Search results

If you play a WotC campaign, there are companions for that which add some side-stuff too https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?keywords=eventyr++complete+DM%27s+bundle https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?keywords=Ultimate+DM%27s+Bundle There also are plenty of small adventure bundles which get...

while the DM might be able to scale it down, that does not really work well for APs that have all kinds of higher level challenges and monsters at the later levels, because they assume / expect a certain party level for them. You are better off adding more content in each chapter than slowing...

no we don’t, the idea was to have longer adventures at a limited level range, so you do not progress in level every other session and speed through the campaign

they are releasing under an OGL-alike and a Shadowdark-alike, so depending in what you wanted to do, you should be covered. From my (rough) understanding, the one case that is not is creating a new game or expansion and not releasing your stuff under the OGL-alike license

as I said, what killed them is having 400 staff and sales for 10 of them. The only way to survive with 1e sales is to fire 95% and eeke out a meager living. Maybe that way they could have gone on longer than they actually did, but I am far from certain on that eh, they could have done that...

I hope they do, at least that way they finally have to make some I am interested in ;)

no, it would have caved much sooner because 1e sales were close to nonexistent it was having several hundred people on the payroll when stuff was not selling that did. That would still have been true without 2e. Had they downsized to a handful of people fast enough, then maybe TSR could have...

yeah, there are only so many options

ah, yes, he definitely has an opinion ;) That does not mean the points he brings up are not valid, I might disagree with his proposed solution however. I do think we are held back by clinging to old ideas too tightly, and I agree that ‘Fighter, Str 17’ is a chess piece, not a character. That...

not amphibian enough

I saw no rantiness in that quote. You also should heed your own words, your recent posts about Baker do not sound like you are open to other opinions, see

having that authority and making constant use of it are not the same thing

different people have different opinions, that should not come as a surprise. So just because some people do not like X does not mean that it is unanimous consent that X is not allowed

to me it always has value, because he has given it more thought than most. I do not need to agree with his game designs to recognize that he is grappling with the fundamental principles of TTRPG design rather than trying to tweak D&D a bit

the guy who came up with Apocalypse World and probably the mind that influenced TTRPG design the most in the last 10 years, whether your like the direction or not. At a minimum from an intellectual, game theory perspective I am interested in his analysis and ideas.

you certainly sounded like any number of hooks provided by the DM still means the DM is in control of everything and the poor players have no say Whether your sandboxes have rumors or not is immaterial. Is a game in which the DM provides all hooks and the players choose among those provided...

that version is the DM ‘more or less’ driving the campaign. An alternative to that is the players saying ‘we are looking for a dragon lair’ and guess what, the DM will provide the means to locate one and then the lair itself once the characters get there. And in this scenario the players cannot...

then I am not sure why you brought it up as if the DM not being able to do so were a bad thing

ok, but what is the likelihood of that happening… they can still do that even if the DM introduced the lair, the assumption simply was that they would not because they know they stand no chance

if the GM exercises it without consideration of the players, yes making these decisions was a choice