AriochQ
Member

I agree with AriochQ, that this seems to really be about nostalgia, and unfortunately some of the requirements makes me feel like it looks it confuses the trappings of zines for the spirit of zines. I don't zine makers of old chose to use only one color ink or make their books 5.5 x 8.5 because it was part of their creative vision, I think it's because that's what they had available at the time. These days it's easy to put out a full color PDF for less than cost of printing an old-school zine. I think it would been more interested if Zine Quest had focused more on what I think are more the core of zines, that they are small fan-focused publications that come out regularly (rather than a single book). They could even focus on the periodical nature as a way to promote Drip.

...f 3e and 4e merely express a desire to somewhat unify experience across multiple GMs. Generalized rules of Fate and Cortex+ and WoD express a technical innovation that simply reduced the need for rulings. The loaded word "trust" comes from a time when people were distressed by change, and should not be trusted to accurately depict the changes and the reasons behind them, or the resulting relationships between player and GM. So, yes, I'll agree that in OS games, the GM tends to make more rulings. I'm fine with that. It has nothing to do with trust. Ok, then how would you characterize it? The rules are designed in such a way that the GM/DM is no longer expected to perform tasks that in OS systems would have directly fallen on the DM/GM. Would that about cover it? Perhaps "expect" rather than "trust" is the better word to use. OS games expect the DM to create rules ad hoc throughout play whereas NS games often use more comprehensive rulesets. Note, I do disagree with AriochQ's characterization of rules light vs rules heavy. That's certainly not true. I mean, many NS games are only a couple of pages long. Or, even something like Savage Worlds, while hardly rules light, is far, far lighter than, say, AD&D. Old School games are rules absent, but, they are certainly not rules light.

Or could it be that they are calling for DMs because of the level of demand? Spoiler: it is. I think ONE factor is a lot of veteran DMs are turned off by the new AL system. Generally, there are lots of players wanting to play - especially new people. So, I think demand for DMs has increased because of both factors. Naturally, I have no hard data to back this up. However, the coordinators calling for DMs in my area say we have lots of new folks who want to play and a fair number of their regular DMs are giving it a pass. I suspect as AriochQ has mentioned, many veteran players are passing on it too. Clearly, I have one local impression. It may be very flawed and the new AL system may be wildly popular and doing wonders for growing the game. I have my doubts...

The DM AriochQ in the one campaign I actually play in has the players award inspiration to each other. Players award inspiration for excellent roleplay and it seems to work very well. I am thinking of using the same system in my campaigns, because it eliminates something for the DM and keeps inspiration in the game. He also allows the accumulation of inspiration, but we spend the points freely and it really does not present a problem.

Sorry, talk of whitewashing in a D&D movie is fundamentally ridiculous. As implied by AriochQ, what does it matter is a racially Mandarin Chinese plays a Oeridian or if a racial Thai does? There are no Mandarin Chinese, or any other real life races in D&D settings. Who's to say what is a better representation of someone from Calimshan or Waterdeep or any other fantasy setting? It's a fricking FANTASY setting.

It has been a very long time since I have played in a campaign. I'm nearly always on the other side of the screen. Last fall, an acquaintance of mine invited me to play in a 5th edition D&D campaign. I knew the other players, but had never played a game with them. I thought I would give it a try. At worst, I figured I could chalk it up as an experience that confirmed my view my natural position at the table was as a DM. The Dungeon Master AriochQ has done a really nice job with the campaign and I have enjoyed it very much. Having been on the other side of the screen for so many years, I endeavored to be the best player I could. Someone I would want at my table for every campaign. I have not always succeeded, but I thought we could share some tips on being a player who adds to everyone’s enjoyment of the game. Here are my thoughts: 1. Be Consistent: Make the agreed play time a priority. Show up on time. Bring all of your necessary materials. Be ready to play. 2. Be Flexible: Use a character concept that fits the DM’s campaign world vision. Play a character that lends itself to story hooks. Create PC obligations tied to the campaign world. Give the DM anchor posts to use if they wish to. Orphaned barbarians from wiped out villages are OK, but ask yourself: Is your PC background giving the DM something to work with? 3. Be Creative: Don’t be afraid to offer adventure ideas, but don’t be offended if the DM does not use t...

@AriochQ The point of backing this Kickstarter is bringing these creatures to the tabletop. The only way you are going to see any of these monsters for use in game is through Effincool Miniatures. For all of teh reasons that I have already covered, we just cant do what Reaper does. :-) That does not mean that I do not value everyones input on this project! thanks for taking the time to comment. I also would like to add, that if you pledge for $360.00 and this project unlocks all of the stretch goals, that works out to $6.00 a mini, and includes 2 dragons and several larger pieces. I know this is not near the value that Reaper is able to afford, but it is the best we can do.

