Search results

I gave that game a look. It changed far too much. It clearly wants to be its own game (like Pathfinder). It IS its own game, with its own version of the PHB, DMG, and MM. Not interested. The game I'm talking about here is decidedly "still 5E but with specific things improved".

No, you already have what you want: just keep playing regular 5E. You don't get to deny me what I need just so you don't have to say "we don't use this supplement in my campaign."

I'm giving you my vision of what a 3PP product should look like. Specifically note the difference to [insert hopeful 5E killer/replacement here]. There's been soo many games that profess to fix or enhance 5E that turns out to not do that, because they're completely new games, that no longer...

I expanded on my take re: what D&D 2024 probably won't fix. https://www.enworld.org/threads/advanced-d-d-or-what-to-minimally-fix-in-5e.704599/

https://www.enworld.org/threads/advanced-d-d-or-what-to-minimally-fix-in-5e.704599/ Started a new thread re: one of the tangents of what's discussed here.

For a while now I've been frustrated by the lack of a product that enhancens and deepens 5E without shooting off and making a new game. There's been quite a number of supposedly saviors of 5E that upon inspection (or right away) turns out to be something else than 5E. They change up the classes...

Somewhat like Level Up: Advanced 5E. Started out intriguing - quickly lost track and became its own thing. Perhaps I need to start a new thread. Edit: Done: D&D 5E - Advanced D&D or "what to minimally fix in 5E?"

And how cool would it be to see a game that actually implemented a small number of such changes but then didn't also change a thousand other things!

I became aware of this thru a Tree ant monk video. As soon as I saw this, I immediately knew it wouldn't feel like D&D or 5E. Now, the pitch was something like "5E but fixed" but that could be treesntmonks pitch, and not something DC20 would say. All of these games that kill sacred cows would...

lol

As long as you understand that unless the players know you and your DMing style, you absolutely must have a "session 0" where you tell them these things. Explicitly and overtly. If I can have my monsters ambush you when your character takes a bathroom break, the theoretical idea "you should not...

This is about expectations. In most modern games players don't bother making backup copies simply because the concept "taking away my spellbook" just isn't a thing. It does not happen. Nobody even considers it. However, if the DM is clear about there being an actual risk of "caster - spellbook...

I miss a lot of things. A major decision point in your mid levels. 5E really could split subclasses into two choice points: one at start taking you up to (say) 11th level, and then a new choice point taking from 12th to 20th level. The main benefit would not necessarily be the character...

3E did many things right. But two things mean I'm never going back: * The martial - caster divide * The complex way you build NPCs

As every good minmaxer knows, D&D is about making your strengths as strong as possible, and have your party members cover for your weaknesses. This is why we don't use age modifiers in any rpg. Far far too easy to exploit. Plus: after a while you'd start wondering where all these very old...

For those that doesn't know, Over refers to the "funnel" concept. At least that's what DCC (Dungeon Crawl Classics) calls the idea. (I'm sure lots of gamers think GG came up with the idea but I don't think Goodman Games have ever claimed their funnel concept to be an original idea. I'm sure...

That's a needlessly combative response. Please stop.

Ah. Got it. I wouldn't either. (But I would be clear about what rules I'm using, which appears to not have been the case here) Most rules that govern NPC reactions are far far too crude and far far to exploitable to be of any use, I find. Mostly, I find that some (not many) players use them...

Not to derail but have you expanded on how somewhere?

That thing at the end is weird, and/or (probably and) I don't understand what you're saying. :) I would definitely not read more into high Comeliness than just attractiveness. Basically, if I would use it, I would use it as a convenient shorthand for a lengthy description. For PCs it's okay to...