Search results

Yup. To me, working as intended. Dedicating a good chunk of your resources to being good at something should make that your thing.

As a note, because the new block feature is mutual, I recommend returning the favor by blocking anyone you find to be blocking you. Otherwise, they can potentially temporarily unblock you long enough to read and respond to something you've said then returning you to blocked status before you...

Which, IMO, means working as intended. If bladeward was always a good option, we'd instead be getting inundated with thread after thread crying the cantrip is broken because it lets spellcasters run around being as resilient as raging barbarians!

I can't recall ever seeing a TTRPG rule system* that gave the players all the power. Or allowed them to unilaterally dictate the effectiveness of their choices. (Caveat: I'm of course speaking only of those designed to be ran by a "boss-role", i.e., DM, GM, Storyteller, what-have-you.)

I am one who tends not to relate classes to in-game professions/roles. A character who identifies/is identified as a "ranger" can be any number of things mechanically. Given the general behavior and feats of heroics most often attributed to him, I think it's totally legit to take this route in...

Cuz I nailed it?... ;)

Heh. Are you new here or something? Who were you asking? ;)

Yeah. I'm a fan of letting my players have cool things because it increases the chance they will have fun using them. And having fun = winning at D&D.

Here we are, coming up on year three of 5th edition, and I STILL haven't needed a magic item pricing module!

Duh... 4e, of course...

Oh, I get it. I totally understand everything about how you do it. I was just getting at the "inelegance" of telling someone to take 18 discrete numbers, dividing them into six groups, but not exceeding three per pile. It's the "no more than" part that hints at some subtlety perhaps being...

I know others have done it, and I keep threatening to as well, to just let my players pick whatever starting scores they think makes sense for their characters.

Completely ignoring my direct, multi-point response to your incorrect assumptions? Where I break it down and show where you are mistaken? Then repeat same fallacies a mere few posts later? That is very odd. I admit I am quite perplexed by your behavior. I take it you are equally unfamiliar with...

Huh, okay. Why not just avoid the discarding of six entirely? Then grabbing exactly 3-per-stat can allow for potentially lower desired scores by choosing smaller results as needed. Just struck me as a little odd the way you worded it, is all. "Klunky," may be the word I'm looking for. YMMV, one...

Do you mean, choosing to have 3s in all your ability score "bad"? The only way, IMO, to make a "bad" character, is to make one that is not what you intended. Because, even if your intent is, "very intelligent and charismatic barbarian with an average physique," it would not result in a "bad"...

I was more going for the alliteration, than anything. ;) Still sounds like a blast. I very much enjoy small PC group size games. Much more intimate and personalized, IMX. Kudos.

Just a quick question about your system that struck me as needing more input. If there are eighteen remaining die results, and six ability scores, how would you ever end up with less than three die results to assign to a score when you can assign no more than three to each?

Very cool. Sounds like its practically dripping with angsty, anti-hero awesomeness. Jealousy. setting. in... ;)

<nod> Considering no TTRPG system ever written can perform such a feat, for any consumer, I agree with your self-assessment.

I gotta say I wanted to respond with: Devil's Sight + Darkness. It's just that its so circumstantially useful. So many times I've found it is not the best option to go with in the moment.