Search results

I've got to wonder... How is a default setting supposed to appeal to new DMs and players? As a whole, people new to the hobby are not going to be idiots or suffer from an deficient imagination. For the most part, tabletop gaming is going to appeal to those who enjoy exercising their imagination...

There is some value in a default setting in a rulebook, but it is not necessary, and many of the drawbacks outweigh the advantages. You can create interesting fluff for spells, classes, and abilities without building setting, and it is the former that is helpful, not the latter. To be honest...

I don't really care if they offer such a thing, but I have no interest in buying a beta rulebook. I'd buy a finished product, but not an unfinished one.

I'll disagree with this quite strongly. If you don't want the RAW to tell you what to do, then why on earth would you bother buying the rulebooks? The last thing I would ever want to do is spend a good chunk of money on a book that just says "eh, do whatever you feel is right". It would be a...

I appreciate the reassurance in the last answer. It has been a big worry of mine (and others), so I'm glad they are aware of the concerns. I'm still not sold on their approach to non-combat via ability scores and DM interpretation, but I guess I may as well see how it plays out.

The thing is, my issue with that complaint is not that I don't think 4E is like a videogame (well, I don't, but still...), but that people use "videogamey" as an insulting pejorative, as if videogames are inherently a bad thing. It is not criticism, but rather crude insult that belittles a...

Well, it isn't exactly on topic for this thread (if we are even following the topic of this thread anymore...), so probably a bad time. ;) Also... you'd need to elaborate on that argument a lot more for me to respect it. If it is left at the realm of "it feels like a videogame, then it is...

The second paragraph does not follow from the first. You're omitting a key assumption required to make that logic work. That assumption pretty much has to be "we just don't like people pointing out problems with things we like". It isn't that the critic is inherently wrong. It is that you just...

This really is the heart of it. 3E is a deeply flawed game. 4E is better, but it is still a deeply flawed game. Nobody benefits from WotC pretending to ignore these flaws. I won't be sold on 5E until WotC does address all of these flaws and shows that it is making an honest effort to improve...

There is a world of difference between the markets for cars and game systems. I don't think this analogy is exactly applicable. The difference in expected customer familiarity with the product is enough on its own to make it inapplicable. I also don't agree with your characterization of WotC's...

I really don't understand why people keep saying that WotC ever actually said that 3E was a bad game. They never said that, even once. They've criticized various elements of it (that badly needed criticizing) and offered various things to improve upon it (many of which are genuine improvements)...

I just gave you experience for your wisdom in another thread, so I'll just say this. Thank you for saying this. Thank you very, very much. Let me also add a few words. Pretty much everything WotC ever said negative about 3E was just repeating complaints raised hundreds and thousands of times...

Mass Effect 2 was certainly one inspiration, though the Tales of Symphonia implementation, where powers could branch out down "Power" or "Technical" lines, also influenced that thought a bit. It really does work well as an upgrade system.

Honestly, I'd rather see spells scale than see a return of the escalating spell level/slot system. I'm fine with having Vancian magic, but that doesn't mean we need nine spell levels with countless spells of each level being cast per day. I'd rather just have spells with no concept of "spell...

I voted "None of the Above". I really just want to see more interesting races and classes, rather than lots of racial variants or not-quite-classes. Race and class are the key aspects of character choice, so it is best to give those categories as many real, meaningful options as possible...

Lingering poison effects can be cured in different ways without worrying too much about the actual damage type, in my opinion. This works as long as the separation between poisoning as a condition and poisoning as a form of HP damage is maintained. Actually, if you avoid using the same word...

I never really liked any previous set of damage types... My full list of damage types would be something like this: Fire, Lightning, Ice, Toxic, Spirit, Slashing, Piercing, Bludgeoning, and Hacking. Fire, lightning, and ice are self-explanatory. Toxic is basically poison, acid, and any other...

It's an interesting suggestion, but I don't think it will work out at all. If nothing else, it would be a logistical nightmare to make sure every race has an ability for every class, since both the number of races and the number of classes will be constantly increasing as supplements are...

This isn't quite true. For me, low scores can also be the answer I want to pick. I voted a 1 for "DMs should influence player customization" (or however that was phrased. Because I don't think they should. Anyways, this is yet another article from Mr. Cook that makes me a bit worried about the...

I think people have been going far too crazy with the idea of turning classes into themes. Something like the Sorcerer works great as a class. Sure it has started mostly as an alternative Wizard, but that doesn't mean you can replace it with a Wizard with a Sorcerer theme. People play Sorcerers...