Search results

Sure, but I imagine it would get very boring. In a PnP game, you generally handwave most simulation things. You have an understanding with the other participants of what goes on and don't actually play everything out. Ultima Online had you doing ridiculous simulationist things like cutting down...

1. Replacement of 1-1-1 movement with offset squares or hexes. I already get enough of circumventing all obstacles with free movement in Descent, thank you. This might also lead to more free form map creation rather than the boring rectangular rooms and corridors over and over again. 2. More...

Well, you've got the strongly worded letter part done, might as well go all out with your planned sanctions. That will show them.

"...as well as implementing features that are difficult or impossible to do in Excel" Nothing is impossible in Excel.

More precisely, they are the leader in combat. The roles are only related to combat. The party leader, if there is one, is up to the characters to work out.

I guess you missed the 3rd Commandment. And the fact that they are "commandments" (nudge, nudge). Mr. Heinsoo is not exactly beating around the bush on this.

Bull rush is not a D&D-ism. It's used in American football.

I still hate the name but I think the class could be good. It's a solid concept, but I found the article to be alarming in a few ways. The implied "sometimes, but not 100% of the time, he gets to order people around" along with the known forced movement is troubling. So is the stuff about the...

Not a problem, thanks for discussing it. I'll be the first to agree that I need to see all the rules and the class in that context to make a real judgment, but I just want to express that I am getting bad vibes from what Mr. Heinsoo wrote.

But that's in character, right? I'm referring to "No, don't step there, that guy has a 10' reach. Oh, and end your move five feet the other way. That way the wizard will have to move and provoke if he wants to hit you with burning hands." I don't want those out of character suggestions turned...

I'm OK with setting up opportunities and such. I am against encouraging tactical discussion around the table, and I am led to believe by the article that that is the intent with the warlord. It may be a fine distinction. Some discussion is going to come up, and if there's a way that it could...

For starters, it rarely makes sense that a discussion of tactical minutia could be taking place among the characters in the middle of a battle. It does make sense that characters would establish general strategies and tactics, but not to the level where the players discuss exact positioning with...

Those are good reasons. Some of my reasons for discouraging table talk: 1) Speed of the game 2) Your characters are not omniscient in regards to the battlefield 3) It tends to take players out of character 4) As DM, I don't optimize enemy tactics--they make mistakes just like the PCs do My...

Give an actual example then of a clear and precise rule hindering someone from doing something reasonable. The throwing dagger thing made no sense in the context of D&D.

Is that supposed to make it better? I don't want the fighter moving my character anymore than I want the warlord to.

That would describe the marshal, but it does not hold with what we have been shown of the warlord so far. My impression is that the player with the warlord is meant to metagame. The article supports this: "...if you're the type of player who loves studying tactical situations and trying to...

That's not the same thing at all. The rules that exist should be clear and precise and not leave room for interpretation. No one is proposing that rules should exist for everything.

And I am not sure where you are getting your idea of it from since I haven't seen anyone express metagaming any other way than what SmCaudata wrote. It's using your knowledge as a player in a way that breaks from what your character would ordinarily do. Someone saying "I'm hurt bad--get up here...

That never has been and never will be a valid argument in favor of a rule.

No thanks. I try to keep metagaming to a minimum, and here's a class that seems to be encouraging it.