Search results

Oh no, that ruins the whole point. Even progressions in each pillar for everyone. Also, variable progressions would make Themes (feat delivery) and Backgrounds (Skills and maybe Trait delivery) unworkable. If a class should have a boost to a particular pillar, just stick it in the class. But...

What does it matter if the rules call it a "skill" or a "trait" or a "feat"? My expectation is all three would look a lot like feats in 3.X/4E. We already know that skills are going to be situational bonuses to attribute checks, and not a 3.X-style point system, or even a set list of skills. My...

Nobody's saying that these things would have any barriers between them. Nothing would stop someone from using whatever abilities they have whenever they are applicable. It's just a way to organize mechanics in a sensible way, and help facilitate characters that can contribute in various aspects...

I like 4E, but the term "Powers" should probably go away, outside of Psionics, for the sake of placating certain people. "Feats" is primarily evocative of combat to me, anyway, and I think Skills is perfect for Exploration. I like Traits for Interaction, too, if that's a separate thing. But...

You are probably right. They've said a lot about wanting to "empower" DMs, and making them the gatekeepers to the actual mechanics fits with that. Unfortunately, I don't like the brand of empowering DMs that entails substituting DM judgement calls and fiat instead of clear, well-defined mechanics.

Yes. I'd like to see something like: Class Level: levels of spell slots available 1: 0 0 1 1 2: 0 1 1 1 3: 0 1 1 2 4: 0 1 1 1 2 5: 0 1 1 2 3 6: 1 1 2 2 3 7: 1 1 2 2 3 4 ... 20: 4 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 8 9 So, new spell slots get added relatively slowly. Instead, the spell slots become better at each...

Actually, my response is: that happens quite frequently at my table, in most RPGs we play (which actually does not include DnD currently), and I don't really mind. If it's a straightforward use of intimidation, in a circumstance where it obviously applies, I don't really need to hear a flowery...

Yeah, I like the symmetry of Traits, but it does feel a bit like bloat. I think Skills covering both exploration and interaction is a better approach. As for Feats and Skills being optional, what I'd like to see is: Core game alone: Each Class has a full complement of feats and skills...

Bah... I even refreshed just before posting my thread... I'll just repost here, then: Yes! This is exactly what I've been asking for. Although I'm a bit confused because I thought interaction was the new name for the "roleplaying" pillar, not a separate thing? In any event, I think it's a...

Nevermind, Got beaten to the punch. Mods, please delete. New blog post: Avoiding Trap Choices Yes! This is exactly what I've been asking for. Although I'm a bit confused because I thought interaction was the new name for the "roleplaying" pillar, not a separate thing? In any event, I think...

I actually think well-defined mechanics help here. If it's very clear where the sledgehammer can be used, and the player understands, up front, how limited it can be, they're more likely to diversify. On the other hand, a lot of the "good roleplaying" I see being advocated (for example, that...

While it wasn't your intent, I think it is an implication. If a "Trap" option can become a "not-Trap" purely by virtue of it being simple, that suggests that the player cares about simplicity, but not effectiveness. Whereas to someone who cares about effectiveness, a Trap can't be fixed just...

But I'm not content with simply having differences with the personality and background the players come up with. I want differences in what the characters can do. It's not the be-all, end-all, but it's the root of the players' narrative power, at least in DnD-style games. The options available...

It's a trap if they expected to have an effective character, in comparison to their peers, and don't. I simply do not buy this notion that all theses people who want simple characters don't care how effective their characters are. That's clearly not a "trap" by common usage of the term. A Trap...

The point is that a Theme that is custom designed can have a higher power level than a Theme that is just 5 feats, and still be balanced with a custom choice of 5 feats, because that custom choice is likely to produce a great deal of power. Suppose a Theme that is simply 5 pre-determined feats...

Good example. And another one where I don't think the 1E version is any more flavorful, or an example of high-quality prose. It's just a lot messier and harder to read, with mechanics more appropriately placed in other sections of the book. Having seen that, and the Half-elf section, I'm...

If a player can choose a Character C that is exactly the same as Character B, and a whole bunch of other options, it will NEVER be the case that Character C will be worse than Character B, in their own judgement, unless they're just being irrational. Custom feat selection is a full substitute...

Well, for me there is no engagement with the world without tools and rules. The rules are the expression of how the world works, and without that, I find roleplaying frustrating at best. If there's only an occasional flying enemy, then it is a player issue, not system issue. If there are...

Feat like in the sense that class features are "feat-like". Not "feat-like" in the sense of being interchangeable options that can be freely combined, mixed, and matched. How abilities are chosen, what options are available, makes a big difference. There's a big difference between a chunk of...

I am thoroughly confused how anything I've said suggests doing that. Or how any argument I've made generalizes to that conclusion. Please elaborate. The only thing I am arguing against is Themes being just a package of feats; a strict subset of the possible combinations available from...