Search results

True, the "polishing" 1st Ed got as 2nd is what made it great.

Hmm, Air Force 1 & some F-16s buzzing Manhattan comes to mind...

Most children in the US start 3rd grade at 8 years old. I taught 9 of my child's friends (none of them anything but average) and they all learned it. I've taught many kids to play. No problemo. Now, at 8 I was doing algebra, but I went to private schools.

No, it always remains true in a sandbox campaign. Dragons or no dragons, what I described is true. And, what you described was railroading.

If you were to actually read the games rules as 1st written it was damage not touching that was being determined in the "to hit" roll Yes, when I taught them the rules of it they had no problem. At that age you are doing multiplication & division so figuring out something like this is well...

No, that's the point of a Railroad campaign. In a "sandbox" campaign you encounter what actually resides where you take your PC. When the game "designers" at WotC decided to use the Heisenberg uncertainty principle to model encounters they threw a wrench in the sandbox campaign.

To answer you Q, no. It was deemed that only the fighter, because he didn't spend time on class abilities like spells, thieving skills, etc., had the time to build his strength to those high levels. In other words, fighters had time to physically work out where other classes spent time on...

Okay... I've taught 8 year olds to play and there wasn't a problem with figuring movement. So, I guess it could be a playability issue with someone who has less math skills than that... I've just never encountered it before.

Here's how I do it. I start the "encounter" thus; I take the Char mod, factor in any NPC predisposition mod, THEN I add or subtract points for effort of the players part when they make their pitch. I then roll and add it together. I grade for effort over acting ability. In this way if you...

Playability? I never met anyone in my 35 years of gaming that found any playability issues with that type of movement. So, I haven't a clue why they did it.

So, can I take a 10' rope of gold, stretch it out parallel with the grid and then move it 45' off center and end up with more gold? According to the rules I can.

From the legal standpoint, yes, as it is a D20 lic. From a mktg/PR standpoint it isn't bright since he is trying to sunset prior editions and the game he was referring to is a 3.x compatible game.

It just shows he's not a seasoned exec when it comes to interviews, recorded or not.

I was thinking more along the line of your speed increasing if you move at a 45' angle relative to the game board. Like in 4.0

That's where the "board game" feel comes from.

From C&C Monsters & Treasure: "Each classification of lycanthrope retains individual powers in human form, as listed below." Actually, C&C is the simplest to implement this in.

That was my thought but I'm not an IP atty. I just know that as a business exec I wouldn't refer to another company's product as my TMed product.

No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.

So, he considers Paizo's offering "D&D?

I hadn't thought about that, with 4.0 you can't really make what the OP wants.