Search results

FWIW, I like the 4e monster system in general, but I do miss a bit of simulationism, because it helps give a yardstick to the PCs achievements, and also because sometimes I like an NPC or a monster to fight on the party's side. It is nice that you can make a dragon's breath wipe out an army...

Going by 3rd edition RAW, crafting charged magic items isn't just cheap, it's crazily cheap. A mage can make an item that will allow him to, for example, understand any language in the world, and the cost for doing so, and probably the time expenditure involved, is less than it is to go out and...

As in "not terribly uncommon house rules", the likes of which have been argued about around here (the ever-present low magic wars) for the past several years?

Hussar. You're specifying a hard case, requiring a hard rule (yes/no), and then being appalled at how hard it looks when people choose one of those hard rules. I mean, something like dragonborn, among friends, that's usually going to be discussed around the table and everyone will have a pretty...

Alternatively, have the monster use the Slippery Mind mechanic (which reintroduces the two rolls, but keeps the numbers from having to be retabulated).

Well that's the thing isn't it? This is an internet forum, not a group of friends. Because groups of friends 1) tend to have something like a consensus on taste issues and 2) assuming they have like an over-18 maturity level they'll come to an agreement about little stuff like this before it...

Careful, Hussar'll come crusading to your table to gank your players. Heads down, everyone!

I do this, because yeah, way too many races. But one thing you can do to open things up a bit is to demote some monster types from "race" to "clan", "accursed (or blessed) family", or "unique" – basically, the lens of evolutionary biology, which so many of the monster descriptions take for...

What I have been thinking about lately is treating very specific skills or nonadventuring professions as if they were languages (or Complete Scoundrel skill tricks) in that they cost a flat 2 skill points. So, something like Forgery might work like: you take the forgery skill, you want to forge...

Sure, but are you the movie-maker? No? Then who cares what their POV is? I dunno, I never saw Spider-Man 3 on account of everyone said it was bad, but my impression of the reviews was that it was (like X-Men 3) trying to be too many things and fit too many arcs into one little movie and hence...

500? 1000? Buh! The way I usually organize my thieves' guilds is, there's a core of about 30 to 50. These are analogous to made men. Planners, enforcers, skilled burglars. Outside that core, you have about 50 to 100 people "who know people" in the guild, do jobs for them, don't know very much...

First of all, I completely agree with & applaud Mouseferatu here. Secondly I think where input from the players is really important & useful is where you run the kind of adventures they want to have. If they want to go exploring uncharted wildernesses, looting tombs, saving the kingdoms...

No, he has it (basically) right: TWF w/ short swords: 1d6+1d6(SA)+Str, and then 1d6+1d6(SA)+(Str/2), flank bonus cancels out TWF penalty. Two separate attacks=2 doses of sneak attack. Strikey!

Seriously. That's just work.

Well obviously when you run things this way you make a bit of an effort to correct for this. It isn't that hard to vary things from behind the scenes, and you shouldn't be throwing so many of the same type of creature at the PCs that the baseline becomes that obvious, anyway.

I think that is pretty much what is meant. A tactics RPG with a 4e ruleset.

This is pretty much what I had wanted to write as soon as I saw this thread. The core game doesn't have to be anything at all. I would note that "kid-friendly" can leak into "kid-boring," the bad-old-days when the game was seen as devil-worshipping psycho stuff were also the days the hobby was...

This sounds like a lot of fun!

• a good fantasy adventure story • a few fun heroes • a dungeon • a dragon • a scene with green slime • and no mention of "Dungeons and Dragons" at all. If it has memorable scenes with stuff you can play in the game, there's your tie-in.

To run with this a bit, I think most all of the vocal 4e "haters" around here think that 4e has some very definite strengths, but are also annoyed by other aspects of the rules. The people that flat out hate 4e don't post much, because they have no investment in the new game.