and survival tricks, and the monk and cleric seem busy on their own talking points as well, so the rogue and fighter on one side end up bickering a lot with the bard and barbarian on the other.  This leaves two paladins to control their party mates while striving to find a resolution.

Now, here is where some interesting things occurred:
- Neither paladin spent their time harassing or controlling their respective rogue/bard!  That's right, they didn't end up using every little thing their sneaky character did as an excuse to berate them!  A common problem avoided, both sides used their sneaks to gather information on one another, including deeds performed, reputation, and so on, as well as proving that yes, the smith was in the area.

- Neither of them tried to pull any kind of honour duel out of their butt to solve the issue violently!  Both recognized that their own version of lawful good was no less valid than the other's in their own region, and conflicting beliefs did not instantly nullify the 'good' part of the other paladin's views and actions.

- Both realized that their party members, being either not diplomatic by nature or too busy needling one another, were going to leave the thrust of the discussion to the paladins, but apparently both regularly conferred with their allies.... including setting defense around their inn rooms and opinions on the likelihood of defeating the opposing party if required.

- Each considered the possibility they may have been in the wrong.

- Each insisted their parties work together and not immediately discount the other...... bickering aside.

Now, for some people that's pretty odd behavior, since a lot of people play paladins as self righteous douchebags who harass their team for any perceived failing to live up to being good or perfectly lawful.  Others fight the holy fight against all comers without really considering what the consequences are, assured they can't go wrong as long as they're beating down the bad guys.  In this unusual case neither did ether.  Very odd in my experiences with paladin players!

In the end the desert group surrendered the smith to the northern party, not just because he knew what he'd been getting into in the first place, but also because he'd abandoned his family to the mercy of the Lord he owed and the Lord had been unwilling to exploit them as he could have done under the law.... the smith, it was felt, owed his family a lot more than the Lord in question!

So, with that, the two parties separated and went to find further adventures.  Spells were swapped between wizards, ideas and rhetoric between monk and cleric, survival tips and warnings about creatures between druid and ranger, and insults between bar, barbarian, rogue, and fighter.

So, who here would have tried to settle this a different way?  Who thinks this was a good way to settle things?  Who would have done something different?  Was this optimal?  Less than?  What would you have done?

And lest anyone think this was completely calm, the fighter did end up fighting the barbarian and bard, both at once, and he mopped the floor with them.  It turns out fury and song aren't as powerful as full armour, a heavy shield, a bastard sword, and a good plan!  Though, I'm assured, nobody died and the fight was agreed on by both parties (and heavily bet on).  However, the barbarian DID end up needing a new weapon and the bard required some serious medical attention for being beaten severely!

Anyways, tell me what you think!  What have been your paladin experiences in RPGs?  And as usual, keep things safe, sane, and consensual!

Nacha
This loot box thing is getting pretty weird lately, isn't it?  Apparently the producer of Monster Hunter World said they wouldn't have loot boxes in the game and it was a big cheer moment, even from me, and I haven't bought a video game in more than a decade!  Wow, has that gotten out of hand.

Someone told me the police branch that looks at gambling in the states has decided that, for now, it's not illegal nor technically gambling for video games to do this.  Surprise surprise, if it WERE they wouldn't be doing it right?  But because it's 'not illegal', they do it.  However 'not illegal' doesn't mean explicitly legal, just that there's no rules covering it.  On it's face, it is, simply, gambling.  You pay money, you get random results, you get that addictive rush if you get something cool.  This on top of already paying a ton for the game, especially if you're a preorder kind of person or you get special editions (heaven help you if you preorder special editions..... can you send ME that money instead of flushing it down the drain like that?!)

Loot boxes are gambling, just in a not currently regulated format.  This may surprise you, but I know plenty of people who don't consider the lottery 'gambling' and don't consider scratch tickets 'gambling' even LONG after they're proven to BE 'gambling' and worse, highly addictive.

