Search results

I'd rather have fewer, well-defined and flavorful (official) subclasses than a bigger but blander array. For D&D, at least. For infinite mix-and-match, I'd rather just go with a classless point-buy system. I don't have to imagine it. I've played D&D 3.5 and Star Wars Saga Edition.

You could work in gem dragons for extra economic shenanigans. Maybe there's no actual mining in this world! (So what would be the stereotypical profession for a dwarf, in that case? Brewer? Stonemason?)

Haven't played 3.5 extensively or recently enough to comment on how the fighter and wizard were designed. Honestly, this is going to come down to what you want from D&D, I guess. I personally like the system where a subclass belongs to only one class, refining and intensifying it. If you think...

Fixed feat slots that reinforce the class fantasy and refine it into a more specific archetype, hence, subclass. Portable "subclasses" that are designed to work with multiple different classes won't reinforce and refine the base class fantasy--quite the opposite. They'll tend to de-emphasize the...

Wouldn't that layer be feats?

I feel like making subclasses that would work with any class would also work against class fantasy. It might still create a fun game, but it wouldn't be a game with strong niche protection, which has always been one of D&D's hallmarks and, arguably, strengths.

Why, though? What do you gain by making all the advancements happen at the same level for every class, apart from consistency? Sometimes it makes more sense with the class fantasy to have things kick in at different levels: some classes have it baked in from the start (sorcerer needs to know...

I ran season 4 (the Ravenloft season) as a home campaign. It was very successful, but I did quite a lot of massaging to make it work--partly because my group plays in a world where Barovia is just a place on the map, not a separate demiplane. I wrote up my experiences in this thread, but I need...

Lolth seems like she should be tops in a category, but I'm not sure what the category could be. "Evil god(dess)" has lots of contenders, and arguably Tiamat fits that one as well. Is "spider" too narrow to be its own category?

In addition to the issues with naming that others have already mentioned, I think WotC has moved away from making books that are just player focused or just DM-focused. They want to have something for both groups in each supplement.

Why do you assume the puzzles won't make the cut?

I'm looking forward to this project!

Shocked! Shocked, I am!

I'm expecting that nobody will actually play 2014 characters in a 2024 campaign, because they'll be considered too mechanically weak, even if they technically still function. And I suspect that WotC wants it that way.

This doesn't really sound backwards compatible to me. It seems like they're trying to have it both ways.

What's more, (some) people complain if the game doesn't give them more options. Unfortunately, the sweet spot is probably different for various groups of players.

Yes, we had quite a long discussion thread on it. https://www.enworld.org/threads/matt-colville-on-adventure-length.703754/

I started a thread to compile a list of available arcs, although I'm sure there are many that haven't been added yet. It might be a good starting point: https://www.enworld.org/threads/al-adventures-that-form-mid-size-story-arcs.672688/

Not anymore, but WotC made 10+ "seasons'" worth of adventures themselves before outsourcing them.

Looks pretty cool! There's also this, if you're looking for a product that's already available: https://www.twindrums.com/book https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/477575/the-wagadu-chronicles-7th-era