Search results

Rangers are a lost class, IMO. Historically, they are such a hodge-podge of implementations and ideas that they always seem a bit off to somebody. And much like bards, it makes it hard to a Ranger to mechanically stand out. We have them " 'cause tradition", but really the modern concept...

Just my thoughts. I like the idea of boxed sets (perhaps nostalgia B-)). On the other hand, I don't really like "campaigns" so much. (I haven't bought any of the adventure paths.) What I think would work better for me would be a campaign guide (background("fluff"), unique monsters, spells...

I'm reminded of the game Strike! Its got a very light core, that could easily run a narrative/light style game. Almost all the "tactics" stuff is left out of that. However, there is a good solid section of X's and O's tactical rules, that can be invoked if the table wished. (Its sorta based on...

Seems to me that the level of stupid/ignorance required to run such a scenario is justification in itself for a permaban. Even if the git apologizes and claimed reform, you just couldn't trust his judgement enough to know if he actually understood what that meant....who knows what else he might...

I share your dislike of HP, but perhaps for different reasons. Nonetheless, removing them from 5e might be a big undertaking, since they are baked into so many things. I would look at Blades in the Dark as well, there is an SRD. You could go completely abstract and player-facing with the...

No disagreement there, but I haven't noticed any particular positive correlation with the "robustness" of a ruleset and its complexity or listiness. If anything, I think that the more bloated/complicated systems work against robustness by creating more opportunities for unintended exploits to...

Different strokes, I guess. I've found my experiences with every edition of D&D to be similar to what you're describing. I find the systems that procedurally acknowledge the negotiation of what each roll means to be infinitely superior for just that reason. D&D always seems to preserve a DMs...

This seems like a lotta work for precious little gain, IMO. I think if I wanted to rehash 4e, I'd look at Strike! first. But then I'm a big fan of lighter rules.

I guess I just don't see the point. I question the value of D&D-style stats in general (especially randomly generated), but really, why bother with the racial/gender modifiers? You wanna play Brienne of Tarth or Red Sonja...or the one Dextrous and Charming Dwarf in Stone Keep...go nuts. If the...

The only thing about 5e that irked me when running it was the monsters. I'd have preferred a more 4e style of monster design. (IMO, the single best thing about 4e). With the glossing-over of a lot of the tactical detail, they could be super-simple stat blocks.

I voted for 2e. 3e came along and I was very excited for all the changes...but in the end it seemed more tedium than it was worth. I had a lot of good times with both of those editions, but I tired of 3e in a way that I never tired of 2e.

I tend to think that this is where playgoals come into it. That is, I'm not sure myself that Conflict Resolution is the best way to conduct Investigative Scenarios (or the Investigative Portions of other scenarios), because part of the point of play is to have the experience of putting the clues...

I agree, although I think the Skill Challenge was a bit clunky overall. I think my problem here is that after a game like Capes, its really hard to fuzz my eyes as much as I used to. Capes doesn't even have skills. You just have traits. The traits can be almost anything: "Hit 'em with the...

I've brought it up before, but there's a game called Capes that focuses solely on Conflict Resolution, and it taught me more about it than all the discussions ever could. Firstly, just to get it out of the way, I hate Vincent's oft-quoted example. Because, asking "Why?" makes no sense outside...

I might suggest the Fate World: Gods and Monsters. I ran a combo Aria/Primal Order game about a zillion years ago. I'm not sure that the extra mechanics ended up being worth it. I think from an "Interesting game" perspective, I might just use a modified Marvel Heroic (If you have that available.)

I think if I were making recommendations to a new GM/players, I would take a clue from some of the modern games and skip the world-building and just do a session zero. Some of the best worlds I've experienced are just cobbled together and spiraled out from the first couple of adventures. Getting...

Who needs wind when you have a zombie "motor"? :cool: As far as wastefully expensive...its not like you need to feed most of the army. Also, most of your army doesn't need barracks or quarters. You can literally stack them like cordwood. So you can get away with a lot fewer actual vessels than...

Seems to me like a lot of options would be tough for your typical zombie/skeleton. I can't imagine that it would be easy to keep track of them all along the ocean floor (plus sharks, canyons, etc.), and crewing a ship seems pretty complicated. What isn't complicated, though, is rowing. If I...

For most dice, I agree. With d20s not so much. A few years ago, I was intrigued by some videos on the internet with people testing their dice by floating them in water (put Epsom Salt in the water if they sink). I found plenty of bias with the water test. (As in, every die seemed to float a...

I didn't mind SoD too much when characters are easy to roll up, at least from a balance PoV. However, I was always dismayed at how old D&D had rather instantaneous effects for things like poison. Seems to me like that should take a while. My more abstract game-design gripe about them is that...