Search results

What about all those slides, pushes, pulls, and various micro action types like reactions and interrupts? I'm not convinced that giving the fighter a bunch of powers would go far enough. The combat mechanics of the system would limit this approach. Maybe you need an optional rules module...

To my surprise I recently discovered that Rotgrubs are considered unfair by some purists. Of course, I'm perfectly happy role playing a miniature giant space hamster while my fighter is waiting for a res... :)

Not sure if there is a name for it, but it's a playstyle that is very heavy on the miniature wargaming side of things coupled with MMO concepts.

"Hey DM we want to feel powerful, can you drop in a few monsters so we can feel that progression?" Yeah that doesn't happen. The DM shouldn't have to avoid the encounter system. If BA is soft core then perhaps SoD makes it hard core?

No, I'm serious. The 5e fighter is not the only game element that doesn't support that playstyle. You can't just insert that playstyle back into the game without changing other areas of the system.

Maybe I just prefer older editions, but I like games that have more "whiffs" coupled with fewer but more deadly hits. IMO, rolling damage and doing very little because of high hit point totals can also feel disappointing. It's far more exciting to stand up at the table and roll that...

I think that dissatisfaction is more related to how much the game differs over the preceding edition.

IMO, if the class didn't peek anyone's interest or it was flawed I doubt it would rank #1. People don't like the beast master ranger and they avoid playing it. I know I won't play it unless the DM removes the shared actions requirement. I think the reason so many people like the fighter is...

A simple safe clause to add is "as I see it in my mind" or "as I imagine the outcome" Of course, I think a wish cast by the character is less likely to go wrong, but one cast on behalf of a character by a leprechaun or a genie is far more dangerous.

I'll have to read The Drow of the Underdark book again, but I don't think they lost their natural ambidexterity in 2e. Regardless, I think the drow were dual wielding in various modules long before Drizzt came along.

It's interesting that fighters are apparently "not interesting" enough and yet they are the most played .

The ranger with TWF was never a problem at my 2e table, most offenders of TWF were Fighters. With the addition of the Fighter's handbook, Two-weapon Style and Ambidexterity profs caused all the problems. This resulted in the introduction of heavy handed TWF penalties in 3e.

A few years ago I frequently encountered new players who had no idea what graph paper was even used for... Needless to say, they waited for new content like pigs at the troff So I agree, I think the game must continue to promote the idea that you CAN create your own content. Guidelines for...

More monsters and optional rules would be the best option. The game might need a few feats, but I think I'd rather see variant class abilities and new sub-classes.

True, a code must be lawful for it to be applicable to a lawful character.

What you are able to play is function of what the DM allows. If the DM wants characters that have really high stats he can do that buy selecting a rolling method or using a higher point buy. Heck, he might even let you pick your stats. Also many people don't have an issue with fictional...

All this talk about "legal stats" makes me think that some people have completely forgotten about rolling for stats. Heck some one even tweeted Chris about Drizzt's stats not being legal as if every NPC must use the point buy system.

I still have fond memories of Jan using his wand of wonder and turning Wulfgar to stone. IMO, that's now canon.

I haven't seen such a rule. As I understand it, a character can have any magical item the DM allows.

Why are they epic level? As I understand it, magical items are not tied to level. A character can have any number of magical items at any level in 5e. The DM has the final say over this.