Search results

Of course they would. If they rolled an 18, they aren't suddenly going to put that score somewhere else. You will always put your highest score in the stat that you need the most for the class you want to play. Thats part of it. I want to determine the PC I play, not let the dice pick for me...

Rolling should be an option for those who want it, but point buy and static HP hands down should be the default. No question. No randomness at ALL in character generation except as an option. I want complete control over my character when I make it. I want to play the character I want to play...

Yes. Generally it is my hope that the 5e "miniatures" rules are essentially the 4e combat rules. As one of my wargamer friends who is a regular tournament winner of both Warhammer and Warmachine games told me once, "People may disagree about 4e as an RPG, but its combat system is the best...

Excellent post, malkav! :) I generally agree with your analysis of balance vs. uniformity. When 4e first came out I embraced it whole-heartedly. Got somewhat burned out by the uniformity after playing it for two years and decided to change things up a bit by playing Pathfinder for the past...

I will make 3 short points. 1) Players have always wanted more options and will until the end of time. In high school I was rolling up a ninja PC the very day the Complete Ninja's Handbook for 2e showed up at my game shop. The DM approving it was a total afterthought. :) 2) Pathfinder fixed...

Yes, exactly. :)

Basically, you are going the other way. Adding +1 to every level instead of subtracting. I thought about that too. It certainly works, but you end up with something that might look more like True20 than D&D. Nothing wrong with that. I love True20. :) But I think it bakes in a certain amount of...

Sure, thats a good point. And I think there are two ways you could address that. One is by implementing a smaller bonus like I posted previously. A +1 per 5 level skill/inherent bonus to represent there is some improvement over time. That sort of reintroduces an ascending bonus of sorts, but a...

Right, this is definitely a feature of the system. See my response to Dausuul above. :) Have a +1/5 levels inherent bonus that doesn't stack with magical enhancement bonuses. I think that could work here.

Ok, so how about something like a +1 inherent bonus every 5 levels to represent increasing skill, but this bonus overlaps and doesn't stack with magic item enhancement bonuses. That way it keeps the integrity of no ascending bonuses and helps balance out magic item bonuses but keeps magic...

Right. You would still have some bonuses when building your PC. Full Plate is still +8 to AC and so forth. You might still have a weapon focus feat and so on. So a level 1 PC in 5e would look a lot like a level 1 PC in 3e or 4e. Virtually identical in fact. (Yay, prior edition compatibility! :)...

Right, thats the general idea. Right now, it would have say +24 to hit and AC 40, but the adventurer's facing it would also have commensurately higher ACs and attack bonuses as well. We just flatten the curve by taking away from both sides equally. Thinking about it further, I think this would...

Yes and no. DCs were static in 3e, but player bonuses and skills were not. Mike Mearls had a whole L&L column on the problems this could cause. Getting rid of ascending bonuses is an attempt to actually make static DC meaningful so the benefits they provide in terms of maintaining verisimilitude...

I'd like to propose a mathematical framework for 5e that I think would allow one to play a game that feels both like 1e/2e and 3e/4e at the same time and that I think could address some of the verisimilitude issues. We'll start with the framework that 4e uses, since objectively speaking that...

I think trying to fix class imbalance by slowing progression is putting the cart before the horse. The real problem is the fact that classes are imbalanced in the first place. Fix that and there ceases to be a need for different rates of advancement. My preferred method of advancement is not...

Based on what Monte is saying, I think its safe to say that Essentials is a sort of 5e preview, at least in terms of concept. So you have an Essentials Fighter which is very simple. No dailies, one simple encounter attack power and some encounter utilities. That's it. The 5e version could be...

No save or die, suck, lose. If it exists should only be an option for advanced players.

I was making a joke off the two playtest posts that Monte and Bruce made that were posted to the EN World 5e info page. Each post something bad had happened to the paladin. But I don't actually know anything about 5e mechanics.

I'm sure they browse the forum and joke about some of the more outrageous 5e demands at work. I doubt any will post though. Its like sticking your hand into a hornets nest. All of us crazed gamers latching on, dissecting every word, taking it all to extremes and freaking out over it. The word...

Right, to clarify I was specifically referring to individual class based XP awards. The fighter and other melee classes gets bonus XP for killing stuff, the Rogue gets bonus XP for doing their Rogue-y stuff. It sounds kind of neat in principal, and some video games do skill levelling in this...