Search results

Not 100%, but it's a closer fit than Arthurian romantic fantasy or swords-and-sorcery.

100% agree. When I run D&D nowadays, concepts like "class" and "hit points" are explicitly supernatural phenomenon that exist within the setting fiction. The game just runs so much more smoothly when you stop pretending that a "class" is simply a vocation and that hit points are a combination...

In more game mechanical terms, the desire for those players is for nonmagical classes and subclasses to only gain abilities that modify and adjust the normal resolution system (attack rolls and skill checks and damage rolls), not provide new optionality. They can get more and better attacks...

Exactly. The player just handed you a story hook, why would you drop it like a hot potato? Let's play the game to discover exactly what your subclass means in the story!

Lanefan's ideas are fine for optional gritty play but not for the core game.

Yea, I disagree. It's not an issue of legality, it's an issue of respecting the fact that you're part of a community that thrives on collaboration. Which they took to heart and corrected, which is a happy ending for all involved.

In their defense, they were extremely overt in calling out their game influences in Daggerheart. Lesson learned and all that.

I already have multiple 3pp that do a more than credible job as 5e++. If that's the route 6e takes, it's not worth a purchase. I'm positive about a 6e if it's an impactful change, to keep to the (+) standard.

I know I mentioned Schwalb's Shadow duology in glowing terms, was it me? Feel free to call me out! I have many more hot takes!

Hey, we're just trying to make things better for the rest of you unwashed masses. :)

You can have a resource game without tying the recharge to the nightly sleep narrative, though.

The 2 Shadow games are the closest game I've seen to my ideal version of D&D.

I think the game could get closer, but it needs to ditch the idea of a diegetic rest period (i.e. going to sleep) being a full recharge of everyone's resources. Break that linkage in everyone's expectations, and the game can start exploring more innovative resource structures.

Magic items just shouldn't provide pluses. Perfect world, a player should only ever have to add their ability modifier to any dice roll; any other modification should modify the dice rolls (change the die, add a bonus/malus die, etc.)

Agreed. I'm a bit of a broken record in saying this, but I wish D&D had much less fixed progression (in terms of gaining abilities through leveling) and much more diegetic progression (abilities gained within the fiction, primarily magic items, boons, transformations, and most especially...

Personally, I would prefer D&D to stay more on the "crunchy rules" side. Not because I think that's better, but because crunchy games benefit much more from manpower and resources being applied to them. And WotC is one of the few companies that actually have the resources to do that.

I mean, I certainly don't plan out a bunch of stuff in advance, I'm an improv guy. But what's the point of having any sort of resource system, of a system to game, if it doesn't trigger loss conditions? I've played in games like that, and all it does is encourage players to go all-out every...

Absolutely one of my lowest priorities for D&D in general. What is actually gained by playing "smart"? (Defining "smart" here as relatively cautious play with a focus on advancing the overall "storyline".)

Like I said before, I don’t do modules. Never have. The few times I’ve tried I haven’t really lasted more than a session. So my agreement or disagreement would be mostly meaningless.

The main issues? 1) "Follow the story hook to the next encounter site" was dishwater-dull 25 years ago. It's just overdone. It's generic MMO-style play at this point. 2) It has nothing to do specifically with the PCs. It prioritizes the crafted situation over the interests of the PCs...