I don't think all games need to have ways to suck more money out of your wallet.  Many video game companies are rich beyond belief, being huge international giants that bleed money straight from the populace of about every nation on earth that has electricity.  They make their physical games as cheap as possible, and these days they don't even bother making that many of them since people can just download the game directly without requiring a physical medium.  Yes, game development costs millions, but even middling games MAKE millions.  Survival horror games and adventure games don't need to be huge extravaganzas of multi-media mayhem and cutting edge graphics to make a cool few million.  Seriously, I've heard of games selling 4 million copies and being considered failures on a 12 million dollar budget.  That's 240000000 dollars made, at sixty bucks a game!  TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY MILLION.  How is that a failure when a movie managing to pull in 8 million on a 5 million dollar budget is considered successful enough?  Big video game companies are loaded with cash, and they are forever expanding, so don't fool yourself, they don't usually need the money gained by gambling.

Now, a FREE game offering some kind of incentive, I understand.  They didn't make any money from you buying it, so if you want to sling a few bucks their way to get ahead in the game, that's fine.  But free games are already designed to be addicting in most cases.  You're not making it worse, and you're usually deciding consciously to reward the game makers for their efforts.

I don't work in the video game industry, but I know a lot of people who have and who do, and like any company it's usually the guys at the top who have no idea what reality looks like that decide what the games they don't understand or respect need in them.  The people who make the games tend not to be good business men, they are writers and dreamers.  When they come up with an idea, I can only imagine how painful it is to have some suit full of dollar signs sic a team of soulless emotionally dead marketers and analysts on their project looking for ways to bleed out all the controversy, shove in different controversy, and always ALWAYS looking for new ways to bleed the audience for money.

Friends of mine who know where this is all going have warned me, unnecessarily, not to buy any game that features a season pass or preorder, or one that promises later material and lots of DLC.  They are now warning me away from ANY game with a loot box system, even one moving on in-game currency.  I stopped buying games because I got tired of them trying to constantly linger.  In my day you bought a game and liked it or not.  If enough people liked it, you got a sequel.  Rinse and repeat.  Nowadays people don't make new games and sequels, they just constantly stretch the game with DLC which is almost always worthless.  If you want DLC for a game, make it something worthwhile!  I remember seeing Borderlands 2 add on whole new areas, characters, and stories.  Sure, that works...... who else does it?

With that retroview, we now see the latest attempt to make sure they squeeze every penny out of you: loot boxes.  And what's in the loot boxes?  Things that make their grindy games playable, if not laughable.  Spend enough money and you can wade through most games these days, and the games are designed to require you to either spend ridiculous time grinding to make any progress or to spend money to speed up and beat the game.

Folks, if you're spending money to NOT PLAY THE GAME, you're not playing the game.  You spent 60 bucks on something plus whatever extras to a soulless company that doesn't care about you in the least which you may as well give to someone else in the hopes they'll play it where you can see it.  Because you AREN'T PLAYING IT.  You would be further ahead playing it until you get bored and walking away rather than wasting your time AND money just to say you beat a game.  Nobody cares if you beat a game and you aren't missing anything reading a good book wouldn't do for you and better.

Every time you buy a game with loot box systems in it, even if you don't buy them, you are encouraging the companies to produce more of them and you are promoting gambling.  It's that simple.  If you don't indulge, you still bought the game, and the statistics and figures will show that.  In an age of electronic data manipulation, games will continue any behaviour that the charts say is profitable or at least doesn't HURT profit.  So the more you say yes, the more they will continue.

My suggestion is stop wasting your money on games with loot boxes.  There's a lot of really good indie games out there for cheap and plenty of freebies.  If you're looking to kill some time there's books, movies, and more that aren't trying to stick a meat hook in your soul and bleed your wallet dry in the process.  Trust me folks, the money you will save on NOT buying a 200 dollar preorder set of crap that then soaks you for another 200 bucks in loot boxes a month for half a year will be better spent anywhere else.  Heck, commission an artist!  At least then you get what YOU want.

