Search results

I think it's a combination of viewing D&D as a game primarily about combat, and a need to be "the best", two sentiments I disagree with.

That's one of the reasons I like 4e much better than 3.x, actually. You don't have to worry about building your character "wrong", since it's harder to do so within the framework of the rules. It's hard to have an exceptionally poor fighter and an exceptionally good one, assuming the same...

<double post>

I'm entitled to an opinion, too, right? ;) I dislike in-depth character building. In case you couldn't guess. Mutants and Masterminds' character building was a tempestuous serpent of optimization and complexity- none of our players were satisfied with the options presented in the book, so we...

What I like is untying the game from the 15 minute adventuring day and making players rest to regain their health and spells after blowing their load on a group of three orcs. I also like the willingness to redesign their entire game from the ground up. That takes some serious balls. I may not...

One of the biggest feature of d20 and its descendants is an increased focus on the building of the character, at least on a mechanical level. Numerous feats, class options, and alternate spells provided via "splatbook" have added a lot of complexity to what was once as easy as rolling up six...

I'm really not a big fan of Attacks of Opportunity as they stand anyways. It's basically requiring you to stay in combat and then only perform combat maneuvers. That said, I can't really see what the difference is. Withdraw, basically, means that you're giving up your entire round to make a...

How do you feel about humans playing elves? Or orcs? Or humans? Or vice versa? ;) I haven't got any problem whatsoever with it. If somebody wants to play a character of another gender and act like a fool, they'd probably act like a fool regardless.

I DM Labyrinth Lord, and though I don't buy adventures, I'm system agnostic. It's one of the big reasons I do so, actually. The game is simple enough that I can guesstimate about the right stats and hit dice and stuff, and then get to the ever-important task of playing.

Actually, no. I had forgotten to give the pdfcast link, for those among us who haven't registered for Scribd and have no intention to (heretics!) The alternate download link is here: Aremorican Addendum Vol. 1: Player Option - PDFCast.org

As I posted about on my blog, Aremorican Addendum Volume 1: Player Option is a roughly 30 page free pdf for those of us still rocking it old-school. It's designed to be compatible with Labyrinth Lord, which in itself is compatible with your favorite version of any Classic Fantasy Roleplaying...

I would like to recommend Labyrinth Lord. Screw all that other stuff. Why play diluted, over-complicated D&D when you can get the goodness straight from the source? 3.5 is a horrible mess of rules with no flavor or soul, and 4e is worse. Anyways, the key when playing old-school games is that...

Do tell! Sounds like fun :)

I'd pay some artists to illustrate my various books, companions, and other pieces that I produce. Other than that, who needs buckets of miniatures and dungeon tiles and other boring crap? Imagination is where it's at, baby.

So this guy doesn't like that in 2001 that people voted for their favorite and should have voted for his favorite? What a unique and interesting complaint *rolls eyes*

I think the only advantage is that in 4E, monsters and characters alike are both more rigid. Your characters have these powers, and this many spells, and that's it. Everything's tightly bolted down, which makes it hard to pick up and move. In 3.5, which is based off the excellent AD&D/oD&D...

I'd have to recommend OSRIC. Like somebody else noted, the reliance of 4e's "multiple balanced encounters per day" and the general slowing down of combat means that if you're going to let players get in problems that are way over their head, then you're left with three options, really. 1) They...

Look at it this way: If your players are cool with it, who are you to tell them to stop? If your players aren't, then who are you to make the gameworld notice an extremely minor set of actions? Why do the gods care when two buddies are messing with each other when the wholesale slaughter of...

Yeah, I'd never once heard of horse miniatures being square. I've had a small group of Empire cavalry (from the Warhammer miniatures game), and they're definately rectangles. If you don't like the squareness, plenty of games use round bases, or you could get some hex bases. Like one poster...

I usually only use Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral, and that's only because my games have a strong Moorcockian flavor and I like the idea that all of the gods are sort of detached from humanity. Sure, the Lawful gods can be nice guys, but they're not on your side, really. You can be on theirs, and...