Search results

Because when group initiative is being used, then the players function "as a team" as a side effect of the rules, not because they actually do any kind of team functioning. They act together in concert because the rules make them act together in concert. This isn't acting as a team, this is...

I have never understood the idea that the DMG is somehow off-limits to the players.

It takes at most a few minutes to pick a feat. A few minutes to pick skills. Most are well summarized and you only need to look at a few more fully to decide. The "if a player intends to pick a PrC later" is exactly the sort of agonizing over things that will happen many months down the line...

Sure they need to be on the same page, which is why I said that house rules are okay, if announced ahead of time, and agreed to by the people involved. If the DM says he is playing 4e D&D, or 1e D&D, or whatever, and a player shows up at his table, he is entitled to expect that the rules of that...

The theme of the campaign is, in my opinion, the one thing that should never have a stat associated with it. The players should not be motivated by the accumulation of a stat as the metric of a campaign, or even have such an element quantified. In most cases in which Wick has made a...

Like say, players who come to a D&D game expecting they will play using the rules of the D&D game? Infidels!

No, it is a clear sign of someone who thinks that the DM should be expected to play by the rules too. And if he doesn't, then it isn't a sign of creativity, or genius, or some sort of DM entitlement. It is just a guy who wants to play a different game than the one everyone else thought they were...

Sure, as I said before, house rules are fine, and I don't have any problem with them. I use them often when I DM. But they need to be outlined ahead of time and agreed upon by everyone, or at least eveyone needs to get a chance to agree or decide the game isn't for them. But that's not what...

I was talking about group initiative. Maybe you missed that.

Here's mine: The binders on the floor are all .pdfs that have been printed out. I don't have enough shelves yet to put them anywhere else. If I could get the first picture to display the correct way, I would.

Because if you buy the book you can't read it except when Rich posts?

Well, I guess it is lucky for you that you found some players desperate enough to put up with your entitlement issues.

Except we aren't talking about house rules here. We are talking about simply ignoring a chunk of the rules by fiat. House rules are fine, if you announce them ahead of time and everyone agrees to their use (and if they don't have an opportunity to decline to play). But that's not what happened...

If the DM isn't bothering to play by the rules, why should the players be expected to? Explain that first. If the game was more fun, do you think the players would be complaining about it? DMs often say they are providing "more fun" for their players by winging it, and yet this rarely seems to...

The point is that with group initiaitve, the PCs aren't functioning as a group. They are simply functioning as they are as a byproduct of the rules. The PCs aren't doing any "functioning", the rules are functioning for them.

Once again, that's not the fault of the system. That's the fault of the player who thinks it is critical to get that feat or that attack power or whatever. Going through the books, one finds that there really are no feats that are "critical" to get to have a mechanically competent character, so...

How many more steps though? In 1e, it was stats, race class, alignment, hp, (spells), equipment. In 3e it was stats, race, class, alignment, skills, feat(s), hp, (spells), equipment. Two additional steps expanding from 6 (or 7) to 8 (or 9). And those two steps can be completed in a couple...