Search results

The rest of your post is an alright idea, but I have to pinpoint this and say NO! No more feats that are useless apart from being the prereq for another feat Make all feats approximately equal. Don't go "Well, this feat is worth two feats, so we'll make another, useless feat, as a pre-requisite"

Depends on their reason for adventuring. If they're trying to help people, it's easy. Sure, they could rescue the prince tomorrow, he'll still be there to be rescued, but his half-ogre bride is unlikely to let him sleep quietly and peacefully. Sure, they could defeat the necromancer tomorrow...

If the entire dungeon's worth of kobolds, all at once, tactically positioned and ready for a fight, aren't a deadly threat for even a fully loaded party, then the dungeon isn't a reasonable threat for the party. There's no dungeon such that it would take 4 days worth of fights to fight through...

If the cave is full of Kobolds, then on day 3*, when you return, your face is full of Kobolds *not necessarily on day 2, because they may figure that they drove you off on day 1, but when you return day 2 then leave again, they're going to know what's going on. They have two options. Run away...

Yes and no. In 4e you get a lot of extra value from the first leader (having a healer makes your surges more efficient, although you can spend them with no leader) but the second one is still useful (even in hard fights you're sure to stay up if you have two leaders). In a hypothetical system...

I wasn't referring to linking it to their HP max; although that's also a good thing. I meant it links it to their resources. Rather than the person who takes hits, then gets healed, using up the Cleric's resources, they're using up their own resources Hmmm, I didn't really think of it like...

It links healing to the person being healed, not just the healer. To me, this a plus. I'm one of those some. However, it's not really that big a change from having a cleric heal you up in 3.x, in both cases you start all your fights at max HP, the difference is in what you run out of. (healing...

This is only true if you assume that Healing Surges don't represent anything. Which isn't the way it's intended, they really do seem to represent woundedness, but is a common enough view. Hence my suggesting changing them for wounds

Why is that? I mean, player's who're going to ask for customisation options are going to ask for them no matter how the modules are built. So what about baking in feats is offputting? I'm genuinely curious, because I suspect that whatever it is, it's a problem that can be solved; and it's...

Would you be okay if "switching feats off" meant: "Instead of feats, each class gets a default class feature whenever it would get a feat: with some of the class features having a suspicious similarity to a feat"? IE. no feat choices, but still feat-effects baked into the classes instead? The...

Feats should definitely be optional. But that doesn't mean you can't have classes that grant you specific feats for free; even when feats are turned off. A class feature is a class feature, even if it's technically in the form of a feat; just list it's effects as a class feature and it's all...

True, assuming they didn't store any data other than "number of votes". However he can say "A majority want us to include Vancian and an overlapping majority want us to include non-Vancian": which is close enough.

If they actually do use feats for vancian spell slots, then I can see the game working with every class being feat-based. If they do what 3e did, and treat feats and spells as totally seperate things, then I can see it going exactly as it did with the 3.x fighter v wizard issue. So I'm really...

"Is that a damsel in distress?" "Nope, that's a damned soul in a dress!"

The way I treat it in 4e is the following: Any magic item will, as part of the basic magic, give you an instinctive idea what it does. Some are faulty, and don't do what they say due to an error. Some, which I only have as plot-points, are actively enchanted to give you the wrong answer. But...

Ah, I think I misunderstood your thrust. Am I correct to surmise that you're not actually looking for "as quickly as possible" but rather "quickly enough to avoid it getting boring"?

5. I don't mind errata to fix weird edge cases; power combos that were eventually found to result in something massively cheesy and overpowered, etc. But the game needs to be completely playable without the errata. The errata should be something you look at only when you stumble across (or...

D&D has always been built with the assumption that combat was a significant part of the game. So saying "end the battle as quickly as possible and get on with the game" is like saying "end the spaghetti carbonara as quickly as possible and get on with the meal" (just FYI: I'm a big fan of...

Maybe, outside of combat it's much more effective. It's quite plausible that in combat a sleep spell would force someone to push through it, essentially damage themself. However, a guard sitting down at his post who has sleep cast on him, before any violence starts at all, may simply give in...

Including the decanter of endless water