Search results

Of course, none of those limited 3E examples were actually 1/day. 1/day is more jarring than several-times-per-day. More such abilities are more jarring than very few such abilities.

Personally, I do in fact consider all those things soap-opera-ey. In my gaming I'm actually not interested in hearing how people feel. I'm more interested in how an in-world character would act in response to a challenge, test, or puzzle.

Didn't vote. I'm not into immersive roleplaying if that means emotional soap-opera type interactions. I am into puzzles, traps, physical and tactical challenges, if the players are interacting from the characters' point of view.

Well, I thought this was an easy call way back when it was first announced. You've got 30 years of fine-tuning in the core D&D system being tossed out, to be replaced by about 6 months of playtesting 4E. I thought it couldn't help but be riddled with errata issues.

Short answer: The DM tells you when. He's supposed to be keeping track of how long the PC's actions are taking.

Actually, that has to be 2E, because it's the only edition that explicitly listed a -10 hp rule as Optional. (1E had a -10 hp rule, non-optional, but triggered only if you actually hit 0 hp on the dot. With option listed to lower "trigger spot" down to -3 hp.) It looks like they're advancing...

Well put -- I almost wrote practically the exact same thing. Thanks for that observation.

Now it's a poll. Do nonmagical once-per-day abilities damage suspension of disbelief?

I probably shouldn't reply, but: A huge number of the Dragon articles in the 1970's and 1980's dealt with the game-design topic of "realism vs. playability". People were constantly trying to add new rules to make D&D more realistic in perceived ways, and the main barrier was how many rules made...

No. I agree with Pawsplay -- a fighter with a specialized attack in real life is most likely to use it over and over as long as it's working. It's up to the opponent to actively come up with a counter, if any. Admittedly if you're doing comic-book or movie-style fighting, then you're likely to...

Top Secret (original version here, only one I played) would be my least favorite of all the 1980's TSR genre games. I'd eagerly join in a game of Star Frontiers, Marvel Super Heroes, or even Boot Hill. Top Secret not so much, it's just "meh" as a system. A bunch stuff without any great creative...

To sell more stuff later on?

Nothing to be sorry about. There's obviously no way you'd be invited to any of my friends' games in the first place.

For those who missed it, I did create a poll for people to register their best guess as to exactly what Goodman Games is doing for a license: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=232730

Not a 4E player, but I agree with the OP. Yet another reason for me to avoid this version of the game. I've had players in the past say "We wish we had a staff of healing", but my response would be to have them in-game research legends about a staff of healing, and then create a particular...

T, is sounds like maybe you were you playing just the 1st Edition of MM? The issue of stats-vs-ability-powers was specifically one they addressed in 2E -- the "super-ability" powers were struck out and replaced with just higher ability scores. (I only played 1E briefly, but I was aware of what...

This is off on a tangent, but -- you're making me recall that this exact same thing was actually recommended way back in the 1E DMG (1979) with regard to actual, physical miniatures. I suggested it to my players, but got back the grousing that you specify here, "We pay and then you keep the...

Not sure the Microsoft CEO agrees. Steve Ballmer in 2007 ( http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2007/02/ballmer_i_worry.html ):

Not so. From Wizards.com OGL/d20 Software FAQ ( http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123i ):

Super post, Terramotus.