Search results

Initially, you might be right. But I do not see any chance of WotC not adding the 2024 Basic Rules for free once they get released with the SRD. So no, it's not a MEGA LOSS, it's a waiting period of up to 1 year at worst.

I vaguely remember WotC mentioning a Free Rules 2024 (which was to replace Basic Rules 2024) in one of the explainers they published during this weeklong mess, but I can't find it upon checking. Maybe @Minigiant is right and there will be no Basic Rules 2024 immediately, but even then I agree...

I'm not sure that's the case. The backtracking does not mention anything about their intention to release a 2024 version of the Basic Rules, in which case you could still access free 2024 stuff from there.

I second @Scribe's idea that the ability to mute thread tags would help solve most of the grievances here. I think people should rightfully criticise WotC when they take a misstep (which is every other day these days), but I also sympathise with the idea that seeing nothing but WotC-bashing can...

This black background to white text, "YOU CAN KEEP THINGS AS YOU LIKED, WE LISTENED TO YOUR FEEDBACK." message from D&D is starting to become too much of a regular thing. I'm starting to have the same Pavlovian "oh what did they mess up again?" reaction to it as CDPR's yellow background...

While I appreciate the nuance Snarf points here, I'm kinda with Alzrius with this one. Too many bad decisions seem to have piled up under Lorraine's tenure to argue that she was a net positive influence. Also one thing that doesn't seem to be discussed even though I remember it being common...

Really informative timeline! But I don't understand why you put Flee Mortals as a separate branch from 5e, since it's a 5e monster book. The MCDM RPG might be a separate line, but I think that system is too far removed from D&D to be included in the chart at all.

That they do! And I have to that that is super useful when trying to spice up combat by placing it within an exploration challenge. But would you recommend assigning CRs to social encounters as well, or keep them outside of the adventuring day's scope?

So I think A5E's new Adventuring Day guidelines in Trials & Treasures are a fantastic tweak to O5E. Reducing in earlier levels the number of encounters a party is expected to go through in one Long Rest and increasing it in later levels makes the game's pacing far better in my opinion. But...

Thanks for pointing these out. The article didn't sit right with me when I first saw it, but I didn't feel qualified enough to respond to it. It's nice to see that it just seems to be written with an agenda against cats without proper scientific basis.

I second the ability to have this. Maybe through a "type username to block" so you don't need to be able to see someone to block them?

The in-game conception of adventurers in my world is something like Salvage companies: They delve into places outside the fringes of society, and recover stuff for people from those areas. Forgotten treasures. Difficult to find ingredients. They usually aim to help people, but they get a cut of...

I certainly don't mean to argue that the way my players play is the only true, modern way. However, I have experienced this with different groups rather consistently. Someone rolls a 1 or a 2 with their Hit Die and they immediately regret rolling for Hit Points. Initially what I did was "Either...

Well, modern players don't see hit points rolls as a casino. They see it as a fundamental aspect of surviving the game's expected difficulty (and I can't blame them given that the game is designed around players having average hit points and dealing average damage and monster having relative...

I think taking the average is too samey, but getting a 1 or a 2 on a hit die roll is disproportionately annoying for players, so if you give them the choice, they will try rolling once and then stick to the PHB average. I've devised a middle way which goes like this: everyone has to roll, but...

I guess we'll have to see what kind of adventures he produces for the MCDMRPG when that comes out!

Visiting Candlekeep would've been honestly fun. I also want someone to recreate Baldur's Gate 1 (and 2 but even dreams have limits) using the BG3 engine, and that would've been far easier if Candlekeep was already made.

I suspect she might be offed to show how strong Vecna is. D&D Socials posted sth like "Who'd win? Vecna or Tiamat?" followed by another "Who'd win? Vecna or Strahd?".

Is there any chance WotC could get another company to make D&D games using the BG3 engine - similar to how Obsidian made Neverwinter Nights 2 and Fallout New Vegas? I feel like Tactical Adventures (the small French company that made Solasta) could make a decent 5E/OneD&D game if given the...

I understood why they made the choice, but I really wish they made at least one DLC to expand the level range (to 15 or beyond) and also reincorporated stuff like the scrapped upper city. But I honestly can't blame them given how WotC and Hasbro have proven themselves to be unreliable partners...