Search results

On the issue of TSR and how it affected me, it did as time went on. I absolutely loved the things that Judges Guild put out and I think it still holds up today. Mayfair's Role Aids were similar to me. TSR eventually had problems with them and lawyers got involved. For me, this was one example of...

It's funny that you say that. I have played Daggerheart and ruled it out, but that was for an entirely different group of players. I'll definitely consider it.

I find myself in the need for a new RPG for players that hits the same general beats as D&D or Pathfinder but ... isn't them. The ideas I have so far are: Shadow of the Weird Wizard, Worlds Without Number, 13th Age 2E, or Mythcraft. We're going to be playing via VTT, so I'll need support for...

There's definitely an opportunity for smaller publishers to take advantage of WotC's missteps, but I think the window for a 5.5E alternative is largely closed. We're going to see Dagger Heart, Draw Steel, 13th Age 2E, and I'm sure others, but the marketing for 5.5E is pretty much wrapped up at...

I do one big thing that I don't even think is fudging, but I'm sure some people do. I don't roll the dice for a long of things that characters are skilled in, I just let it happen. If a character has the appropriate skill, I just let them do the thing that relates to that skill. If they have...

Back in the day when we were transitioning to 4E from 3.5, WotC did a great article about stat blocks and simplifying them. This was still in 3.5 mind you. They talked about all the stuff you could get rid of without affecting the experience at the table. I expect that would be something you...

I will cop to this attitude. But at the same time: who am I to say what you should care about as a DM or a player? I've never had a problem explaining monster powers, and I say that as someone who ran a lot of 4E and likes the design of those monsters a ton. My system of choice at the moment is...

Maybe? It depends on a lot of things about the different characters. I'd say a game where the potential exists for something like that would be better. But then, I like the Hero System where all of that is handled. But 5.5E is very far from that.

I would suggest the Hero system (Champions) instead of GURPS. Monte Cook wrote for them for years, and it had an influence on some parts of 3E. As a "fun fact" the lifting ability based on Strength is the same as the Hero system, for instance. I think that being able to describe "you take 1D8...

In D&D terms it does. In fact, almost any attack from any creature makes has the same results: you lose some HP. That's the kind of game D&D is. A hill giant smacking a halfling with a great club doesn't send them hurtling across the room. It does some HP. There are plenty of other game systems...

This is about the first time I've read something about 5.5E that actually excites me. Having monsters who can do more interesting things and aren't just bags of hit points ... that's a very good sign. Many moons ago, when I ran Curse of Strahd, I had to find a custom stat block for all of the...

I think in a game of "never have I ever," I would win with "Wonder how a monster does that." To me the whole thing is "Is this interesting." Obviously others disagree but if I had to choose between a fun and interesting monster that had wacky powers and one that was a bag of hit points, I'd...

If that's true, I think it's a very good thing. When I see a creature that's just a basic stat block with hit points, defenses, and a basic attack, I think, "Why is this even here?" It would be a lot easier to just have a generic "humanoid" stat block with a set of different names and levels...

Oh sure. The point is, I'm using these rules so as not to use WotC's. I sure can use their resources in conjunction with Tales of the Valiant, but that misses the point of why I picked it up in the first place. We'll see what they (and other companies) do, I suppose.

If you are looking for a basic 5E game that doesn't come from WotC and looks beautiful, this is it. It has support from Foundry, the VTT that I use and it has fantastic monsters. The reason I don't think our group will be using it, at least as it is now, is that there's not enough character...

I played a scenario with the designers and it seems to be an OSR based game, so heading back to the early AD&D days. It looked great and played better than AD&D did out of the box (in my opinion of course) so if you're looking in that direction, this was a good looking and well designed game.

This is one of the things that I find hard to understand. Let's say we had the "how to build monsters" and rather than add page count, they took out 10 monsters like you're saying. How would anyone even know? Unless WotC said, "Well, we could have had 505 monsters, but you wanted design rules...

This is something we don't know for certain yet, but it really appears to be the case. And if it's true, it really is a poor decision (in my opinion, of course). The basic rules used to design a creature are a couple of pages, and tell us so much about what the expectation is for monster stats...

I still have my AD&D screen and break it out at conventions. I can tell who the old farts are because there are always comments. It's useful for AD&D and works wonderfully for that. Nowadays, I use it as a conversation piece.

I'm someone who was always into pinball and love it very much today. There was a lull and the thought that it might be going out, but things never stopped. I am fortunate to live in an area where it never really went away, and some folks doing maintenance for the machines live. It is a big issue...