Search results

I agree with much of what's being said here. Many of the non-humanoid monsters look pretty good, but the proportions on the humanoids is terrible. There are far too many tiny legs attached to giant torsos. I'm pretty sure the Northland Barbarian is supposed to be human, but he has a >tiny...

Yes, as stated, D&DN is a working title -- not what they expect to put on the cover. (I think they chose it over "5e" because they didn't want a working title they couldn't get rid of.) What's more interesting is what they have said about the name they want to use. They want to call it just...

Absolutely. +1. This kind of immersive feel is priceless. It always make me want to play the game, while the 4e book was filled with all this rules text that was visually easy to follow, but was never inspiring in the same way. I also loved the "sketch" style art in the 3.x books. It had a...

I think the compatibility is an important point that can easily be lost in the discussion of modularity. We've talked about how different "levels" of the game will be compatible in the sense that different players can sit at the same table and play characters of different complexity. But...

To be fair, I love the idea of a basic set that includes a 16-page version of the core rules, and I don't want to search through several books either. If I'm going to lug a 300-page PHB around, I want it to include the full set of combat and character creation rules. I don't want to have to...

I know this has been said before, in this thread even, but Mearls is describing the basic version of the game. Remember that "core" has meant something different in pretty much every edition of the game. In D&DN, the basic version is supposed to speak to the simplest style of D&D. If it...

Sorry if I was unclear, my post was about players as much as it is about characters. If you are trying to run a game where the objective of the players is to gather treasure or accomplish their mission, then getting into unnecessary fights is a failure. It drains resources and poses a danger...

Very true. It's also true that a fight can be a penalty for failure at the "adventuring" game. The goal of treasure-seeking adventurers is to get as much treasure as possible without getting killed. Or, alternatively, the goal of objective-seeking adventurers is to accomplish their "mission"...

I quite like the aspect of skill dice that generate the trapezoidal distribution. I think they are very good for creating situations where skilled characters are very likely to succeed but still have a (very) small chance of failure. But I wish they had used the "roll multiple dice and take...

I don't really understand where you're coming from. Skills are task resolution mechanisms in 3.x and 4e. (In fact, with a few minor changes, they are the same task resolution mechanisms.) The major change from 3.x/4e to D&DN is that the task resolution aspect of skills is moved from the skill...

I agree completely. I also find that picking a class, race, background, sub-class and specialty isn't too bad when it comes to creating a character. I'd play without sub-class and specialty for a basic game, but the current system of "pick your own level of customization" looks pretty good...

I think you're conflating "story" with a common technique for generating story. If the PCs thwart the schemes of an evil count by seducing his daughter to reveal her knowledge, tracking the count's servant to diabolical ritual (that they disrupt), deliver the evidence to the king's guard, and...

I agree with this. The gradual de-emphasis on weapon choice as characters level is a positive feature of the current rules packet. It's just that the current rules packet has too much of that feature (IMO). -KS

I agree with this. The gradual de-emphasis on weapon choice as characters level is a positive feature of the current rules packet. It's just that the current rules packet has too much of that feature (IMO). -KS

I agree with this as well. I would also add that I'd like to see some specialties and maneuvers that require certain types of weapons. So, if you want to play a glaive specialist, you start with the polearm specialty, and take a maneuver (or sub in a feat) that works with slashing weapons. I...

Based on the DM Guide and the monster ex, the red dragon is supposed to be a Tough encounter for three 14th level characters. That a single 14th level character can solo the dragon shows a significant issue. (Keeping in mind that fully rested PCs will typically defeat a tough encounter.) I'm...

I used to play with Mearls back when he was a regular in the New England convention circuit and I'll support the Jester on this. Mearls is a stand-up, straight-forward guy. I don't always agree with his design sensibilities, but he's not a liar. But you don't need to take my word on this...

I think WotC is trying to release playtest adventures to cover the classic adventure "genres." They started with dungeon exploration with Caves of Chaos and then did wilderness exploration with Isle of Dread. I think they just wanted to do a Tomb of Horrors style game, but felt that they had...

The point of providing these damage bonuses are to give Fighters the correct DPR for their level (whatever the designers decide it should be). Every fighter should have approximately that DPR, not just fighters that take the "adequate DPR feat." Anyway, a feat should be about providing some...

I agree that a 4e-style "2[w]" or "3[w]" damage could go a long way to making weapons more meaningful at high levels. Personally, I think choice of weapon should become less important as characters level. My sense of the common fiction is that, as characters become more powerful, it becomes...