AriochQ A puzzle spaced throughout different parts of the castle that require simultaneous interaction to open a vault door. Falling portcullises or even stone doors. Or mimics ;) A pit with water flowing thru it with multiple aqueduct tunnels the water flows thru. Before anyone makes checks to jump across clarify that the consequences of a low roll mean falling into the water and getting swept away...somewhere. A coffin or an iron maiden with a built in teleporter. Include with a monster that Shoves or causes forced movement. Gargoyles that grapple characters and fly off with them to perches throughout the castle. Valuable treasure in a dangerous place to lure treasure-hungry PCs away from the party. Naturally guarded by a trap separating them from the party (e.g. chute). Provide a side solo mission for a PC - if they accomplish it then the party (or just them) benefits. However, it requires them to go it alone due to (a) ethical differences with the party, (b) need for s...

You mean this one? That says he cannot do it on his turn? It supports my interpretation. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/12/07/rogue-uses-sneak-attack-on-his-turn-can-he-also-use-sneak-attack-on-a-reaction/ Rogue uses sneak attack on his turn can he also use sneak attack on a reaction? December 7, 2017Zoltar of a rogue uses sneak attack on his turn can he also use sneak attack on a reaction?Yes — Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) October 9, 2017 As long as the reaction isn’t on the same turn. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) October 9, 2017 I hadn’t seen the addition, on the compendium... which I guess is why there is a compendium but I always take the sage advice as gospel even when it hasn’t been printed yet. As it’s clearly the designers intention. Good catch. So you can counterspell a counterspell but not when you’ve used a bonus action as well as a cantrip. Which would be fairly rare anyway as most bonus spells are minor effects and who dispels a cantrip...

I am not suggesting that and am not sure what point you are making. I have a ton of opinions on how I THINK some of the 5e rules should be written, but am discussing RAW in this thread. If you have a RAW citation for your statement that reactions happen outside of the round structure, I would love to see it. Like I said, I have seen people make that claim before, but haven't had any luck in finding an official ruling or SA backing it up. It has been specifically addressed in the sneak attack official sage advice compedium. Where despite being limited to one per turn a reaction exists outside this and allows a second sneak attack.

That post was specifically talking about a scenario where you HAD cast a bonus action spell on your turn. I went to great pains to point out it was a very limited scenario and use clear and precise language. I think your post was internally clear but not clear in the context of this thread. I know that when I first read it I assumed you were pointing to that last sentence in the bonus action rule to claim that you can't reaction cast on your turn at all. In hindsight it may have been beneficial for you to have included a brief comment explaining that you normally can cast reaction spells on your turn but wanted to point out that using a bonus action spell prevents this normal interaction.

Keep in mind if you cast a spell using a bonus action, the only other spell you can cast on your turn is a cantrip. This means no counterspell if you have already cast a spell using a bonus action on that turn. It doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. Just to be clear...It can really only happen on your own turn (since that is when you get a bonus action); you would have already cast, or be casting, a bonus action spell; the enemy is now either countering the bonus action spell, or a cantrip you cast after the bonus action spell; you cannot counterspell the counterspell. It may also occur during a spell based legendary action, since they occur at the end of other creature's turns. Counterspell isn't a bonus action, it's a reaction so that rule does not apply.

It doesn't contradict SA since they don't mention bonus action casting in their response. They tend to do that alot. Give very curt answers that raise more questions rather than explain the ruling. It is an edge case but does pop up on occasion. It can even be used to a characters, or NPCs, advantage once you are aware of it. All the scenario's you presented are correct. The best way to think about the casting limitation is to really phrase it as a rule about 'Bonus Action Spells' and not about spell casting in general. That is why a PC with Action Surge could actually cast two standard action spells in the same turn (given they don't cast a bonus action spell that turn), plus a reaction spell. You could even cast more as a wild magic sorcerer if you get a surge that allows you to take an additional action immediately (81-82 on the table). Theoretically, there is no limit to the number of spells you can cast a turn (if you continue to surge) assuming you DON'T cast a bonus action ...

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/212836/Dungeon-Master--Tips-and-Advice-for-New-DMs Thanks, I didn't know about that one! I also considered giving her this resource, but I decided to hold it back until a little later: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/133114/Be-Awesome-At-Dungeon-Design It has lots of great advice for realistic dungeons--you know, "think about how your monsters get food" and that sort of thing. But I feel like age 12 is when she should just be letting her imagination run rampant without worrying too much about that stuff. Her players are unlikely to find that it ruins their suspension of disbelief.

