Search results

So, if I'm really into martial arts, can I describe exactly what my monk is doing in order to skip the attack roll? At the least, you'll give me a +2 or +4 bonus if I'm sufficiently descriptive, right? There's a reason why Charisma has always been the dump stat, why social interaction rules...

I'm surprised that there are people out there that still prefer random attributes and hit points. Among people I play with, point buy and fixed hit points per class are standard, unless the GM wants to run an "old school" game as a change of pace. If your group really wants random ability...

I suppose how important you consider the GM depends in part on what you consider his role to be. I generally include the preparation stage of adventure and encounter design as part of a GM's responsibility. I would think it's difficult to overestimate how important those foundational aspects...

Yes, the problem is that, while a great GM can make for a great game, there's really not that many great GMs. In a sense, most people who play D&D (or even RPGs in general) are self-selected, to the extent that we all either are, have or have had a great GM in our play group. I would expect...

Though I don't expect it, I would find it greatly amusing were they to make the city of Raven's Bluff core, for obvious historical reasons.

WOTC limps along (perhaps being sold off) and a major update (4.5e or 5e) gets released in 2011. WOTC blames the OGL (not without reason, since it would have to be a major factor in any likely scenario where 3.5e remains dominant) and swears off any further support for open gaming.

I don't quite understand the problem with WRT. It strikes me as far more effective for NPCs than it is for PCs. One PC being able to cast multiple times in a round is impressive, but by and large, the PCs are going to win most combats by definition. All this does is speed things up. Teaming...

This, btw, is one reason to be wary of epic storylines with low-level PCs (unless you have players who are willing to ignore inconsistencies for the sake of the story). If the setup is that the PCs are the only ones who are able to save the world, rescue the princess, fulfill the prophecy, slay...

Simple. Generally speaking, people play D&D because they enjoy playing D&D. The lower the level, the less D&D-content in the game. At 1st level, very little that matters will be determined by your PC's abilities, because you have very few of them. Save for a few outliers (e.g., the 20 Str...

I consider this the easiest maneuver to fix: Tell your players that it's their choice--they can use the maneuver as written, with modifications of their choice, or not at all. Let them know that NPCs will be bound by the same rules. The ability of lower-level minions using WRT to magnify the...

The "hiccup" method is the easiest one to live with. It just means that the very beginning of a combat is a strange and confusing time, and I can accept that. The alternative is to expand combat-timing systems into every corner of the game, and that way lies madness. Once you do that, you're...

That's not entirely incorrect. By default, you are entitled to a patent on whatever you claim is your invention. The patent examiner has to prove that you are not entitled to the patent; if they can't show proof that whatever you are claiming is not new or is obvious, you win. The more...

Personally, I've never been a fan of the "lose a level from being raised" system. I prefer the variant where being raised from the dead causes the PC to gain one negative level, which they suffer from until 30 days have passed/they next gain a level/they perform a ritual in their deity's...

Oddly enough, that's a rather interpreter-ish definition of what a literalist is. An interpreter cares about author intent and why and how the rules were created. A literalist, in contrast, generally doesn't care about those things. The rule is the rule and it says whatever it says; how it...

My general philosophy is that a GM should feel no qualms about deliberately breaking the rules when he feels that doing so makes it a better experience for everyone. However, for me to respect the GM as someone who knows what they're doing, the breaking of the rules needs to be...

If they're giving automatic bonuses to skills, I'm surprised they don't differentiate between class/non-class skills, e.g: - Your base bonus for a non-class skill is half your class level + Stat bonus; - Your base bonus for a class skill is your class level + Stat bonus; - You may train in any...

It does, but it's easy to slip in a house rule: "Instead of training in a skill, you may instead allocate a +5 bonus between two or more skills in which you are untrained (giving, for example, a +1 bonus to five different skills, a +4 bonus to one skill and a +1 bonus to another, or any other...

For consistency, I really like the idea of "the attacker always rolls". However, it's easy to switch this system around to "the player always rolls". (NPCs have static attack bonuses and ACs, spell DCs and saves; PCs roll to attack, block, cast a spell or save against one.) Indeed, I think I...

Whether or not you allow auto-success of a saving throw on a natural 20 has little effect. If a PC/creature could not save against the effect with a roll of 20, and needs the auto-success rule to live, the odds are that the next round is not going to go pleasantly for them anyway. It will...

I've been an opponent of auto-fail rules for saving throws in 3e since Skip surreptitiously slipped them in. Like anything that increases the impact of randomness, they disfavor the player, quite seriously in some cases. Auto-failing saves is a relic of 2e, added as a patch there because...