Search results

Well I can DM D&D in my sleep at this point, but I really felt what it's like to be a new GM when I started with Pathfinder. My reservations centered around (less than thorough) familiarity with the mechanics, wanting the game to run smoothly, being proficient enough in the VTT I was using, and...

Why go through the trouble of building your own service when you can simply get small fees for each transaction from StartPlaying? Or even better, just purchase StartPlaying.

Yes, clearly there is demand for it, and it seems that $20 is the price the market will bear. I still wonder what percentage of players are willing to pay for a game, and for how long, how competition impacts demand (e.g AL) and if the model is sustainable in the long run.

They may not get a lot for each session, but it it could work like a micro transaction from their perspective.

To be clear, I am well aware of the site's purpose, I just think $20+ per session is a lot. Apparently there are enough people willing to pay the price.

Why? If MM is the only DM newbies have ever seen, it's not unreasonable to believe that they could view being a DM as intimidating.

Apparently there is a cost per game for the service. That may limit interest in the long run. I saw "$10 off first game session", so that implies each session cost more than $10. After the initial interest, this may be a big impediment. I wonder how much WoTC will get from this.

When a PC is trying to deceive, intimidate or persuade, I have the players roll for it. Otherwise, I don't insert any type of mechanics into roll playing.

Short survey. I guess the truth hurts.

Well, per the my DM at a recent game, elves are apparently non-binary

Personally, I'd rather have Pathfinder and Starfinder exist in different universes/dimensions. That being said, it would have little effect on the Starfinder worlds (they have wizards already), but a profound effects on Golarian. Kind of like if the aliens from the Barrier peaks module (AD&D)...

Everyone should be given the benefit of the doubt, until they prove otherwise. WoTC is long past the benefit of the doubt.

Going a little off topic, but WoTC has earned scrutiny from the player base. It's perfectly reasonable to give the smaller guy the benefit of the doubt...unless they prove otherwise.

Good if you create 3rd party content for D&D, bad if you create content for other games.

I've never had to vet a player before because I knew everyone that I've invited to games. However as a player, I've experienced two very different vetting's. The first one was a phone interview that lasted close to an hour. He asked me about my (TTRPG) background and experience - each response...

To describe the world as the PCs explore it, and run/initiate whatever happens as a consequence of PCs interacting with the world.

The only mundane animal I use on a regular basis are horses.

The remastered PF2 GM and Player Core And Menace Under and Troubles in Otari (Roll20)

I wonder that in the long run, if they'll make the decision to drop everything except D&D and MtG.

If a player stops using a PC, then without knowing the details, it's not unreasonable to assume they are no longer interest in that PC, and also has left the game. In that case, what other people do with it likely doesn't matter to the player. It always best to simply ask the player if they...