This From PHB: Casting Time: Bonus Action: A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. If there is another rule that overrides the rule above, I am unaware of it. Seems to contradict sage advice, or maybe it's just an edge case? In other words, using your reaction to counterspell on your turn is allowed unless you are or already have cast a bonus action spell. So you can't counterspell the counterspell of a Misty Step. You couldn't counterspell the counterspell of your cantrip after you've cast that bonus action spell. You can only do it if casting a standard leveled spell that is not a bonus action.

From PHB: Casting Time: Bonus Action: A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. If someone there is another rule that overrides the rule above, I am unaware of it. That’s only a rule about bonus action spells. If you cast a regular action spell and then reaction counterspell that rule doesn’t apply since you didn’t use any bonus action spells right?

Keep in mind if you cast a spell using a bonus action, the only other spell you can cast on your turn is a cantrip. This means no counterspell if you have already cast a spell using a bonus action on that turn. It doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. Just to be clear...It can really only happen on your own turn (since that is when you get a bonus action); you would have already cast, or be casting, a bonus action spell; the enemy is now either countering the bonus action spell, or a cantrip you cast after the bonus action spell; you cannot counterspell the counterspell. It may also occur during a spell based legendary action, since they occur at the end of other creature's turns. I don’t think that’s actually the rule but I’m welcome to being proven wrong

In my humble opinion, anyone who considers sleep and exercise to be "liesure activities" is actually doing a little too much adulting and will someday end up truly regretting the life they have lived. First and foremost: THIS. Same song, different day. We heard the exact same arguments with the rise of television. I am pretty sure when the first caveman invented the wheel, the caveman next door boycotted it since the increased mobility would lead to an erosion of cave community. The real question of one of isolation. Does gaming lead to an increase in isolation? Clearly table top games do not lead to isolation. They increase social interaction in almost every case. Video games used to be a solitary activity, but that hasn't been the case for many years. Most video gamers I know play with other people. So, that is also a red herring. I think it comes down to people being stuck in a tribal mentality. "My tribe doesn't play games, so playing games must be wrong" being dressed up as ps...

Same song, different day. We heard the exact same arguments with the rise of television. I am pretty sure when the first caveman invented the wheel, the caveman next door boycotted it since the increased mobility would lead to an erosion of cave community. The real question of one of isolation. Does gaming lead to an increase in isolation? Clearly table top games do not lead to isolation. They increase social interaction in almost every case. Video games used to be a solitary activity, but that hasn't been the case for many years. Most video gamers I know play with other people. So, that is also a red herring. I think it comes down to people being stuck in a tribal mentality. "My tribe doesn't play games, so playing games must be wrong" being dressed up as pseudo-science.I have seen references to one of the earliest confirmed written essays being a sumerian rant about "kids these days are too soft" etc. My brother and dad and friends have played golf and talked golf together regular...

Huh? Neither of those is true in the vast majority of campaigns. Any campaign that it is true, would be considered an outlier IMHO. I agree that gameplay needs to change as characters grow in power to keep things interesting. That is true in every RPG. Sometimes players aren't interested in empire building or world shaping and that makes higher D&D level adventuring pretty tough. This I disagree with. By the time a group is mid to high double digit levels, there's pretty much nothing native to the plane, outside of some dragons, that could individually challenge them in any edition. By that time, you're dealing with major demons and devils on a fairly regular basis.

Two articles so far, and I am still not sure what this is about. I really want to understand, maybe I am missing something. AFAIK, Zines were fan created content in the form of newsletters that had sign up lists and were distributed through the mail. Pre-internet, it was one of the few ways an individual could interact with their particular community (the other being conventions). The submission standards tended to be pretty low, so you got a lot of community content for the particular topic. The advent of the internet and ease of self-publishing have pretty much replaced the need for zines. Besides nostalgia, what else is this offering that we don't already have? I can't speak for others, but as I am contemplating winding down my architectural career I have also been thinking about starting up a 2nd career / hobby in RPG design. This kickstarter effort has prompted me to file with my State and Federal governments to register a gaming company to actually produce a zine under this prom...

