Search results

No. I said that I don't care if WotC creates feats that allow a player who wants to specialize for the role they envision to be able to. I do care if WotC makes such specialization a default expectation of the rules. This is not a difficult concept. Have you played 3.5 or, more recently...

There's a big difference between players choosing roles and roles encouraged and enforced by the rules. I think that is part of the disconnect in this discussion. As I stated in my first post, I have no doubt that some tables played with and formalized combat roles. More power to them. But...

I believe you are correct. It was this familiarity with MMO terminology that sparked the criticism (rightly or wrongly) that 4e played like an MMO. With regards to 1e and 2e roles, my play experience matches yours. Any character might be called upon to be the major damage dealer (wizard vs...

Uhhh...no. Just no. Those "roles" didn't exist before 4e in rules or in play. Period. Now, I know some people did play in a way that they could have categorized their characters in that manner even earlier. But that was not a function of the rules, nor was it a requirement of the game...

That's the first thing I thought of when reading through this thread. I have 1st editions of just about all of the AD&D hardbacks, including that and the Fiend Folio. Also, I've got 1st editions of Battletech, Mechwarrior, and all of the first round of mech books and house books. I've got a...

Well, I don't exactly consider the open letter by the new owner desperate to retain the fans of the old owner as an unbiased source. Especially the favor-currying at the end. I think it's pretty well established that TSR tried a Hail Mary with its books: "TSR also decided to publish twelve...

Your table is yours. If elves are a mere stat block at your table, more power to you. I certainly wouldn't tell a player how he had to play his character. But see, I'm also a great believer in personal responsibility. You can play your character any way you want. But if elves in the setting...

I love 5e. This is one reason why. The last few editions lost sight of what made D&D most popular; they went mechanics over flavor. I understand that some folks like mechanics (and I'm not surprised that the makers of Magic: The Gathering would initially favor heavy mechanics). Heck, some...

One point, and I mean this with all sincerity. "Cheapening the Realms?!?!?" Seriously? Cheapening the freakin' Realms? At what point can currency have a negative value? The "history" of the Realms reads like a 13 year-old's fanfic translated by a marketing firm. I mean, every author of...

OK, now we're getting somewhere. I must have done a better job explaining myself and my objections, because now we are talking about the same things. Let's say that we get a list of "powers" for a psionic, a list of psionic "abilities" (your detect thoughts, etc.) and psionic "combat." First...

Not at all, warlocks are mechanically different than wizards, and each can do things the others can't (and not just based on which spells they know). Class abilities make the difference. I don't see the space that is open for psionics to do different things as a class, without simply copying...

Agreed. Psionics does not need to be "chained" in order to be constructed as feats. Each feat could give you different abilities (see the attacks/defenses of 1e).

A cleric is a "healing" wizard (or sorcerer, more closely) that wears armor. The divine/arcane divide is a mechanical invention designed to encourage build diversity and flavor (If the wizard could heal, why play a cleric? If the cleric can cast all wizard spells, why play a wizard?). Where...

That's metamagic/warlock enhancement. We've already got that. I'm obviously not explaining myself well (that's what happens when you try to type from an Ipad... I'll switch over to my PC so this doesn't take an hour to type), so let me try to show you why I think this "class" approach can't...

And I'm telling you what I'd like to see and why, in my opinion, the prevailing wisdom on psionics is "short-sighted." The fact is that the "source" of the power is flavor, and therefore is irrelevant to the mechanical operation of powers in the game (even more so in "rulings over rules" 5e)...

Nope. Nope. Nope. Folks, what makes psionics "different" than magic? If it's just flavor, then reskin. What made psionics unique in the first few editions? It was a facet of your character, not the whole definition. It was a part of the whole, something that didn't come up all of the time...

Why not just say, "Rocks fall; you die"? It would be much quicker and serve the same purpose? In real life, we have the ability to carefully observe our surroundings and a mind built to notice change. A character only has what is described to him. So if you want an assassin to blend in, just...

What ever you do, don't cross the streams!!!

The problem isn't necessarily with the caster who buffs himself. It's what happens when the caster buffs the melees that makes this change in 5e so necessary. The concentratation limit prevents flying, blurred, invisible meat-cleavers of death from roflstomping every encounter. That's why the...

Number one: POWER POINTS, baby! Number two: Psionics like 1e. No classes. A random chance at creation (maybe with rolls when a stat increases) based on Int or Wis. Number three: No classes! Number four: A la carte powers, maybe with groups of powers (If you get Ego Whip, you also get Tower...