Search results

A minor change would just be annoying. 3 to 3.5 was annoying, doing it again would be more so. 4E should be sufficently different from 3.5 to be a recognisably different animal but at the same time it must still be D&D, which to me means: classes, levels, six ability scores, slot-based magic...

I'd agree with that.

Couldn't have said it better. D&D actively encourages you to play min-maxed characters by rewarding you for it, both with rewards (xp, loot, just plain effectiveness) and penalties (level loss for raise dead, just plain inability to succeed) and gives you the tools to do it (feats, point buy...

I find the notion that Assassins have to be evil in the D&D universe absurd. In a world where an LG paladin is entirely at ease slaughtering foes on mass for being "evil", how does targetted killing get flagged as more evil?

Min/maxing is always a fault of the system and not the players. Setting up a system that rewards certain forms of behaviour and then complaining when they occur is the design equivalent of being passive-aggressive.

I increasingly try to never fudge. In fact I'm moving to using rules variants that make it more difficult for me to fudge. I've only ever fudged recently when I've badly misbalanced an encounter and it is clearly unfair.

I don't think the LA system is broken it just another thing that doesn't work with spellcasters due to the way that D&D does power curves.

Because Long Spears are hideously impractical to carry or use in woodland?

Yes.

As I see it, Leadership buys personal devotion and choice over your followers. So he's got a 100 monks? Most of them are 1st level and unlikely to put their life on the line for him; and some of the order will doubtless be plotting against him. Remember Lawful only means they work within the rules.

I strongly recommend getting Fief from Cumberland Games. It has a lot of researched and historically accurate information.

*shrugs* either/or. I'd consider someone who got upset by the practice just as much of an ass as someone who practices it.

The only time I fudge to spare the PCs is if I discover I've badly misjudged a fight so that they didn't stand a fair chance, otherwise they just live or die by the fate of the dice. Fortunately, with D&D it's very easy to balance fights so it happens rarely.

I tabletop 2-3 times a week, occasionally more. I don't play online or LARP at all.

Well, you need to be 10th level to have it last long enough to appraise, and then you'd need a couple more rounds if it's going to do something with the information - so, say, 12th level. Gather Information however takes d4+1 hours so that's right out.

I wouldn't let a Bison grapple. But, otherwise, I've no problem with that - it's a not unreasonable tactic.

That's what I did. It's still not a great question, because the answer depends on the kind of roleplaying you're doing and there's no context.

A horribly binary question for one so open ended. In a traditional heroes style of RPG play - yes, PCs should be better than NPCs by default, otherwise the whole heroic thing just doesn't work out. But that doesn't mean that there aren't loads of successful and enjoyable RP opportunities to be...

Huh? I didn't say that. I don't think they'll try and rip anyone off; I just don't think their decisions will be driven by any of the concepts we might choose but by a mixture of internal politics and short-termism. Very few companies, especially large ones, reward long-term thinking...

That's a well-thought out, thought-provoking and interesting post, Graf, thank you. Of course, I think you're completely wrong ;) I don't work for Wizards, or any other rpg company, but I have worked in Computer Games and I do work for a small company owned by a large corporation. I believe...