Search results

It’s the gamist approach. But multiplying skills and making sure that they’re more precise and more distinctive helps defining characters and may even inspire a player’s actions.

Just roll them all at the same time.

Among the nitpicking, my - quite interesting - contribution to the topic got lost, which must mean that I have failed a skill check. Or an ability check, I’m not sure.

This doesn’t work for me at all. Why not have just two skills: Knowledge and Doing stuff? To me, collapsing wildly different concepts into very broad skills sounds absurd.

As far as I’m concerned, adding Streetwise, Culture, Bureaucracy and Dungeoneering feels essential to the Exploration pillar.

All these rules make sense and should be applied as soon as possible to vanilla D&D, in order to make things right, to show some respect to the various sources and cultural influences used.

You could borrow an idea from the German game The Dark Eye and have skill checks be the result of three linked attribute checks. So climbing a cliff could be, say, a Dexterity / Constitution / Wisdom check. Two successes are enough to achieve your goal, but one failed check may mitigate the...

Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be that hard to come up with a system for people who want to be able to completely customize the "Race" options, like playing a one-of-a-kind Human with Darkvision, or a Half-Elf with Infernal Legacy. If you're so inclined, you could also choose to play a...

Yes, you do seem to focus on what the Rogue can do, instead of trying to find out what the Rogue is. The latter seems to be what 5e is most interested in, so I guess you’re not likely to get what you want. I know what a Scout or a Thief is, whereas I have no idea what an Opportunity Striker is...

What kind of subclasses would you like to see?

I still don't quite understand how the push for more diversity came to be associated with free ASI. It feels a little absurd to me, as I quite enjoyed the modular nature of character creation of D&D, but if it pleases some people, it's cool, I guess.

This is great. Slaads don’t make any sense as exemplars of chaos but your version, while still manageable, is much better. I guess that a clever DM could make them feel very unpredictable and dangerous.

In my opinion, there's a difference between what you allow players to do, and the worldbuilding that goes with it. If a player wants to play an Elf, an Orc, a Halfing, etc. of any ethnicity, real or fictional, there's really no reason to say no. You simply go for it, no questions asked. That...

I stated the obvious?

White as good and Black as evil ? Maybe we need to rethink that.

I was thinking about renaming the D&D classes in Theros (for flavor). How's this for a first attempt: Artificer - Artificer Barbarian - Barbarian Bard - Aoidos Cleric - Priest Druid - Semnothei Fighter - Fighter Monk – Ascetic Paladin - Champion Ranger - Hunter Rogue - Rogue Sorcerer - Moirai...

Just use the sewers map from Oblivion ;)

No. I think it would be cool to include the Cthulhu Mythos, though.

It's a neat idea, but I get the impression that it involves too much bookkeeping for something that should feel heroic.