Recent content by delericho

I'd be inclined to add three classes, to complete the set of "every class from every PHB(1) of previous editions". That would mean promoting the Assassin back to being a class (1st Ed), adding a Warlord class (4e), and adding some sort of Mageblade class (the BECMI Elf 'class'). I'd also remove...

Personally, I like Mageblade. And, like others in the thread, I don't like Gish. There have been a few exceptions along the way (but just a few) - 3e had the Psychic Warrior and Favored Soul, for instance. That said, I do like the convention of using one word for a class, with subclasses...

I would prefer them all to be at least level 2 - the fewer choices are locked in at 1st the better, IMO. However, I don't see any need for them to be uniform. Nor do I think there's any argument for any subclass choices being at 4th level or higher (so only 2nd and 3rd would be options.)

Not the gift set - I have two of the books already. I may get MotM standalone, but not in May - if I buy the 2024 revised books I'll probably get it then. But even that's a really big 'if'.

1. Do you correctly prefer your RPG materials to be in real, book form, or are you one of those .pdf lovers? Depends. For reading I prefer physical. But all my gaming these days is online, so electronic is vastly better for that. (And since one of my games is with work colleagues, that does...

My default is "Common" is just whatever language is spoken and, unless there's a very good reason, everyone speaks it. Other languages basically don't come up. For the occasional (very rare) adventure where I want language to be an issue, the PCs will just need to deal with an inability to...

Yeah, I tend to agree. IMO, it's really unfortunate that WotC decided to merge darkvision and low-light vision. Plus, I tended towards giving out fewer 'special' visions altogether - of the PHB races, I would give dwarves low-light vision, tieflings and drow darkvision, and that's it. My few...

Right now, my answer is tending towards "nothing". Alas. But in times past, when I've been burned out on D&D I've run something completely different - Vampire, or Star Wars, or Firefly. That complete change of scene has done more to get me back on the horse than any attempt to find a close...

I'd be extremely surprised if that was planned at the point where L&L was published, rather than being an after-the-fact addition. At that stage, I don't think TSR had returned demons and devils to the game, or come up with the Blood War (and Planescape certainly was years away).

Yep, that book is probably the best "how to DM" guide I've read, and is probably the single best RPG product I own.

Love this idea for a series! L&L was... okay. I have it, rad it a couple of times, but never used it much at the table. I would have preferred much more on the priesthoods and less on the stats or the avatars - more stuff that's going to see use at the table, please!

For setting-specific campaigns, I maintain a fairly strict set of limits: anything that doesn't fit the setting is outright banned. If a player doesn't want to play a campaign with those limits, that's fine - maybe next time. If the whole group objects, that's also fine - I'll run something else.

Finish my two ongoing campaigns. And that's it.

It depends. If I'm doing a Spelljammer campaign, then there's a whole bunch of worlds out there, including Krynn, Toril, Eberron, Athas, and about a dozen homebrew settings I've worked on over the years (most of which, if I'm being honest, are pretty much identical, and many of the rest are...

I'd use 3.5e, because the megadungeon I own (Castle Whiterock) is for that edition. Or I'd use 5e, simply because it's my current go-to edition. Or I'd use 1st Ed, because it's one of three I've never run and it seems appropriate for something so old school. As for what my megadungeon is...