Search results

The idea that players are "owed" an optimal stat spread is alien to me. That's one reason PF2 felt constricted to me. In that game, a 1 point difference is actually impactful. (The "crit when you roll 10 over" rule definitely plays a role here). It gives you perspective. Anyone claiming you...

its because the die remains twenty sided

I can't get agitated over them just accepting a fait accompli.

The fact Custom Background was right there in the PHB basically meant all those pages were wasted IMO. At least now (if it is true the Custom Background rule will be in the DMG) there will be tables where the DM upholds the implied rule you need to choose out of a given selection. Which pretty...

Counterpoint: chargen with no restrictions is inherently less interesting than chargen with restrictions. Clarification: talking arbitrary restrictions here. There is value in having to weigh some options against others. Having to weigh "I really don't want to play an Elf, but I do want to play...

Those three are definitely the ones I'd associate with Nobles. At least male nobles usually were martially trained, hence the Str. Nobles were generally far better educated than others except priests, hence the Int. And while I'm sure there were lots of dull RL noblemen, the D&D Noble is a...

This would both surprise and not surprise me. Since we all agree that the future of everything is the subscription model, where you lose access to your stuff when you stop paying monthly, it wouldn't surprise me. But since WotC only recently put their foot in their mouth (re OGL) I would be...

Wouldn't something like this be very desirable to the few classes that get no armor proficiences? Much like how Mountain Dwarf Wizard was a thing back in 2014? More generally, you can't evaluate an option based on its popularity or average value. Every minmaxer knows that the cost of an...

Are you saying four backgrounds offer two alternatives? (12 single-combo backgrounds + 4 dual-combo ones = 20 combos) Maybe I just don't follow.

I quite liked the idea you had to play an Elf (or whatever) to reach the very top echelons of Intelligence. Allowing characters of every race to be equally good at everything means something got lost, in my opinion.

Sorry I have news for you: Despite the dozens(?) of posts you make here, the cat is squarely back in the bag.

I am convinced half my players will simply minmax the background that serves their character best. I also don't worry about that half, it's not like this will diminish their play fun in the slightest - these players seldom roleplay their characters much anyway... it's not that the rules could...

Sounds like someone who definitely will be buying the new books ;)

Just as a friendly reminder: it's impossible to discern whether someone clicked the icon to laugh with your post or to laugh at your post. My suggestion is to interpret every laugh like as laughing with you...

The archetypal guard is neither smart nor attentive, so ;)

Not sure if this is applicable, but one rule from 2014 I did not like was the way you could pick a skill you knew you would get anyway, in order to turn that pick into "anything I want". It created a game where there ostensibly was a limitation, but where system mastery let you circumvent said...

What are you talking about now? D&D being pay to win is news to me.

I like it. Restrictions are often the foundations of interesting mechanical choices. The short period of D&D where you could put your ability scores wherever you like regardless of charbuild choices should not be seen as definitive. I had zero problems with racial modifiers but background...

I long for the time when player characters actually feared the dark. A time when Darkvision wasn't handed out like candy.

They want to move away from species/race so what should they have chosen instead if not backgrounds?