Search results

Interestingly enough, in DDM, the really big dragons are deliberately constructed and have rules that allow them to act as the functional equivalent of an entire 5 or so piece warband. As you damage them, they degrade in actions.

All of the wizard's "core competency" abilities are per-day right now. Every spellcaster is like that right now - there are encounters where you just don't use your spells because of metagame constraints; the encounter isn't "important enough" to justify using spells. That's one problem that is...

Relevant or not to the conversation... Take a look at NWN2. A game where "resting" is a quick affair - essentially rutning all of your per-day abilities into per-zone abilities (or even per encounter abilities). One that that made me go "oh, my, how broken" at first: NWN2 does not enforce...

Sorry about that - fixed.

I guess I didn't make my point plain - in a game with NO resource management (Shadowrun) it is entirely possible to have fun, exciting, and interesting encounters than span the gamut from easy to OMGWTFBBQ! The biggest difference? OMGWTFBBQ can happen before the easy encounter. And that is the...

Here's my POV: I "grew up" as a GM running Shadowrun (mainly SR3 - I have yet to run an SR4 session, and I had just started playing when SR2 came along), where there is very little (almost none at all) resource management either in the per day department or even in the per encounter department...

I'm going to have to chime in here. As one of the primary (probably not the only) design goals; D&D has to be immediately accessible to a group of 5-6 young teenagers with one rulebook, some free time, and no experience whatsoever. Otherwise, you run out of gamers. To a certain extent, D&D has...

Druther have the 3.5 weapon sizes than not have a Small rapier for a halfling... Yes, I can house-rule it, but the house rules I would have to look very much like the 3.5 weapon size rules. The 3.0 rules only work for dagger/short-sword/longsword/greatsword (or equivalent axe-class weapons)...

It is a minor problem; but at the same time, you can't get very good on a cross-class skill now. At least this way you don't have to waste skill points to be barely competent. I wonder if they will loosen up on the outside-of-class skill thing, as SWSE practically encourages multiclassing to a...

There is enough flexibility to make the system work. Too much "flexibility" and we have what we have now, where every adventure has to be tailored to the particular group because the adventure author cannot write a general purpose adventure without simultaenously being too easy for one style of...

2 problems - if it's automatic for the rogue, it's not a challenge, particularly. And you don't even know what to set it at to be automatic for the rogue. Uh, SWSE doesn't have 30 levels and also doesn't have Epic rules, the 20-level-cap is a hard-cap as far as rules go. It's been pretty much...

Assuming that neither is "trained" and both have the same stat modifier, the 20th level wizard is more intimidating than the 10th level barbarian, as he should be. If the Barbarian is "trained" he is as intimidating as a character 10 levels higher than him! If the barbarian "focused" on the...

http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13496433&postcount=7 - James Wyatt's blog entry where he talks about the math behind the system. I whole-heartedly hope they start with the math as the foundation, and build out from there. 3E tried to do that, but then they compromised by keeping some...

? Why does who have to specialize? You've gotten lucky, then. Especially with your scheme earlier of having NPCs divide all their skill ranks across all their class skills. Do none of your PCs max skills? Exactly - it sucks to be them when the adventure designer assumes that the rogue maxed...

Oh, then the rogue sucks - rogues HAVE to specialize right now. The Bard and Ranger have similar issues. No, actually, more choices in character development is not better from a macro point of view; in fact, it makes introduction to new players harder, and it makes adventure design for unknown...

Then you and I will have to agree to disagree. It was better than the predecessor, and OK for it's time, but the SWSE system is better. It's not the best; and individual DMs can probably get decent performance out of it, but for general use, it's not as good as it could be. I am rather hoping...

Spreading skill points around takes advantage of the fact that most skill checks aren't going to require max ranks if the entire party hast o pass them; that's the min-max aspect (you can get 2+ skills for the price of 1 depending on the skill, because you know (in the metagame) that you will...

Maybe it's just my shadowrun grognard talking, but I've never had a problem with Stealth and Perception, rather that separate values for Move Silent/Hide and Spot/Listen. For one, unless you are absolutely not moving, you have to both hide and move silent to sneak, and spot and listen to oppose...

Feature, not a bug. As I've said, if you know within +/-5 or so what the party's skill level is, adventure design is much easier (not harder). Yes, the DCs have to change, but because the skill bonuses are more predictable, the DCs are much easier to set - game design can spend more time on...

Isn't a combat encounter a challenge based on the result of several rolls? It appears that the devs are taking this into account that an encounter should be similar whether its combat or non-combat... Which is why I changed my argument. I'm no longer arguing that I as a DM can't make it work...