Search results

Judging by the sales of hardback adventures, most D&D players are just fine with the Forgotten Realms. They could probably dramatize one of those goofy LH Franzibald novels and make it entertaining enough for the silver screen.

Maannn...even without the cheese, it's just QUICKENED BLAST X 2 QUICKENED BLAST X 2 QUICKED FIREBALL + BLAST over and over. It's like the A-10 warthog of character builds.

Ironically, the reverse is more true: A wizard with 3 or 4 levels of Sorcerer does pretty much everything a Sorc is good at. The spell level cap is probably not worth it. Also, from observation, a sorc with 2 levels of Warlock is a better warlock than a lot of warlocks.

OHKs for monsters over CR 1/2 are pretty rare in 5e.

They'd have to just make an entertaining fantasy movie based somewhat loosely on, say, Forgotten Realms canon instead of doing something idiotic. Based on past D&D movies, that's a tall order.

I see you are standing up for that terrible edition I don't like!

And if it's true that edition matters, then it's also true that people who like an edition I don't like are bad people.

It makes me really angry that some people are out there, playing something I don't like, and having fun with it. What a crock of crap. Really grinds my gears. I think one reason the edition wars have cooled off is WotC releasing PDFs of all their old stuff. They've simply embraced their past...

DO WE SHARE PLAYERS????

I'm talking about how you communicate your product to potential customers. The first thing most people interact with is your visual presentation. If your game is about a Madmaxian post-apocalyptic wasteland or spacefaring fighter jocks blasting frog-people back to the black hole they came from...

Ultimately, it's comes down to consumer behavior. In the case of 4e, by and large, many people flatly rejected it as the successor to 3rd edition. Doesn't matter what the label said on the tin. What matters is consumer behavior. 4e was such a disaster that another company, despite not being...

The first paragraph of this is kind of a reality denial and illustrates the impossibility of what Paizo is trying to do. There is, in some meaningful way, no such thing as "The Pathfinder RPG" with its own, independent existence. What I mean is that, Pathfinder fundamentally is nothing more than...

In my games, at 1st level, you are barely more than a nobody, and any backstory you write needs to reflect that. Notable figures in my Greyhawk campaign are at least 5th level. If you want to be a renowned warrior who led the conquest of some foreign land, well, you'll have to actually do that...

I loved 4e. It was, commercially speaking, a disaster, and Essentials only confused and divided the market it had.

Counterpoint: A Way of Shadows Monk in the Underdark is basically a god-tier class.

A more consistent approach would be to let you substitute one of your attacks to do whatever it is the Battle Master ability is, using an ability check, and not doing damage. I actually tried this, but as with grapple and shove, most players would rather do damage. The basic "problem" with 5e...

My rule is don't write a backstory so long that if, in the first session, a goblin rolls boxcars on a critical hit when you're at 1 hp, you get mad and quit the game.

Re: the OP Yes, I have seen that, and no, I don't think it's a problem. 4e offered lots of tactical variety in combat, and the result was eventually taking hours to resolve a combat. I'd rather have combats take less time, not more, to get through. 5e's already too slow for me.