Search results

When have misses always equaled no damage? In older editions spells could still do damage if the targets made their save. But oh, that's magic... It's all always OK if Cause Magic. *eye roll* EDIT: Also, what Obryn said.

Yeah, I'm a huge 4e fan and I'm not seeing where all the bashing by WotC is. WotC has been going WAY easier on 4e than it did on 3.5. Also, I think that even though 4e's my favorite version of D&D ever, it's not a perfect system and there are some valid criticisms of it.

Cool. I haven't checked out that book yet; I'm an awful, awful person that will only buy game books from Amazon. :P This would be nothing short of marvelous. Too often have I DMed games where I had the PCs in a spot where in an actual realistic (or even cinematic) situation the PCs would be...

Because throughout D&D history and too often in their talks about this playtest, the words "fighter" and "simple" seem to be far too connected to those of us who finally found what we'd been looking for in the 4e Fighter. I personally would feel a LOT better if just once they'd talk about the...

Considering some of the attitudes and conversations I've seen around here lately, I think you'd be surprised.

I really, really wish they would stop trying to make fighters the noob class. Some noobs may want to play wizards and some experienced RPG vets may want to play fighters. Playstyles should not be catered to by class, but within each class.

Yeah... Entirely disagree and I almost feel like you haven't been playing the same game as me. As I've pointed out many a time, I was well aware of roles since I first played Basic D&D 25 years ago... The roles ine 4e aren't precisely the same as they were then, but close enough. I think roles...

The thing is, if you eliminate the explicit mechanics of roles like in 4e, they will still mostly exist. Clerics and the like will still have healing and buffs, and essentially be leaders. Rogues and Rangers will still be mobile characters that can dish out lots of damage. Wizards still have...

I would love a gunslinger class in the game, but definitely not in the first rulebook and maybe not in the first few years. But sooner or later some kind of inclusion of both primitive firearms and western-style firearms for those DMs who want to get away from bog-standard fantasy in their...

I couldn't imagine playing one game and especially not one character for over 25 years like that... That's just strange to me. My longest RPG character was a Star Wars D6 character that got used weekly for over four years. My longest D&D characters were a 3.5 character that went about two...

Detail is fine when it's flavorful, thematic and easy to determine. Facing is difficult because you have to mark all your minis, or pogs, or have an idea in your minds eye of where a character is facing, and then you have to determine how that actually applies to the battlefield. Determining...

I don't understand why people dislike roles so much. Maybe roles as presented in 4e were taken from MMOs, but MMOs took them from D&D first. We've known about roles going all the way back to Basic D&D. Back then it was mostly called Tank, Healer, Skill-Monkey and Spellcaster, but it came down...

I'd really like to see the Scholar and Fey Beast Tamer return from 4e, as well as more generic versions of the Pack Outcast (Werewolf) and Dead Rat Deserter (Wererat). Though I doubt the monster-y ones will be in the core book. Vampire should eventually become a theme as well, I felt 4e kinda...

This... I'm cool with. I want to be able to break human max as I level, but I'm good with not being able to break 22-24 or somewhere thereabouts. If I remember correctly (don't have my books here at work) I think I remember old school D&D capped stats for everything at 25. Though if they...

Good list! I think if all those things make it into 5e, WotC'll have the start of a very, very solid game. Seems a lot of players who prefer older editions want to see alignment back as it was... I personally never understood the attraction of alignment. I've hated it since I was playing 2nd...

I prefer SCDIWC. It's the one with the best logic to it. SIWDCC was practically random, and SDCIWC at least divides them up physical/mental, but putting Strength and Constitution together makes a bit more sense and allows easy reference for figuring out Defenses. Its the one that makes the...

Actually, I'd argue that it's WotC that's the tumor on D&D. They took this game that was an ancient dinosaur and modernized it without understanding anything about the checks and balances within the system, removing all the downsides of spellcasting while leaving all its power. They also...

I haven't looked at the Immortals set in something like 25 years, so no, I really don't remember the specifics. And my point still stands - divine ascension has been part of the game, whether it was the basic build track or not, since Basic.

Yeah, taking out the divine ascension endgame would be a strange and bad choice; it's been in the game since D&D basic. Allowing characters to slowly improve their potential, attribute-wise, towards that divine ascension over their career has been in D&D since at least 2e (not positive if it...

I really hope that doesn't end up being the case. I really liked how in 3e and 4e you could get your stats above 18 and become high fantasy superheroes, and especially in 4e where you could do it without requiring being bedecked in stat-boosting magic. The sound of what he was saying shortly...