Search results

Damage doesn't work if you miss. Damage reduction doesn't work if you aren't hit. A retributive strike doesn't work if you aren't missed. Shielding your ally doesn't help if he isn't hit. Nothing always works. Lots of situations with options. That's good, no? I think my point is that they do...

Also, I am not sure I understand the spamming comment. Compared to what? Making a basic attack every round? At least this way (assuming the different options are balanced somehow) you have some variety.

It nr 1 (Edit: I should probably clarify that it's the only thing that makes sense to me)

This new mechanic sounds very promising. I also like that you give up damage instead of to hit. For the ultra-simple oldschool fighter-vibe, it would be simple to agree on taking the average of whichever die the fighter currently have and add that as a static bonus.

Grats to you P-Kitty, that's awesome.

Nah, it's a 5th level monster with double HD and double CON-modifier of a 5th level monster because it is elite. It's AC damage are based on the 5th level template, not the 10th level template, so it can't be technically a 10th level monster. Such a monster would (presumably) do more damage...

You forgot the most important thing if you want to mimic the older editions. Remove the concentration skill so that hit = lost spell.

Share them with us. Inspire us!

This is really interesting, I never thought about that. I think I will hold off for now though, and maybe take a look at later.

Here is a list of the optional rules and house rules we have decided to start with. Attacks of Opportunity You can make one AO per creature, max 1+1/5 lvls (warriors 3+1/5) per round. Training When you level up, you automatically gain whatever you already have. If you wish to gain new...

Yep. I started dnd late, when I was 15, which was incidently in 89 when 2e came out. We played that exclusively up until 04 or 05 iirc. So it might be nostalgia, we are keenly aware of that. But it was something in the dndnext experience that reminded us of a feeling, or rather a way of playing...

Does that mean you promise stop posting about WoTC and D&D? If so, can I have your gold? If this is a serious question, take it to PM. If it is not, this post is pointless other than crapping the thread. Please don't. Thanks. - Lwaxy

Confidence is fine. Just because they sometimes make business decisions where YOU and I do not know of all the variables and thus struggle to understand the reasons why they make those decisions doesnt mean that I lose faith.

AHA. I think I misunderstood the initial statement. I jasper meant that the wizard could cast the spells at will, as long as he has components. Running him like a sorceror does make sense. And yes, no matter which rule we use, I will definitely be enforcing the learn spell-rules and the maximum...

How on earth do you keep that balanced?

Thanks Cro, all sensible ideas. As I am currently on vacation and won't be back until a couple of days before the campaign is supposed to start, any debate concerning eventual house rules will be done by email. It shouldn't be too hard to agree though, since I was their DM for 16 years in 2e...

I wish that WotC would use their ninjas (you know, those that come to your house at night and burn your books if you are not playing the current edition) and deal with those editions warriors instead.

Thanks, I have a feeling we might need it. So many new (old) weird rules to get used to. Yeah, that's pretty much a given. Been considering implementing something a la dndnext for hit points further down the road, as in, you get minimum half hit points rounded down, no matter what you roll...

So, a late night talk about the dndnext playtest, resulted in all of my players and I realizing that we probably had more fun when we played 2e (89-05) than when we played 3.x (05-08) or 4e (08-12). Nostalgia or not, we decided to start a new campaign, using the 2e rules. Now, I must admit I...

Like you, perhaps? Jeez with the negative rethorics all the time.