Search results

YUP. Sorry. :blush: Oh yeah, backgrounds, I forgot about them. There's a ton of them, too! Actually most of them are fine but there was an early set of backgrounds where you could take something like "Born Under A Bad Sign" and get a bonus to HP, which is maybe a little too good for a simple...

I would just add that pure combat can be a lot of fun in 4e, done right. The combat system is deep and will reward tactical thinking. As a DM you can make it work by coming up with encounters that challenge your players: a diversity of monsters, interesting terrain and good positioning are key...

Well I'm glad to see some folks think this is a good idea. Again, my concern is for new groups like the one in the "late to the party" thread where the DM seemed very overwhelmed by all the options. Honestly it is hard to fault him for that, for reasons I outlined in my OP. And it's not just...

A lot of us feel that the Essentials classes themselves leave a lot to be desired and strip out a lot of what we liked about 4e. That's not universal, btw, I think the Essentials Mage is a little bit better than the original Wizard. On the other hand some of the weakest classes in the game were...

Over on the RPG.net forums people were suggesting using the Rogue and changing the 'backstab' so that it works against enemies the player is SOLELY engaged with (and calling it something else, natch). This actually seems like a pretty solid suggestion.

The Late to the 4e Party thread has got me thinking: for tables thinking of giving 4e a try, getting started is intimidating. The first Player's Handbook has a lot of issues that were later corrected and is missing some important classes and races. The skill DC chart was revised twice. The first...

*shrug* I'm not privy to WotC's internal business discussions, but given that the first boxed set was announced as 'a complete, stand-alone roleplaying game' the implication was very much that it was a one-and-done. It was never intended to be a "launch line" with massive mutli-media tie ins...

That moment when the party walks in on the dragon and he's using mage hand to check facebook. Sounds like an EPIC ENCOUNTER!!!

??? The last Gamma World got two expansions. Seems unlikely they would have done that for a product that flopped.

Well, I think you need to be the kind of DM who is willing to push back against your players. But if you're not, why would you even be interested in this??

Tying powers to the natural value of the attack roll is not done to randomize them. It's to take the load off the DM trying to figure out if they are allowed to use the monster's 'limited use' powers. It's exactly the same as when you had to roll a d6 to see if a 4e monster regained its limited...

I see it as a Broadway show. Flumphs! The Musical. To be followed, of course, by Flumphs on Ice!​

The thing that appeals to me about bargaining is that you can use it when some player pushes for something that you would normally, by RAW, have to shoot down. Instead of just saying 'no', you can say 'ok, but in return...' And then come up with a real devil's pact! I do think this is the kind...

That's cool. Wish I had the art skillz/time to do stuff like that.

Pretty sure that it was me that mentioned it and it was the DM Quirks thread where it came up. I encountered this style no so much through a specific ruleset, but through an actual play podcast where designer Rob Heinsoo is DMing 13th Age. He LOVES bargaining with his players. It is...

I on the other hand, think that the first six paragraphs, which explain that people are generally already predisposed to like or dislike 5e and so early opinions should be taken with a grain of salt, bear repeating :) On the flip side, I'm not particularly interested in hearing the OP's...

Sweet art, that flumph looks truly badass. Glad to see that flumphs will be the epic threat they were always meant to be this time around.

Could this have anything to do with the fact that Neverwinter was in the not too distant past?

STEALING IT.

Harsh, but hopefully this discipline has a lasting im-pact. :angel: