Recent content by Mustrum_Ridcully

I have none, but I would't try to do that. Particularly not for PC races.

Not in any games I've been running or playing with, for at least 2 decades by now. Everyone gets the same XP, always. Also, if a character suffers from Nopla-Disease (No Player) and cannot participate, same XP as everyone. If your character dies, your replacement character also gets the same XP...

Just a reminder that some people might have an Int 18 and Expertise with the Game Mechanics skill, but they could still roll a 1!

Oh yeah, race-specific hit dice, I remember that the d20 Farscape game had that, and classes added a bonus modifier, and your class determined control point die and the race giving a bonus modifier. IIRC, that basically lead Hynerians Aristocrats being bad at both and Delvian Priestesses being...

Sure, but I wanted to point out that Essentials introduced that problem into 4E, and 6E designers need to keep that in mind. If they care.

Essentials was probably too late (and within 4E concept of balance, I think they're problematic. The moment not everyone has encounters and dailies, you risk getting into balance issues between 1 combat per extended rest and 8 combats per extended rest. But personally, I'd ditch "daily" combat...

The logistics of it might not work in his favor, because there are still many able-bodied people that could be willing to resist. Naboo did lack support by the Republic in Episode One, but they had their own army and fighters to offer resistance to the Trade Federation. Quite possibly that is...

Attacks rolls and Saves (if they are kept around at all and aren't all turned into defenses) use 1d20, skill checks roll 2d10 (or 3d6). This will make the smaller modifiers matter more, because you're more likely to roll "middling" results and will have less situations were the bad character...

But does it need to pick a lane? You might like that on an aesthetic level? But maybe D&D is successful because it never picked a lane and gives everyone something. It might not be anywhere as good at that something than a game dedicated to it, but it means it appeals to more people and it's...

Maybe stifle is too hard as a word? "Delay"? I mean he got two decades of rulership out of it, didn't he? Would that have worked if people hated his guts from the start? No, he really needed to lay on the oppressive regime hard to really lose their hearts and minds!

In your fiction perhaps, that would never happen in the real world. People have seen Star Wars and could spot the plot from a mile away.

In a way, the whole CLone Wars exist to create a huge kill zone for Jedi, Ruin Explorer? Might work. But it seems the whole spiel was also about giving his rule more legitimacy then just "I have more troops". Having this legitimacy stifles his opposition from mounting a resistance. The "people"...

I think the true reason is far simpler - less flawed methodology requires a far more elaborate setup and many more moving parts than they could hope to handle, especially if they have the typical deadlines for "make a new edition". Seriously, think about how many people you would need to make...

For the sake of participating in a thought exercise, he needs to, but he does not need to participate in the thought exercise, obviously. Maybe I should write could rather than can? Or would? Meh, feels overly pedantic.

A tangent to the topic, but I am not sure I agree these are GM roles. Maybe in practice for some groups, these are the same people. But with my first regular group, we switched GM duties ,but always played at the same place. Snacks and drinks were brought by everyone to share. In my current...