Search results

That is all the necessary resemblance. Judgements will differ. Thus, it will be similar in that some GMs will (effectively) set some odds of success/or difficulty to more or less open interpretations. I've seen very little in the way of semi-traditional rpg games that have what I consider...

Okay, so regardless of what I actually ask or say, you're determined...got it. Please show me where 5e prescribes the actions you suggest must be DC 25. Otherwise, we're done.

Nice power, does the DM arbitrate whether this power is allowed in his game? I seem to think he would. Additionally, I have played and ran plenty of games (not D&D) where there are no spell descriptions at all. Works fine.

Do we need to list the resources available to martials in 5e? I mean they vary by (sub)class, but they are there. Action Surge, in particular comes to mind from your description. Just to be clear. I'm not saying the 5e is the perfect system (or even my favorite system), but this is sounding...

So...are you saying that DC 25 for whatever-it-is you thought you were doing was written in the 5e rules somewhere? Because I don't recall that. I recall that DMs set the DC. So how is this NOT you and the DM disagreeing over the odds/DC of doing something?

I'm not sure I'd describe the process I've seen DMs go through as "calculating". I'd guess most of them would just consider the given chart. Additionally, barring HP, I'm not sure how you figure 75% better.

erm...I didn't see any place in the 5e rules that said "Don't let your players do epic things." Sounds more like a disjoint between player and DM expectations of genre conventions, etc. Yes, 4e baked in that kind of theatrics. I'm not sure how that (writing your own power...can you do that as...

:unsure: I'm sorry for being sucked in....but what exactly was the plan here? Buddy falls and you dive after him to...what exactly? Did the DM require you to make a check to jump off a cliff?

I does seem to have a hazy meaning lately. For my part, the meaning was mechanics, rather than play behavior. (Particularly Freeform descriptors used in those mechanics.) That doesn't seem to be the case for some. To the point wrt Fate. I think @Umbran mentioned this above somewhere. In Fate, a...

I suspect it works the other way. People who were attracted to complicated systems were attracted to both the game and those careers.

Its not that it's absent, but I could have lived with more. I ran both editions (every edition, really) and I found 4e to be far easier on the GM side of the table. (Not as easy as Fate or Dungeon World, but easier).

I do agree here. I do wish 5e had kept more of the 4e monster design ethic, even if the base mechanics can't support the technical details of all the individual powers, etc..

I'm not actually sure what you were going for here, positive or negative? Regardless, the difference in question is about whether those mechanics have to be specified in advance of play. Fate doesn't require that (no lists of powers and aspects is needed before play begins.) While Fate points...

I'm reminded of an episode a few years ago where the two civil engineers in our group just couldn't accept that a certain structure had a foot of water on the ground. We had a conversation similar to Rygel and Sikozu in the Farscape episode "I Shrink Therefore I Am": Sikozu: That's it. This...

This is what I was talking about upthread. Having that structure allows for a freeform game that is much more flexible and reliable than the list-games like D&D. Additionally, it creates a level of balance (all methods have access to the same methods) that I think is really hard to obtain in D&D...

I think I would rather say that it doesn't do anything to particularly discourage OOTB thinking. Perhaps a fine line, but compared to a game like Fate, wherein you can rely on the results of such thinking, the in-play results become obvious. Of course, if your D&D is working fine that way for...

Regarding "freeform" IME. It works, but I think it requires things like a countdown mechanic to work with or things like Fate's aspects that can be created as needed, and be used in a well-defined fashion. (By which I mean, avoiding the "simulative" aspects of typical D&D/rpgs. Lacking that...

This, I think, bears some truth. (As well as a Dunning-Kruger effect going the other way.) To which I would say two things: a) It ends up not mattering as much as we think, because playgroups tend to share mentalities/worldviews. (That is, if everyone at the table thinks it should take 5 rolls...

I actually think this is a misperception that is common amongst us afficianado types. I think the presentation of "pages of powers", or even "piles of choices" as some other editions and many other games have it, strikes those folks as more problematic than, for example, a 1-page character...

I don't think you're entirely wrong, either. The game Strike! is a pared-down 4e, with a lot of similar mechanics. However, the setting/character you choose has to fit within the combat zeitgeist or it stops making a lot of sense (at least, if you use the tactical stuff.) When 4e's PHB2 came out...