Search results

This wouldn't be RttToEE, would it? Sure sounds familiar... ;) The only solution I can see, if you really want to continue the module, is create your own into for the new party. As part of the first couple sessions, they should hear about the other adventurers, rumors that they've been...

In theory, this seems like it would work well. In practice, not so much. First, these rules are, by definition, not part of the core books (until an updated version is released), so I now have to keep track of other books - not for the occasional item or monster, but for rules of gameplay...

I think this preferable to the flat 20% xp penalty in the core rules. That said, I don't like multiclassing xp penalties and never use them - if I want to encourage players to stick to particular stereotypes, I'll offer some kind of incentive instead.

For myself, I find the design ingenious. A creature that relies on darkvision would never get it right (all the colors would be the same shade of gray). I'll have to use that one sometime and see if the players figure out the reason behind it.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I think the main problem is that things are supposed to make sense now. How many of us began playing in the standard dungeon full of monsters that had no reason to be there, with tricks and traps designed solely to thwart adventurers, with scads of treasure...

I enjoy GMing, as long as I don't do it all the time. A break to be a player is the perfect way to recharge the batteries and get the creative juices flowing. Agreed. Just as bad: trying to GM something (a particular system, campaign, module, style) when the players just aren't interested...

I don't suppose you'd be willing to share the OGL parts of this? :) :) :) I've created my own db's for these purposes, but they're not nearly as complete or sophisticated as what you describe.

I love the spell cards Paradigm Concepts did for 3.0. I found those spell cards to be an excellent tool for teaching newbies how to play casters. Unfortunately, the company did not produce 3.5 versions, so the originals are just sitting on my shelf. These could be done electronically, of...

So, essentially, I'm complaining that the designers of 3.x didn't go far enough? I can agree with that. And don't take my comment as a criticism of the designers. As you point out, they were coming from 2E - it's not fair to take them to task based on the past several years experience with 3.x...

Ok, that makes a great deal of sense to me. In fact, I have a hard time understanding why any rules should be hidden from the players. Maybe the future 4E should have all game rules in the PHB, with the DMG being closer to what the current DMG II is. Just a thought... But it doesn't directly...

Still 1st level, IMO. If you feel that's too good, change the duration to 10 min per level, vs. the standard 1 hour per level. Personally, I like the idea of making it a touch spell - I may give that a shot in my next campaign.

Well, keep in mind that RL and RH are simply points on a continuum, and each individual has a different tolerance for detail. When people call a particular system RH, I think they are almost always referring to the level of detail and, perhaps, simple page count. "Hmm, this system has a core...

I think the current edition is an enormous improvement over previous editions. That said, it's been out long enough to begin showing its flaws, some of which are substantial, IMO. Recognizing those flaws and publicly criticizing them should not be equated with dislike or hatred of the system.

Yep - and the latest core rules book is written in a style as dry as the Sahara desert. But in my experience, it's less interface-heavy than 3.x, at least in actual gameplay. For other groups, their mileage may vary. It's kind of ironic, I used to play 1E when I wanted something easier/lighter...

Just to clarify, I say balance is a red herring because individual groups have different play styles. For example, my group has never had a problem with scry-buff-teleport. We know it's technically possible within the rules, but it felt too cheesy to us, so we never used it, as players or GM's...

Interestingly, this is why I feel Hero has less "overhead" than 3.x. Both would qualify as rule heavy, but D&D feels like an "exception based" system. The rules tell the players what can be done, then the subsystems break those rules in one way or another. Items and feats have effects that...

Ok, this makes sense. I saw the same thing when board games were first transferred to the computer. The computer screen generally could not show much of the board, which dramatically affected a player's ability to see the situation at a glance. Add in a bad interface for actual gameplay and many...

I suspect every group does this to some extent. It's the old 80/20 rule. 80% of gameplay uses 20% of the rules. Whether or not to use the other 80% is up to the individual group. 3E is so rules heavy, I doubt there is a single group on the face of the planet that uses 100% of the rules (even if...

The quote implies that the groups had not used the specific rules-lite systems before he observed them. Rules-lite systems rarely show their benefits in the very first session, but in the 3rd, 4th, 5th sessions. Additionally, I think Mr. Dancey ignores a major benefit of most rules-lite...

I don't bother to describe potions unless a player asks. But I always assume they are in something less fragile than a glass vial. Given the cost of potions, making the container out of steel (or some other strong substance) isn't going to change the price much. But it sure saves hassles when...