Search results

You’re confusing cause with effect. Theatre is the result of the action, not the action itself (“I sing” or “I act” makes sense, “I theatre” does not). I can recite a monologue on my own in a room, it isn’t theatre unless there is an audience. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is...

I suspect you are replying to someone I am no longer interested in listening to, but the answer to this remains the same as the last time you asked it in this very thread. No, it is not theatre if there is no audience. Perhaps explain to whoever you are responding to that this is an awful analogy.

Peter Brook states that ‘I can take any empty space and call it a bare stage. A man walks across this empty space whilst someone else is watching him, and this is all is for an act of theatre to be engaged.’ So yes, according to one of the most respected directors of the last 50 years, if...

No. It's fine, unless there's something else you've not mentioned that would make it a jerk move. The fact you're asking suggests you might be worried about it - maybe speak to your DM (tm) and check this isn't going to mess with something. If it is, perhaps ask them why they gave you the item...

It’s my opinion that spell schools have as much validity in modern D&D as alignment. Whichever legacy hole you force the peg into makes not one jot of difference in actual play (in my experience). The words are all made up anyway! Arcane/Primal/Divine are much more effective as categories, and...

Apropos to this, I ran my first session of Enemy Within last week and it was tremendously fun. I really like the way 4e seems to work, and although most of the time was spent on character gen once we were up and running the mechanics really were much easier than you’d expect.

This is a pretty narrow definition of ‘fighter’, so much so that although I voted ‘only 1’ I feel that the word ‘only’ is a bit incongruous. It’s a bit like saying I had ‘only 1’ orc wizard, or ‘only 1’ plasmoid bard of whispers!

My thought process is this: Who cares? The new edition will be what it will be. Some will adopt it. Some will not. This constant quibbling over minutiae is not healthy, or useful. It is the worst excesses of nerd culture (I am technically right) and adds nothing to the discussion of the rule...

I think the sliding scale you are proposing is not really applicable. It is a false dichotomy, I am afraid. RPGs, like all hobbies and pasttimes, must be fun. If they are not fun, people won't play them - therefore fun is important above all other things. However, fun does not preclude balance...

I think you need to commit to one style or the other. I personally like the sense of unity if there is an overall naming asthetic that makes me feel that all these different classes are part of the same setting/system. Having a 'fighter' as an option next to a 'godseeker' seems incongruous. One...

Now I regret not completing the survey - I might have been the template aficionado who tipped the balance back the other way. Always vote, people!

More and more, I wish they would try the warlock without any spell slots, drawing on at-will invocations instead. They would need to greatly expand the scope of the at-will casting invocations, but this in itself would be no bad thing, even if some sort of spell slot system remains.

@TheSword Advantage does seem one of the more fiddly aspects of 4e (although I appreciate the idea behind it). Does the group advantage option streamline this? We use a similar system in our 5e game, and I wonder if it might make the system easier to broach for people who haven’t used it before?

Shadows (well, Mistaken Identity) was my starting adventure too. I've read Gideon's stuff - good to see that it works in practice as well. From memory/my reading the big issue is keeping the party invested once things start to move from one section of the campaign to the next. I definitely...

After a- what- 20 year hiatus, I am going back to WFRP, so this is very helpful. I really like a lot of what 4E has put in place. I already have some of the Archives, so knowing a few other useful supplements is wonderful. My first love was 1E, with its critical hit charts and impregnable...

I'm not sure which written abilities of the fighter lend themselves to melee but not to ranged combat. As far as I can tell, they all work fine at range as well. The presence of the Archery Fighting Style, for example, seems to indicate that a ranged fighter is within the expected parameters...

I know Blades and Doskvol very well, so everything you say makes perfect sense. It is an excellent example of how this should work. Honestly, I just usually assume the players are exceptional and it works out well for me - my players aren't going to randomly stab a burgomeister in the throat...

You can make up your own arbitrary limitations if you want. My fighter is an excellent archer, like Yennenga, Rama, or even Lu Bu. It appears you've missed the thrust of my comment on Flex though. The insult - if any - would be pointing out your inconsistency in argument, rather than whether or...

Eh? I'm holding a shortbow that does 1d6+10 + Dex damage with Sharpshooter (and unlike a greataxe, each +1 to hit is also +1 to not get hit because it's plus AC). That's fab. You could argue that a longbow is better, but you yourself have argued that going one bigger on the dice is neglible...

Dexterity, often called the 'Donkey stat' for it's lack of use. If only it added to initiative, damage, AC, battlemaster DCs and one of the three major saves like Strength. Suffice to say, I disagree.