Search results

I wouldn't change the adventure itself at all. Part of the fun of such an open-ended module (IMHO) is that it's up to the players how much they want to take on. Maybe your 6-person party wants to mow down kobolds, or maybe they want to take on the orcs that would normally be a tough challenge at...

I agree with justinhalliday-- it's powerful. It didn't come up much in our playtest; the fighter moved back to kill a hobgoblin that was bothering our casters then returned to where he started from, but that was about it. But I think once you start factoring in hiding, getting cover, going...

I would love to see some optional morale rules in 5e. I enjoy the idea that there's an element of randomness that could surprise me, the DM, and inspire me as well ("Why on earth do these dumb kobolds keep on fighting?" or "What happened to make this group of bandits flee?"). I also don't want...

My hat's off to you, sir. I look forward to playtesting your system. I curse the sky that the XP system is down right now.

You know, the more I look at these sorts of debates, the more I realize I'm a person for whom the in-game fiction actually isn't primary. I'm happy to say a hit is a hit, and as you level you don't get much better at hitting or dodging, just better at dealing with getting hurt. Unrealistic...

I certainly agree with everyone that we shouldn't be forced to spend hours on making an NPC that will only fight for a few rounds; I think in most real-world cases the 4e system of NPCs as monsters is better. I'd like the option to do otherwise, though, with clear guidance. One person has said...

That's a good point. It didn't happen at my playtest, but I do definitely see how it could easily happen, especially if the DM were feeling nasty. I think though that that may be a separate issue from the wizard's damage output (unless the argument is that they're capable of causing a lot of...

Ah, I see your point. That's pretty old-school of him! Dang, good point! :) You're absolutely right. I'm sure a crafty wizard could come up with some way of communicating, though. Like using hand gestures to indicate ideas, then having the kobold repeat the message back to make sure it had it...

Right, but how would you award XP and treasure for this? Sorry if I wasn't clear in my original post. Obviously I could roll up some dudes and have them fight my players, but I wouldn't know how much XP a 10th-level fighter is worth; that's what gives me trouble. Unless I'm totally missing a set...

If you want to use your method of balance, where wizards are extremely vulnerable at low levels and insanely powerful at high levels, then the problem is that during a level-1 playtest my wizard completely outshone the other characters and never came near to dying. If you prefer a more modern...

Interesting idea! It's definitely a serious issue.

Were you searching for traps at the time? There are no passive skills so the burden is on the players to be actively searching. This is BRILLIANT and I love it. There was a thread about this a little while ago. Back then I said I would rule that you can stack A&D but now I think I take it...

Here's something I really miss in 4e, and would like to see in 5e: the ability, as a DM, to create an NPC in the same way I'd create a PC, then have it fight my players. What I mean is that in 4e everything other than a PC is treated as a monster: orcs, horses, mayors, guardsmen, BBEGs, etc...

I pondered this too, and I'm pretty sure it would use Wis, since that's the "magic modifier." Melee just means it has to be next to the target. TerraDave-- yeah, as far as anyone can tell you get two actions when your Hammer is a-Hammerin'.

Yeah, I think specialization in other classes will generally be handled by themes, since themes cover "how you adventure" per MM. So the fighter can choose the Slayer or Defender theme (from what we've seen so far) but also an Archer theme or Two-Weapon theme, etc. etc. and that gives him his...

I'm missing out on so much XP! :p Anyway, I like your point about having a certain attack bonus mean something in the game world. I do think that more tightly controlled math will better achieve that-- somebody above uses the example of a 20th-level 3e wizard who's better with a sword than a...

I play sandbox-style, and I see what you're saying, but I personally still support flat math. I believe what the designers are going for is: 1. You'll have some modest to-hit bonuses across the life of your PC, but since monster ACs won't scale, those modest bonuses will be very meaningful...

What Clever said, pretty much, but that I'm very intentionally avoiding minis & mats because it's important to me that the game works without them. 3e and 4e requiring you bust them out for every combat is a definite sticking point for me so one of my main desires for 5e is that it work...

I'm in the minority; I plan to jump ship from 4e to 5e as soon as possible. 4e doesn't really support my style of play (sandboxy and freeform) very well, but it's what my extended group plays and I don't hate it. I'm very excited for 5e.

Well, the actual module does exactly that-- it provides a village for the PCs to start in and collect rumors. It details the entire village. It provides a handy chart of juicy rumors that the DM can pick from or roll on randomly (including a few untrue rumors). It sets the caves away from the...