Search results

You might put the whole post in forum to show that you had no input into this post. Or mention in the body of the post that "this is all ChatGPT's work."

Does he, the professional archer, really mention "and arrow?" Way to meta-emphasize your point, Hawkeye. Do settings need to make sense? No! Do they need to be original? Yes, please.

The reason it sounds like nearly every game out there is that nearly every game out there tries to be like D&D. Out of curiosity, how is Monster of the Week definitely not D&D?

Well, D&D 6e did you a solid and wrote out their 154-ish rules on DNDBEYOND. So there's that. You could write an outline. Start with chapter names, drop down to section headings, and each sub-head after that. Then distill the actual rules based on how the material relates to its hierarchy...

What feels like D&D? PCs and a GM. Rolling dice to add uncertainty. Simulated-reality play. Detailed rules for combat, including being turn-based. Your character filling a niche, and a grid-square. Matt Mercer's hair. Having a rule book nearby for reference. Creepy black-and-white art...

Since it looks like we're not worried about compatibility anymore . . . I'll tear some stuff out of the 5RD. See if we can get down to the core, and still feel like D&D. You might want to duck, I'm just gonna throw these over my shoulder: Advantage, Dex, Con, Wis, races, classes (and...

I'll grant my blessing. Just as long as he doesn't toss dwarves.

I'd hope that a new edition would make your homebrewing work easier instead of harder! Yes, there's a better system. Maybe even an objectively better system. Which one fills that gap for you? I can't say. But if homebrewing a game becomes too much work (or "work" at all), it's time to...

Well, on the topic of GM-designed monsters (are we assuming the game designers know how to do it properly?), there is no "too late" because the GM decides what the monster does. @Professor Murder's assertion that calibration (of monster danger to PC abilities) is needed applies only at...

This might be an important distinction, because 6e goes a bit further in codifying and interweaving rules. Which makes pulling rules out more difficult. 5e magic isn't Vancian. There's definitely a d20 mechanism, though. With what are you expecting to be "relatively compatible?"...

By running away? (Bravely, of course.)

This isn't the side. This is the main course. If making monsters is easy, I'll do it myself. If it's a PITA, give me a manual of monsters. Art vs. science. Simulation vs. narrative. I leave the answers to the quoted questions to those who feel a need to optimize their mechanics.

No thanks. That's a little close to home.

Who's doing this relegating? WotC? If your opponent uses a logical fallacy, you use Wisdom to detect it. To use your own, Intelligence to assemble one. Then seal the deal with a Charisma check to sound like the good guy when you deliver. It is what your D&D version says it is. But sure, a...

RIP democracy. You were always good . . . in theory.

They canceled that with the movie plans. Apparently pinball is how they're gonna go full Star Wars.

What if XP awards were determined by HP loss? If you don't lose any HP, were you really in any danger?

Wait... they took darkvision from dwarves?

It's not a game until you have rules, so in addition to Use What Works and Fit the Rules I'd consider something like Why Do You Need the Rules? If someone goes into game design thinking "I really want to have four saves instead of three. Or six," there are a ton of Whys involved. Why do you...

That's odd. I did the same thing for Modos 2 and it just gave me this: "Perfect organism."