Anyways, that's my rambling on the topic for now.  Keep things safe, sane, and consensual, and for crying out loud STOP with the gambling!  These huge video game studios really don't need the extra cash, they aren't working for it!

Nacha
I hope this holiday is full of fun costumes, good times, cute kids with big smiles, sugar, and proper safety.  The best costume we've seen here tonight so far was an eight year old in actual metal scale-and-chain armour as a questing knight!  His quest of course being a sugar high, hee!

What was the best you guys saw this year?
Not that I'm some kind of literary genius, or even a particularly good critic, but I do know a good story when I read one.  And I have to say there's very little more compelling or moving than a particularly heroic, or cowardly, demise in a story.  This applies equally well to games, be they video games or tabletop.  So, here's a few points that make heroic or cowardly deaths memorable and moving to me, and why.

- Heroes dying because they have to do a job and dying is just likely a part of it.  A military type leading his men in a successful raid to kill the enemy commander and save his nation/world/galaxy is pretty 'been there', but when it's done well it can still be a strong moment.  Accepting you're going to die and going ahead anyways with a gun in hand and thoughts of what could happen if you DON'T in your head is pretty impressive, especially when it results in a win for the good guys.

- Heroes getting caught in an unwinnable situation and saying 'Come get some!', basically ending in the troperiffic Bolivian Army Ending (check tv tropes!) can be interesting.  You know they're going down, and permanently, but the sheer guts and fighting spirit required to try and go down fighting is impressive if handled right.  In so many asian cinema pieces I've seen, they do it SO wrong.  The bad guy wins (because heaven forbid people defying authority in most asian countries be portrayed as managing to make a difference) and the heroes die in a pitiful last stand fighting hordes of mooks until the camera cuts out.  Nothing done, no changes, not even a moral victory.  Now, having already DONE the good deed you set out to do and THEN getting cornered and saying 'well, no turning back now'..... THAT is the way to handle it.

- A coward is often caught in a situation they never wanted to be in by their morals, or their feelings toward something or someone they love.  If you're going to whack the coward, it's always nice for them to go by distracting someone from something important..... probably against all the odds and against every fiber of their being, they decide to man up and take the hit for something or someone worth believing in.  THAT is a good cowardly death and makes the character a bit more retroactively endearing.

- If you're writing a really cowardly character, don't be afraid to make them die a cowardly death!  Hiding in a space only to get blown up when it gets hit by bombs that don't touch more heroic characters, getting a stray shot while lurking in the shadows, and other unexpected kills while they think they're safe can get a nice point across: nobody is REALLY safe!

- If a hero dies FOR something, it's much more understandable.  For example, a hero who goes and fights holding off invaders is one thing.  One who goes and fights holding off invaders because his daughter is too sick to be moved out of harm's way is WAY more effective in making the choice to fight to the death make sense!

- We all know THAT coward, the small, sniveling, big mouthed one that goes around picking fights so their bigger friends can settle things for them.  NOTHING makes a book for me like watching one of them have to suddenly fight their own battles and subsequently not survive the horrible beating they take.  It's so gratifying.

- loveable cowards are hard to do right, and having one die right is twice as hard.  A coward swept up in events and dying is often sudden, they just turn around and die to something mostly for the feels it kicks up..... like anything cute and lovable, you can probably set your watch by their demise.  To do it right, have some other character use them as an emotional crutch or something, and have their unexpected death mean something to SOMEONE.  If a loved one has a huge emotional collapse about having caused their death, even if only by dragging the coward along, it makes the story have another strong facet.  Even if that collapse is into anger about their 'weakness'.

-And finally, my favorite death of all: the villain breaking death!  The heroic variant is when the villain is spared or saved by the hero, and takes the chance to kill them..... only to come up feeling completely empty about it, possibly prompting a retreat or even a complete turn about.  In cases of best frienemies, actually winning can CRUSH a villain, like in the movie Megamind.  The cowardly version is when a beloved minion, morality pet, or other attachment, especially one they THOUGHT they hated, is killed and prompts a huge shift in the villain.  Possibly they are struck by the death and become melancholy, or they finally get some lesson the minion or what not has been trying to tell them all along.  Maybe facing death so close just shatters their understanding of their power level.  It can be a major shift point in a narrative.

