Search results

I use action points in my current game because it means I can use save or die effects and the like without PCs automatically being screwed by a bad die roll. They're also there as a way of low-level characters surviving major hits at each level (my house rules allow action points to be traded in...

I doubt aging comes back as a major factor in 4th edition. We've seen no indications that I know of that the design philosophy that removed magical aging in 3rd edition has changed. Unless someone can point out a WotC product that includes a staff of withering or somesuch, I think that bit of...

I hope a lot of this flavor text survives into the Player's Handbook. The implied setting of 4e is starting to sound very interesting to me.

To actually go back to the topic and ignore my threadjack, I think the first Monster Manual is best suited for the iconic monsters of the game. Critters that have been around and are well-loved by players should go there, including the weird and wacky ones like the bullette, the aurumvorax, and...

Reading through those articles highlights one of the big reasons why my brain is resisting the 4e hype somewhat: the blanket statements of what's fun and what isn't. Losing equipment isn't fun. Save or die isn't fun. Antimagic fields aren't fun. And so on. I think one of the reasons I haven't...

I voted setting, even though there are so many different D&D settings. Despite the wide variety of campaign settings, there are certain shared assumptions in all of them, whether you're playing in Greyhawk or Dark Sun or something even further out there. The setting is largely informed by the...

I think I'd like the "per encounter" stuff better if the round/turn paradigm from older editions was brought back and "per encounter" meant "per turn" (i.e., ten minutes). For the system itself, I'll have to see it in action before making a judgment. I'm hoping that the number of per encounter...

I need more crunch in the previews before I decide. Some of the stuff sounds cool, other stuff not so much. But most of what we've heard so far is about playing style, which doesn't tell me much. My games have deviated significantly from the assumed playing style of D&D for years now.

If I choose not to convert from 3.5 to 4th edition, my house rules will probably be something like that (as will many other people's, I'm sure). Even if 4th edition isn't my cup of tea, it sounds like there's enough tweaks that at least some of the more interesting rules will get added to my 3rd...

I'm really hoping for the core books to get a 3e-esque discount when they're first launched. At the moment, the cover price of the books will be a huge factor in my decision to pick up the next edition or not.

Why not separate familiars and animal companions from class abilities entirely? Bring back the find familiar spell and make animal companions the results of an animal friendship spell.

Sounds like a good playtest to me. I hope the multiple attacks are mechanically handled as additional damage on one die roll rather than multiple attack rolls. As for the warforged, I hope they're included as a playable race in the Monster Manual, but not the Player's Handbook. If they add too...

Meh...while I'm no huge fan of the Realms myself, I think it would be a bad move for WotC to start tailoring the setting to those who don't like it. The setting has been around as a D&D campaign for almost 20 years now, and has been one of the most consistently popular settings out there. To...

So...is Graz'zt a demon or devil now? Because he certainly takes a humanoid appearance...

Sounds like the Holmes basic set, which is essentially oD&D.

This strikes me as a change that would be better introduced in a new campaign setting rather than in the core books. It tosses out a lot of the very interesting demon and devil culture that has evolved in the game's loose continuity for 30 years. The change itself isn't a bad one, but it is one...

In a video game, death is no big deal because your guy respawns within 10 seconds. The big problem with death in D&D is that unless it's a total party kill, the player whose character dies is going to be out of the game and bored for a while. Older editions of the game, particularly basic D&D...

I like the sound of that change. Attacks of Opportunity are a really good idea in theory, but their implementation in 3rd edition and d20 Modern leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully, most combat maneuvers will not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Yeah, but published adventures always follow certain guidelines, no matter what edition. 1st-level characters in a published module are never going to be expected to fight off a beholder by themselves. With the exception of meat-grinder adventures like the Tomb of Horrors, published modules...

Heh...tell that to my players after their 2nd level characters ran up against a 20th-level mage and his undead horde. 4e, like all other editions, will be what people made of it. CR will be gone, but there will be the new "1 monster per PC" or "X experience points makes a balanced encounter"...