Search results

I kinda-sorta-but-not-really did something similar with SWADE. When I first started with this new group, I tried to incentivize the players by making a "chart" for how many sessions you needed to attend before you got an Advance. So, Novice characters only needed one session, Seasoned needed...

I run two groups, and I've got 2.5 players (one is 50/50) that are just there for the socials. One of them straight up told me, "I don't really like D&D, but I'm here to hang out with friends because this is the only consistent social outing I have." I don't love it, but from my perspective...

This is the answer. Like it or not, 5E is a resource management game. You're going to have problems if you only do one fight per Long Rest, and any "solutions" in that framework will either be half-measures, or the player will feel targeted (because let's be honest, they will be). The best...

Sure - I guess my point though is that there are thousands of combinations of spells, abilities, features, classes, subclasses, that I like to be at least somewhat prepared for each. I don't have time to vet, let alone read (or even know the existence of) the latest 5E flavor-of-the-month. If...

As someone who runs two six-person tables who are both currently at high-level - I care. If only for my sanity and fun at the table. At session zero, I explain what sources the players can pull from, and what classes/subclasses/spells/features I ban. I explain why, and they get it. My tables...

Yeah, we just had different experiences. We found it simple, intuitive, and it disappeared at the table - which, to me, is the most important thing a system can do. We're a pretty beers-and-pretzels table, so we had none of the issues you described. Instead, that system led to stories that we...

I just have foundational design issues. I don't like the spellcasting system (too many spells, too many "I win" buttons, martials don't have an equivalent, monsters use the same spells that players do) Little-to-no DM support outside of the Combat Engine, and what support remains is obtuse and...

I have three "regular rulesets" that I cycle through: 5E, Savage Worlds, and Call of Cthulhu. I'm Unsatisfied with 5E, Very Satisfied with Call of Cthulhu, and Satisfied with Savage Worlds. I've gone on length about my problems with 5E, so I don't feel the need to repeat any of it, suffice to...

This boils down to one of those gameplay vs realism debates. I’m generally on the side of “whatever makes for better gameplay”, and this idea fits that. If you have a trap as it would likely be in reality (single use, simple, “you see it or you don’t”) that deals damage or casts a spell, the...

I typically don’t like using established settings, as I want to be the “expert” about the world. last campaign was a Star Wars game using the FCG system, and I always felt like I was the one being informed about how the universe worked (I had two players who were big SW fans). It’s not a...

I use the Bloodied condition, skill challenges, and when I design monsters, I use the 4E role methodology. When I try to design encounters, I also try to envision the “roles” that each monster will take.

Best case, they realize 4E had the best monster design, and as much as they can, revert back to that. That will never happen, so we’ll continue to have terrible encounter math, boring monster design, and a knowing wink/nod to DMs, saying “you got this, champ!” (All for the sake of “backwards...

Yeah, there's a few options (and we'll see exactly none of these in 5E 2024): roll to cast spells (turns spells from "I Win" buttons to elements of risk) everybody gets spells (the 4E way; there are no "haves" and "have nots") spells/features add content, not remove content (this is harder to...

One - Curse of Strahd - but I basically rewrote the entire back half. I don't plan on running another WOTC adventure anytime soon. (I do like the anthology adventures, though)

As a DM, that sucks. I've got two high-level groups now, and a good chunk of prep is now devoted to, "can a single spell invalidate this encounter that I've spent 15 minutes prepping"? Spellcasters just get to do what spells say; martials have to play "mother may I".

You absolutely, 100%, will see a new edition. I just cannot see a world where it's 2046, and D&D is still relevant while also using an engine designed back in 2014. Imagine being the D&D lead in 2040 and being told, "yeah so, you're actually not allowed to change anything. Just get this Curse...

I'm very much on the side of "martials should be supernatural in my superhero fantasy game", but the other side really loses me when they say, "martials can already do cool things! They can shove! And grapple! And jump!" as if that isn't something a 5-year old can do.

I get that, but for me, there's gotta be some kind of middle ground. It feels less like "breaking the wheel" and more like "quickly pave more road so the wheels don't fall off". The wagon is still the same, the road is still the same (this metaphor is really getting away from me 😂). D&D 2024...

I've said it before, but if D&D 2024 was always going to be built on 5.5, there's nothing WOTC could do to save it in my eyes. I was mildly interested with some of the more dramatic changes they were talking about, but since they've walked almost all of those back, I just can't see myself paying...

Agree on avoiding a "hard" mechanical effect. At most, if we're playing 5E, and the player wants to bend the rules, I'll ask them to spend Inspiration (I hand it out pretty liberally in my games). That way, there is still an expenditure cost. The way I see it, 5E is a resource management...