So, those are the circumstances of some of my favorite deaths in writing, gaming, and visual media.  What are some of yours?  Have you even considered it?  Do you prefer a 'good' death or a 'bad' one?  Let me know!

And as usual, keep it safe, sane, and consensual!

Nacha

deviantID

Daggerhammer
Dagger and Nacha
Canada
This is one I discussed with a friend of mine just tonight!  If you play Dungeons and Dragons or Pathfinder, you may find this interesting!  If not..... well, this may still be interesting.

A DM I know has two parties he regularly runs for.  One is a desert party with a barbarian, a monk, a wizard, a bard, a ranger, and a paladin.  The other is a north europe kind of region with a fighter, a druid, a wizard, a cleric, a rogue, and a paladin.  They are both from level 8 to 11, depending on the character, averaging out to about 9.  Of note the desert party's monk is powerful, but the northern party's fighter is the sole level 11 character, and he has extremely good equipment compared to everyone else on the field.  He is also chaotic evil working towards a good alignment..... having him is a risk to the party because he could probably kill them all in dire circumstances, but the paladin has talked the others into letting the man TRY to redeem himself.

The Desert party encounters a man on the run, a metal smith, claiming that he is being pursued by a group of adventurers who wish to take him back to his home city where he will be enslaved.  They take up the cause of the man in the interests of preventing slavery, since they have to constantly fight this particular inhumanity in their own back yard, as the cities DON'T trade in slaves but the nomadic bands tend to.

The northern party is pursuing an individual who took a very large loan out from a local lord and signed a contract stating that if he failed to repay the sum loaned, he would work for the lord as a smith to the tune of one year per thousand gold owed (which, given what a smith typically makes in a year, is generally a pretty generous payback plan!).  This amounts to six or so years of labour, in which time he makes no money but has shelter and food.  Of note the man also left a family behind, and the Lord COULD have taken the eldest son instead of the father, but chose instead to hire the party to fetch the man.

The two parties meet and size each other up, each looking at the situation from their own perspective.  To the Desert party, there is a strangely mixed party of characters including a thief, some kind of barbarian priest, a holy man of a heathen god, a holy knight of a different heathen god, a weird fellow bedecked with scrolls and charms, and some warrior who is quite evil.  To the northerners there is a much more uniformly good party with a hulking bruiser, some oddly serene athletic fellow, a woman with a bunch of strange instruments, a man with a tall banner proclaiming faith to a heathen god, a woman with a very impressive bow, and some strange portly fellow on a floating carpet.  They meet and discuss their situation.

Note that.  They MEET and DISCUSS.  Already this is an atypical D&D campaign, now isn't it?  Hee!

The northern party explain the conditions of the contract signed by the smith, including producing a duplicate copy which was also signed.  The southern party explains their stance on slavery.  Much arguing commences between various members of the groups, including quite a lot of needling of the evil fighter by the opposing barbarian and the bard.  The two wizards seem involved in their own discussions, the druid and ranger spend their time comparing environs and survival tricks, and the monk and cleric seem busy on their own talking points as well, so the rogue and fighter on one side end up bickering a lot with the bard and barbarian on the other.  This leaves two paladins to control their party mates while striving to find a resolution.

Now, here is where some interesting things occurred:
- Neither paladin spent their time harassing or controlling their respective rogue/bard!  That's right, they didn't end up using every little thing their sneaky character did as an excuse to berate them!  A common problem avoided, both sides used their sneaks to gather information on one another, including deeds performed, reputation, and so on, as well as proving that yes, the smith was in the area.

