Search results

My main concern is that Core will be basically an OSR game. And be rife with old-school game balance problems. Which is OK for that style of game, but it makes it difficult to take that, and add tactics modules, and somehow arrive at a well balanced game. And without balance, all that fancy...

I think there's a pretty clear distinction. An Encounter is a scene. An Adventure is the chapter, or perhaps a whole book. A scene is, usually, some set number of actors interacting with each other, essentially simultaneously. In a combat encounter, an XP pool helps ensure that the NPCs are...

Problem with this is there's a huge difficulty difference between some amount of XP spent on a single fight, and that same amount spread across individual monsters encountered one at a time. So I don't think a simple per-adventure XP pool accomplishes much of anything. If you want balanced...

I'm generally inclined to believe that this is a reasonably accurate description of the 1.0 rules. And they look terrible. Not that I expected much different. Sounds like these are from before they started talking publicly about 5E, so hopefully there's been some feedback they're paying...

I don't think we necessarily need Palis, and both melee and caster Clerics as core classes. And for core, I think melee Clerics make more sense than caster Clerics, so that there's some kind of melee/caster middle ground in core. And ultimately, I definitely do want to see a melee-Wizard...

Paladins are one of the primary healer classes in WoW. I don't play WoW either, but I do play DDO, and it's a frequent point of confusion for new players moving from WoW to DDO. Now, I wouldn't want that kind of consideration to get in the way of a better design, but part of the response to 4E...

I think that's a significant change in what a DnD Pali is, which doesn't seem likely to happen in 5E. It also might draw "5E is WoW" style complaints if a Paladin becomes a bona-fide healer. The 3.5 Pali sucked because it was primarily a melee class, and melee sucked. So naturally, making it...

The problem is that traditionally, Paladins aren't really effective substitutes for Clerics as party healer. So either they break with tradition and give Paladins full (or near full) Cleric healing, or there's no true melee divine healer, which is also a break from tradition. Tradition aside...

Except that the example of "Cherish" in the article was a duct-taped, scribbled-on, well-worn book from over 30 years ago, with value well beyond monetary. That's what I don't think can really be designed for. Sure, they can do Deluxe edition-style things, but that strikes me as a rather...

It's ultimately a spectrum. I don't see much point driving a real distinction between Lawful vs. Neutral or Neutral vs. Chaotic. Neutral is just someone that's closer to the middle than to either extreme. I disagree that Chaotic is necessarily the "self interested" alignment. Robin Hood...

Alignment shouldn't "define" character actions. It's far too simplistic for that. Alignment is just a characteristic tendency of the character. Being Lawful shouldn't mean that you have to uphold all laws at all times. It should just mean that the character's general outlook on life and...

I actually think the opposite. Good/Evil is purely subjective, and a matter of perspective. Noone sane actually considers themselves Evil. Law vs Chaos is more objective. There are certainly people that describe themselves as wanting weaker law, and greater personal freedom. The "Chaos"...

I'm not really seeing how "Cherish" is something that can be a design goal, really. It sounds like something that is completely wrapped up in people's own minds and experiences with the game. As for Consume vs. Engage, those make a lot more sense. I'm definitely on the Consume side. I buy...

So to be clear, you don't want Paladins to be required to be LG? So if the DM says "your Paladin is no longer LG", it just means writing something else on your sheet, not losing Paladin abilities, or any inability to continue leveling as a Paladin? As long as your "trait" based is strictly a...

How is that any more or less prescriptive than any other alignment system the game has used? If you write down "lawful", what if you end up stealing a lot, or breaking laws? What if you write down "true neutral", but end up doing good deeds all the time? The only real difference is that this...

No. For a couple reasons. 1) It wastes names. Level titles are little more than flavor, but the terms used can't be used for other things without creating confusion. There are only so many good terms, and I'd rather they be used for classes, themes, backgrounds, PrCs/Paragon Paths/Epic...

That interrupt ability is essentially identical to (hypothetical 4E-style power): Rolling Dive (Rogue Utility) Encounter, Immediate Interrupt Trigger: You are targeted by an Area or Close attack. Effect: Shift to the nearest unoccupied square not targeted by the attack. So, I'm not sure...

I think in the vast majority of cases, it's pretty clear what an "adventure" is. But "Adventure" is a statement of intent. A DM less comfortable with structuring their campaign with such narrative ideas can set, say, a week of rest to recover "Adventure" resources, and the game would naturally...

I'd like to see most Daily resources become Adventure resources, with guidance in the DMG to either make a DM call on what an "Adventure" is, or to establish a sensible rest period to naturally demarcate them. The idea is to make the player's option of resting for the night be less...

Saves (pre-4E) are really only superficially active, and fundamentally very different immediate reactions/interrupts. I would be disappointed to see immediate actions go away, and saves be treated like they're some kind of replacement. A Save is mechanically equivalent to the spell attack...