Search results

Aah... Well. I know they say that "customers are always right" but sometimes they need a good roper spanking. Edit: Well, to be fair, the module could've advised the DM to use a weaker version of the roper, if the players didn't believe in running away, thus catering to both playstyles.

That might be a case of adventure design being locked into a certain convention, and then the audience becoming overly accustomed to the standard spoonfed formula. Like watching happy Hollywood ending for many years and then getting upset when you get a twist bad ending. I think it's unfortunate...

Has anyone ever played a campaign where knights are just as lawful or unscrupulous as the general population? I'm thinking robber knights, Game of Thrones, etc. Where "knight" is just a title and code of conduct is subjective.

I think the essential question could be reframed like so... Which of the following is true: 1) a rule describes what can/will happen in-game (regardless of context) 2) a rule describes what is likely to happen in-game (in an average context) With boardgames, it's always #1. It's simple, clear...

It wouldn't occur to me think of windy conditions before making a jump, I think you're more on the ball for accounting for various in-game details. I can imagine a player rolling a 20, the DM narrates that a gust of wind carries them far than usual, and the player blinks and wonders where...

If I wanted to remove race bloat in a Star Trek RPG, I'd get rid of all the people in funny suits -- I'd reskin Klingons into a human warrior culture, Ferengi into merchant guild members, Vulcans into logical monks, and Romulans into a post-modern Roman empire. But this would mean killing sacred...

I rolled a 20 on my Willpower check, so I've refrained from derailing further the thread with a confused tangent about gusts of wind.

I don't think anyone tries to model prevailing weather conditions before making a jump roll; I don't think that was the intention.

Right, except the point I had intended to make is that if the DM houserules to disconnect race mechanics from physical stereotypes, then it makes the job harder for the DM to differentiate the non-humans from the humans. And let's not forget that the players would also be involved in roleplaying...

Although it's very difficult to be completely off the radar during the entire course of adventuring, I'd disagree that epicness is directly correlated with a sort of universal prominence. You don't have to be a secretive hermit or a lone wolf -- you could just adventure for a few years in a...

IMO, that makes magic "the same". Magic is called magic because it's different, has different advantages and limitations. For example, you can create light the mundane way -- light a torch, need to have the torch in your backpack, flames can be extinguished, there's an x% chance of lighting the...

In a campaign that seeks consistency but wants to allow for full player choice, the setting could have a mutagen backstory (aberration magic, Far Realm virus, divine curse, etc.) to cover these unique individuals. I agree, but I think there is another nuance there. If there are 3 physical...

I remember playing a Jedi trial from a Stars Wars game. And the Star Wars wiki provides examples of a Trial of Insight and Skill and a Trial of Courage and Skill which involves illusionary opponents. So I can imagine that for a trial of Bahamut, powerful illusions would set up one or more...

To capture the feel of an era of exploration, discovering not just new locations and treasures but also new civilizations, like a pulpish adventure, it might be interesting to start with human only or core only races, and then pick up new races only when the party finds them in the story. That...

Although it does have its drawbacks in an RPG, unique individuals (or unique tribes or bloodlines) for PCs is probably the most basic solution to race bloat. For example, in Wizard of Oz, you have some races like the winged monkeys and the Munchkins. But if Wizard of Oz was D&D, you'd also have...

The pixie-as-a-human comes to mind in terms of straining credulity. For whatever reason, the pixie (whatever one thinks of the race in gameplay) doesn't contribute to "race bloat" IMO. I think the reason is that a) I'm used to thinking of humans and fey (ie., real-life Europe and fairy...

I haven't thought them all through, but is there any race that can't be reskinned as a human "subrace"/ethnic group or a cursed or mutated human tribe or a unique individual?

He could choose to do so, but he'd be very bad at it without the appropriate training in arms and armor. No, you don't reskin armor mechanics in this case at all. The wizard class mechanics consider what kind of magic is fun and compelling to be in the game. If there is an abjuration school...

I'm also ambivalent, but I think Naszir is correct to argue that this isn't 4E. I imagine that, with single actions, "prone" is a serious condition, moreso than in 4E. That is, with all the implied movement that goes on anyway in combat, that sometimes getting knocked down and heroically...

Still not following. Take an orc (in 3E and 4E). Have them frequently fight one on one (for bloodfeud, hierarchy, whatever) across all the clans over centuries. Per your logic, whoever wins initiative wins the combat. The orcs knows this, so they breed themselves for the highest Dex.