Search results

Would it really be such a turnoff if they'd placed the 4e style notation at the top (or bottom) of each spell entry as a quick-reference aid and used the 3e style for the paragraphs of description? Because that way you'd get the rules buried in paragraphs of text as you like and people like me...

4e was great. I loved it.

This rule also screws with people who take certain feats, such as Shield Mastery (I think that's the one. I'm packing to move and don't have my books out). I've been making the identification of the spell part of casting counterspell. Which seems logical to me: after all, if you can't...

I don't really see the point of orcs. You could basically treat them as another tribe of humans but still use the culture described for orcs and not really lose anything. Also, it's generally been my experience that when you take away the "inherently evil" trope you get more player attempts to...

I don't do it for that reason. When I was in grade school that's just how I was taught to spell those words. My teacher wasn't from the UK, or if she was she had completely lost her accent and never mentioned being foreign, but that's just what she taught us was the right way to spell them.

I'm American and I pronounce them "Min-oh-tore" and "Say-tur." Then again, I also spell colour, behaviour, etc. with a u, which I've been told is the spelling used in UK English.

It's hard to do everything you'd want within the confines of a subclass. My campaign setting has a mage-slayer who is an anti-arcane paladin. However, the ability to detect certain types of creatures (which exists outside the subclass framework) is replaced with the ability to detect magic...

Oh, I'm not saying you're wrong. Just clarifying my prior advice, and agreeing with you on this one.

Although I suggested those exact names above, I don't particularly love them. I fully concede that they're obvious, simplistic, and at least a smidgen lazy. All of which makes them great names to use when you just need a name on-the-fly, but I do prefer having more of a historical or in-world...

3e was good. But, for quick reference during play 4e is the hands-down winner in my book. I mean it's not even close. 3e could have a relevant mechanic buried in paragraphs of text, but 4e put all the relevant mechanics front and center for easy reference.

You're not alone. I also enjoy D&D (and have since BECMI) but haven't read much fantasy. I played D&D for many years before I ever read Tolkien. Maybe that's why I also drew on The Brothers Grimm and fairytales. My fantasy influences come mostly from film: Willow (1988) Conan the Barbarian...

To offer specific suggestions. . . I see you have to cities on the coast at the mouth of river tributaries (the top of the map). You could go with Eastport and Westport. You could go with Port_____ for one, and have the more recent port city called Newport.

People have a tendency of building towns in certain places, and naming them in certain ways. Let's look at some real world town names: Newport Portsmouth Nashville Beverly Hills Oxford New York Jamestown Yorkshire We can see a few things here that can easily be patterns in naming. A town in...

I agree, both about the mechanics and about the piling-on. If I were to have a child-abusing demon in one of my games (I won't. But, for argument's sake. . .) I really wouldn't feel the need to make mechanics for the child abuse. The things the demon has already done would've worked because...

Why would anyone pile on king for Pennywise when IT also contains a far more objectionable underage gangbang by the protagonists?

You know, When I was a little girl, I was always taught that standing up for someone who was being bullied, harassed, insulted or assaulted for anything other than the content of his/her character was simply basic human decency and doing the right thing. It makes me very sad to see empathy...

I won't go so far as to say that villains only say things which are wrong, but I agree with you that what that villain said is wrong. It's like when I hear people say there would be no good without bad. Yeah, there would be good, we just wouldn't have a counter-point for it.

No. I'm not buying it at $29.64 (the current Amazon price). It has too much FR setting crap in it for that price to be a good value for me. If I can find it in a bargain bin or otherwise lightly used for $10-15 then I'll pick it up.

$30 is close enough to being fair for me that I'll likely buy the book. But, it's so close to being fair for me because I didn't buy the SCAG and won't be paying for some of the content twice. It does mean that I'll never be willing to pay more than $10-15 for the SCAG however, because I'll...

Some of us did stick around.