Search results

I do agree with this. Asking players to give up combat feasibility for RP feasibility just doesnt work. Players um and ahh come level up and almost invariably go for the combat option. The one guy in the group who doesnt ends up feeling slighted as the rest of them resolve everything by...

Ditto. I want 5e to bring D&D back from the "combat is the dominant pillar" point it got to. Saying feats are combat specifics just goes in the wrong direction for me. Sorry. Edit : Though I do take your point about role-playing being detached and non-mechanical. Problem is that when character...

Regardless of which side of the fence you sit on, I hope that there is at least enough dis-approval of this rule in the community in general and that WOTC is listening enough to understand that this is one hell of contender for optional ruling. I hope they do have alternatives out of the gate.

Im not overly fond of the HD mechanic either (though I VASTLY prefer it to the HP mechanic) Though oddly enough, in 5e it would work far better than ever before. Why? Flattened Math. One of the stated advantages of flattened math is that creatures dont become trivialized as you progress...

Yea, severely dislike the hp threshold mechanic. I get it, I understand the motivations, but this has so many pitfalls directly in front of us that I just cant believe this is the only way to resolve the spells. One other thing people havent mentioned is Constitution. Already a really useful...

I thought 4e multiclassing was crap. Utter crap. However, oddly enough, I agree with your post. The implementation in 4e was just weaksauce, but the principle has some teeth. Generally 4e feats were POWA boosts to what you class actually did, but with multiclassing (had they got it right) you...

Ditto, this was perhaps the best single change we made! (Even if it did come in late paragon...wish I had of thought of it sooner). Things started making sense. I didnt have to convolute all challenges to ensure they were worthy of players. Doors didnt have to "become harder", rivers didnt...

I agree that the ranger is a Jack-of-all-trades. But dont agree that the Bard isnt. (Arguments already made by gyor, wont repeat). Who ever said there isnt enough room in class definitions for two?

Personally Im not a fan of encounter spells, for many reason (some already stated here). I dont mind what the have proposed for the evoker (and other traditions Im assuming) but would simply prefer that you didnt get these spells back on a 1:1 basis. Maybe that you have a random chance of...

Feedback only has value to the receiver. Thanks for yours, its has taught me a great many things.

Look, thanks for the post. I work in software design and find the biggest hurdle is making people understand that concept (foundation) and objective are the first things to establish before you start on the solution. So its encouraging they are stating the narrative is the highest concern and...

I have actually often throught the other way. Lets just have a d20 for probability and a d6 for efficacy (/damage) and do away with the obscure others. ....ok, I will shut up now.:o

Yes, but all those examples are competitive, TT RPG is cooperative. Apples and oranges. I agree with what Mike said...perfect balance in cooperative TT RPG is practically unachievable (some optomizer will ALWAYS break it) and ultimately bland. I am so glad Mike made this point.

The Ardent? Isnt the only reason that class even existed to to give a nice psionic fit for 4e's tank/striker/leader/controller and pisonics didnt have a "leader" class? Really, given 5e doesnt have formal roles, why would you want to resuscitate this class? Nail the Psion, make the "ardent" a...

Damn if you do, damned if you dont. I think your dead right, but apparently others dont. At the end of the day, this is a bad thread. So many people forget that a Forum is a medium intended for open discussion. The GOOD threads remember this and are raised in order to stimulate discussion. The...

I am firmly in the use backgrounds approach. Without wadeing into the debate here (as it has already been discussed over and over on there very forums and Im worn out for contributing), could I put forward another perspective. If our designers take care not to wire skills into too many facets...

Yes, but the next sentence after what you quoted was ... So the problem with turn undead isnt the concept, its the implementation. But everyone is seeing that. Thats why the (4e) essentials TU was FAR more tuned down from the PHB variant, and even the PHB variant got a decent nerf at one...

Why the turn undead hate? Well, let me tell you about our 4e cleric. The player said "I want this cleric to be an undead hunter and healer". He had an objective and an image of what he wanted. Good for him. So he tralled every feat he could get, picked the right god, got as many extra channel...

Someone give this man a cigar. I couldnt, apparently I have given you too many. This is exactly right. For our purposes, we scrapped XP tracking when 3e first came out, and good ridence. If XP tracking is required to enable multiclassing, Im going to cry. Regardless, I distinctly dislike...

I like specialties and backgrounds. Maybe not the ones they presented, but the principle is appealing. Quickly generated characters that are varied and distinct without situations where one players intimate knowledge of rules and mechanical synergies marginalizes other characters (or, at least...