Search results

One thing I liked about 4e monster design over 3e was the sheer amount of powers (especially for high level monsters) got trimmed down, often paired with a recharge mechanic of "roll a d6." I'd like to see it on the player side, perhaps as a replacement for the "Encounter Power" - Roll a check...

"But throwing swords breaks realism!" Of course, realism is a stupid argument when trying to apply it to D&D. :D

There is one common bit of fantasy writing that just can't be properly supported by D&D: Magic is most effective against magic, mundane is most effective against mundane. 2e, 3e, and 4e have become increasingly dungeonpunk - any sufficiantly advanced magic is indistiquishable from technology...

One of the issues of 3.0/3.5/Pathfinder is how upscaling is handled as part of monster design. It's not so much an issue from a DM using it for monster design, but rather when a PC is increased in size they are affected by the same charts. It encourages players to want large creatures just for...

Meh. Most of the people I've played with were decently or highly creative NeRDs who are easily distracted by Shiney Objects.

For some reason, going between Small and Medium size creatures in 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4e works out fine. But from Medium to Large (at least in 3.5 & Pathfinder)? It doesn't work well. There are balance issues, which means I have to creatively solve/work around on the fly, etc. I'd like to...

It's not. Every decently sized group of people has a small minority of very vocal unhappy-with-everything jerks. I know I've felt discouraged from posting on Enworld's 5e forum because of those individuals more interested in fighting/trolling than actually discussing something. Mods and admins...

I guess I can see where $$ and branding come in. Maybe I think about it differently because I grew up with PC games, where hardware, software, and game engines were always changing & upgrading. Brands come and go, with very few lasting more than a couple of years before developers split and...

Technically, that's not nostalgia. Semantics aside, let me try rephrasing one more time: I am not saying to ditch nostalgia completely. I am saying it must be tempered, less it leads to sacreficing quality of design.

Well, a few people seem to miss my point, but I'm going to take the blame on that one for my only three-quarters coherant rant. Nostalgia is a factor, but I would even say that it's not a leading factor. Feeling like D&D doesn't necessarally need to rely on playing up to the "good ol' days,"...

EDIT: Sorry, Doublepost...

Sorry I was unclear on that, but I was trying to use Star Trek as a positive example. GX.Sigma: And I don't hate 4e. It may not be my current game of choice, and I would have preferred that 4e was more like SW Saga (probably would have gone over better, too). Nostalgia wasn't the problem...

There. I said it. There is one thing that will kill 5e for me, and that is if all it does is commit Wizards of the Coast to the abyssal plane of Remakes. I'm fully aware that isn't WotC's intention, but some of the feedback they receive could push them in this direction. It's the difference...

As someone who isn't emotionally tied to a system, I am curious - what is it that ties a person to a specific gaming system emotionally?

Exactly. Someone wants me to act like an AI, GTFO of my game and go play WoW or something. As a DM: Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat. Win condition = Everyone is having fun. And if I play this game of Xanatos Speed Chess correctly, you won't even know I did anything at all...

I grew up with a dad who did contract work all his career. It looks to me like people are making a big deal about nothing. Then again, this is the internet. People get hired and laid off all the time in every industry. WotC isn't that special.

I'd rather have a dragon customising system instead of the traditional Rainbow of Doom. The current setup sends a confusing message.

Great way to miss my point. I'd continue with the /sarc, but it'd probably wouldn't accomplish anything. Your response seems a bit flame-baity, but I could be reading something into it that isn't there. Text can be a poor medium at times...

Not according to how everything statted out - and not everyone choses prestige classes based on optimised power. Honestly, it got a little janky...I probably should have kept him on Exorcist of the Silver Flame path and not added in Eternal Blade, but it was a Roleplaying decision. 3.5's paladin...

I am cautiously optimisic because I like the design theories they are following.