Two articles so far, and I am still not sure what this is about. I really want to understand, maybe I am missing something. AFAIK, Zines were fan created content in the form of newsletters that had sign up lists and were distributed through the mail. Pre-internet, it was one of the few ways an individual could interact with their particular community (the other being conventions). The submission standards tended to be pretty low, so you got a lot of community content for the particular topic. The advent of the internet and ease of self-publishing have pretty much replaced the need for zines. Besides nostalgia, what else is this offering that we don't already have? AriochQ, These are good questions and I appreciate you asking them. As you stated, doing a month of RPG zines is largely nostalgia driven. I have a place in my heart for zines so I'm excited about it! :-) Why are publishers planning to do RPG zines? There's a variety of reasons: The cost of production is low enough that it encourages some first-time publishers to join in, the zine rules give "permission" to some high-end publishers to experiment with a simpler format, for others it's a chance to create a love letter to this format that, again, as you stated, did take a hit when technology fostered the internet. There's more but that's a fair sampling. In February, I foresee a lot of interesting content shared through some enjoyable zines that will be available in print and PDF at reasonable prices. I'm eager to see what comes of Kickstarter's initiative! :-) Thanks, Egg Embry, Wanna-lancer If you're a publisher that would like to share an RPG-related job opportunity in a future article o...

Yup. They have staggered registration and silver badge registration opens 2/2/19 thanks for all the info. Saw the list of events and looking that over now. You've been a big help.

An equally compelling, and possibly stronger, argument could be made for the opposite viewpoint. That we should use how the games were actually played, rather than intended. AD&D was rarely run 'as intended'. In 40 years, I have never run into a group that ran by the book initiative. Yet, most of the AD&D groups I have played with over the years had most of the OS characteristics I outlined in my earlier post. I very much agree with this. Lots of new games were explicitly built to handle some perceived deficiency of D&D. Rolemaster, for instance, started out as a set of "advanced" rules that were pretty clearly to be added to D&D for players looking for a more detailed set of rules. It became a game in its own right. I'm not familiar with the Rifts family of games much, but they are fairly clearly D&D derivatives. I've mentioned the business side, too, and I think it bears remembering: Back in the day, TSR was known as They Sue Regularly for a reason. Many game rule innovations happened be...

I don't follow the forums, but I doubt AL/PFS could 'take over' Gary Con lol. IMHO, AL has been the weakest part of Gary Con in terms of GM quality. That being said, expectations in an organized play setting should be different than a home game or stand alone outside of organized play. They all offer different experiences, none of which are 'wrong' or 'better', just different. Thanks for all the good info. I have zero interest in AL or honestly played 5e/PF there so that one thread got me wondering. It was a pit pissy in tone between some of the participants. I'll have to make a decision tomorrow.

First year I went, Mike Carr stopped by during my Fight in the Skies session, just to see how things were going. One of the fellow players in that session was Skip Williams. Last year I sat in on Dave Megarry's Dungeon! session, it didn't require any upgraded badge. It is much smaller than Gen Con, so you see 'industry legends' pretty often just walking around. Most of them are there to game, so there is a decent chance you could run into them during a session. Yeah, being a fraction of the size of GenCon and more OSR focused, I've heard, really appeals to me. I'm looking for old school tourney AD&D/OD&D type gaming. Plus some mini gaming. Well run?

An equally compelling, and possibly stronger, argument could be made for the opposite viewpoint. That we should use how the games were actually played, rather than intended. AD&D was rarely run 'as intended'. In 40 years, I have never run into a group that ran by the book initiative. Yet, most of the AD&D groups I have played with over the years had most of the OS characteristics I outlined in my earlier post. Ahhh, but if old schoolers are not embracing all the rules in advanced because they are arbitrary, fiddly and overly complicated, or because they just enjoy tinkering, and they are rejecting Gygax's philosophy, then are they technically embracing the game? They are using the game, but have heavily modified it to fit personal tastes. Usually those tastes fall under what is now considered Old School, but that is not Gygax's Advanced ruleset. 2 e continued the 1e philosophy, as written, not what most players were actually doing. Later 2e loosened up character rules with kit books and...

Not sure I agree with this. While I didn't have the broadest experience during the 1e/early 2e era, every table I played at was heavily house ruled. It was almost required given the complexity of the rules and relative lack of interaction with other gamers outside of conventions, college clubs, or Dragon Magazine. Oh yes, they were heavily house ruled, but if you read the rules in Advanced, house ruling is discouraged. Advanced falls under OS because of how most people played. In that sense, yes it's OS, but, that was not Gygax's intention. He believed he had given players all the tools they needed, so house ruling would be minimal to none. His goal was a player in Austin could move to Halifax, join a group, and have rules and advancement speed, etc. be pretty much the same as it was with his Austin group. This was the period when Gygax fought a lot with players who had their own ideas of how the game should be run. This was the time period where many of his articles in Dragon were con...