- Neither of them tried to pull any kind of honour duel out of their butt to solve the issue violently!  Both recognized that their own version of lawful good was no less valid than the other's in their own region, and conflicting beliefs did not instantly nullify the 'good' part of the other paladin's views and actions.

- Both realized that their party members, being either not diplomatic by nature or too busy needling one another, were going to leave the thrust of the discussion to the paladins, but apparently both regularly conferred with their allies.... including setting defense around their inn rooms and opinions on the likelihood of defeating the opposing party if required.

- Each considered the possibility they may have been in the wrong.

- Each insisted their parties work together and not immediately discount the other...... bickering aside.

Now, for some people that's pretty odd behavior, since a lot of people play paladins as self righteous douchebags who harass their team for any perceived failing to live up to being good or perfectly lawful.  Others fight the holy fight against all comers without really considering what the consequences are, assured they can't go wrong as long as they're beating down the bad guys.  In this unusual case neither did ether.  Very odd in my experiences with paladin players!

In the end the desert group surrendered the smith to the northern party, not just because he knew what he'd been getting into in the first place, but also because he'd abandoned his family to the mercy of the Lord he owed and the Lord had been unwilling to exploit them as he could have done under the law.... the smith, it was felt, owed his family a lot more than the Lord in question!

So, with that, the two parties separated and went to find further adventures.  Spells were swapped between wizards, ideas and rhetoric between monk and cleric, survival tips and warnings about creatures between druid and ranger, and insults between bar, barbarian, rogue, and fighter.

So, who here would have tried to settle this a different way?  Who thinks this was a good way to settle things?  Who would have done something different?  Was this optimal?  Less than?  What would you have done?

And lest anyone think this was completely calm, the fighter did end up fighting the barbarian and bard, both at once, and he mopped the floor with them.  It turns out fury and song aren't as powerful as full armour, a heavy shield, a bastard sword, and a good plan!  Though, I'm assured, nobody died and the fight was agreed on by both parties (and heavily bet on).  However, the barbarian DID end up needing a new weapon and the bard required some serious medical attention for being beaten severely!

Anyways, tell me what you think!  What have been your paladin experiences in RPGs?  And as usual, keep things safe, sane, and consensual!

Nacha

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconrunshin:
Runshin Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2017  Professional Digital Artist
150816 - Thank You-2 by Runshin  
Reply
:icondaggerhammer:
Daggerhammer Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2017
That's adorable!  Thank you for the excellent gallery!
Reply
:iconspidermagus:
spidermagus Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2017
Thanks for the llama! I will cry out your usser name in my next d&d fight as a war cry. I do this to honor you! DX
Reply
:icondaggerhammer:
Daggerhammer Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2017
lol, no problem!  I was just getting a heap myself and thought 'Wait a second!  I haven't given one of these to Spidermagus, and he's all about gaming and stuff, he deserves one!'

Onward to victory!  Also strapping a dagger to your hammer not only makes it a touch deadlier, but also makes it a nifty ice-axe in a pinch, hee!
Reply
:iconspidermagus:
spidermagus Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2017
So far I just have my trusty wand and quaterstaff. I"ll have to attach a dagger to my adventure friends goliath fighter's warhammer. I play as a ettercap wizard in a d&d 5e homebrew campaign. His name his Mr. Webby :::3
Reply
:icondaggerhammer:
Daggerhammer Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2017
An ettercap wizard named Mr. Webby...... I approve of this SO much!  That's actually a brilliant combo since Ettercaps have a huge manouverability advantage and can hold up in a fistfight!  PLUS they're definitely nible enough for somatic components to spells.  I rateh this an A+ class/race combo!  Just try not to eat too many halflings.... I know, they're tasty, but you saw what happened to that bunch in Lord of the Rings!

Goliath hammer plus dagger..... hm, it's like a pointy avalanche!
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconbound-to-please:
Bound-to-please Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2016  Professional Digital Artist
Reply
:icondaggerhammer:
Daggerhammer Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2016
Awesome.  Thanks for the amazing work!
Reply
Add a Comment: