Search results

That sounds good and all, but it glosses over the truly difficult part: what does primary Combat really mean as far as actual mechanics? Or primary Magic? What gets lost with less training? If primary Combat means "full BaB, and a combat feat every two levels" and primary Magic means "full...

RPGs aren't "life", and like entertainment in general, are inherently escapist. Just because life sucks sometimes doesn't mean a game needs to suck similarly. In particular, if I feel that a game is punishing me for something I had little to no agency in, I start looking for a new game pretty...

Who wants this? Certainly not me. I don't think Incenjucar does either. Neither of us (and noone else I've seen in this thread) is expressing a desire to remove the six ability scores. Wanting a system where they produce a smaller number of derived stats, that get used in combat, does not...

That's a very strange, and very incorrect, conclusion to draw. I like ability scores being funneled into a smaller number of easy to remember stats that actually get used frequently in combat. Simplifying the frequent events (attack resolution during combat), even if it adds a little...

Those don't sound mundane to me at all. They sound like things that require significant training, above and beyond raw strength.

I can't say that I remember any specific stats of any character, at this time. But I can say that I very often remembered the things I used most in combat, at the time I was playing. That was 6 numbers in 4E (defenses, attack bonus, damage bonus), which becomes 9 in 5E. When I say memorize, I...

It adds some degree of play-time complexity because there are more things an attack can target. The six ability scores in 3.X and 4E are used to calculate saves/defenses, then can essentially be ignored for routine attacks/spells. It does reduce character creation and leveling complexity, but...

My stats were very quick to come up with. Even in that extreme case, the cat was not a mortal threat (aside from the Rabies, which would be potentially worth modeling; make the cat a trap with an attack vs Reflex or maybe Fortitude that inflicts a disease). Anything that deals damage to a...

Quest XP was pretty standard, I think, but I didn't think adjusting combat XP was all that common. But my experience with early D&D is very limited. Of course, very early on, most XP was from treasure, and that was tied directly to what treasure table the monster you fought had. But the...

Here, I made up some stats for you: House-cat Level 1 Minion Tiny Natural Beast Init +2 AC 12 Reflex 12 Fort 6 Will 10 Speed 6 Standard Actions: Bite Melee +4 vs AC: Deal 1 damage to a tiny size, or smaller, level 1 Natural Beast Minion. Minor Actions: Claw Melee +2 vs Reflex: Grab and knock...

I don't expect it to be perfect. But the problem with your suggested modification is that it makes it effectively the same as 4E's encounter design, just in a roundabout way. That doesn't really argue in favor of Mike's Adventure XP pool idea as being viable, if the only way to make it work is...

Yes, simpler games tend to be easier to balance. If encounter/class balance is an actual design goal. Which is often not really the case in OSR games. And even if it is, balance for a CaW-focused game (heavy exploration/interaction and strategy, light on tactics) is very different than for a...

It's not an in-world term. It does not describe any social structure. It describes the combat role. Nothing more, nothing less. I can't argue your personal preference, but I can say that I greatly prefer having simple, clear mechanics and terms, that are largely divorced from setting or...

But Mike's stated goal is a system that handles that all-in-one, or separate, just by spreading around Adventure XP. If it ends up being DM judgement if it deviates from a narrow assumption, then it really does nothing of the sort. Your suggestion is really almost identical to 4E: 3-5...

He's not a "minion" of anyone. It's just a mechanics term. No stranger than calling Human NPCs "monsters" or "creatures", which is quite common. He's a Brute because it categorizes how he's likely to fight in combat. Standardized terminology to make things clear to the DM. He can't make...

I've contemplated doing something like this from time to time, but it ultimately felt like I couldn't actually have any significant consequences, or else they would feel like DM fiat, because I took away a lot of the options they built their characters with, instead of something truly earned, or...

I'm not conflating them. I recognize that they are two separate issues. My point is that even without 4E's encounter powers, 10 single-monster encounters compared to one 10-monster encounter is a huge difference, and one that a simple Adventure XP pool system would not recognize. I don't deny...

I should be clear that I meant "issue" in the sense of "problematic for an Adventure XP pool system", not issue as in "a problem with the game design". 10 individual-monster encounters absolutely should be easier than all those monsters put together, and they always have been. But if the...

If we assume a simple system where there's a set Adventure XP pool, and monsters have a set XP, and that's it (which is what I think Mike was going for), ignore unquantifiable things like ambush setups and terrain advantage, and assume the game looks anything like any edition of D&D, I don't see...

First, considering they only got even remotely on top of balance 4 years ago, and it lead to an edition that has (much to my chagrin) apparently failed enough to warrant a new edition this soon, I don't think my concerns are unwarranted. That wasn't 40 years of progression, in terms of game...