Search results

I would try to allow something like this as much as possible.

I certainly agree. Let's add in complaints about editing also.

I think advantage and disadvantage is a good idea, but should be pretty rare, and it looks like WOTC is dialing it back a bit to see how that works. I have no problem with bonuses or penalties as long as they are pretty clear and consistent.

Adventurers tend to be the exception, not the norm, so this is not a problem.

Well, I am not a fan of gnomes at all, and have spent many an edition rarely encountering one, and never playing one. That out of the way, I prefer the gnomes as surface dwarves, but with a magical bent that got them separated form dwarven society, that tends to not like magic at all. Over a...

Yeah, something like that is pretty mean, but fun.

Well, in my experience most players have a preferred kind of character, and for some people, it is really really narrow. That said, I think it is a good idea (Maybe for a short game) to have people play a more or less random character as a way to try to get people out of their comfort zone and...

Well, I'd love to get rid of the take ten mechanic itself. Let the rogue roll twice, or something like that, if you must, but stop making people not roll the d20.

You are talking about one tiny bit of the rules, so quitting 5E over that seems a bit extreme. And it is a part of the rules that many people have houseruled in one way or the other since 3E came out.

I am absolutely not a fan of this, except in a few circumstances like Intimidate working with Charisma and Strength. Otherwise, you will get people dogpiling one ability score too much, and that is not good for the game.

I would like to go back to that amount of reality also, where green slime actually destroyed items.

Yes, I hope they can keep the number of base classes really down and use specialties and such to make the plethora of base classes I liked from 3E.

Very nice post.

Well I would hope that a specialty were the base class, like magic use, or fighting, or whatnot. I liked theme better.

I overall have to agree. It looks like a fairly elegant system I would not mind playing. I am sure people will be exploiting holes, and I see a lot of min-maxing potential, but it does not seem to be too strong as the game seems to be trying hard to limit things. For example skills. If the top...

I think the stats is a mistake, really, and something like a bonuses to skills would be a lot better. Letting them have , say a +3 to skills, spread out how they want would do a good job of showing their versatility.

This thread is up to over 1000 posts, an impressive achievement in itself.

Sometimes I think a good 5E DM will need to avoid forums like the plague.

I would say that the difference you detailed is too small to make any real difference. I would have no problem with the males being disadvantaged to the extent of 3 gold.

I think a strong case can be made for PDF Or online support, strong support.