Search results

But we don't really let anyone get away with any thing and we don't play like that. Actually you don't need social skills to do any of that...trust me we have been since 1e.

Don't worry, I am not going to raise anything to the other players at the game table, but mostly because I can direct my ire at game mechanics to the fellow DM since we are long time friends. ;) Something Saturday night set me off involving a Sense Motive check, but the sad part is I can't even...

I am simply stating we have never lacked for players but we try to keep it 6-8 max. You are trolling me now right? lol

We have never lacked for players whether I am the DM or the other guy, and that's why I DM AD&D so I don't have to worry about the skills.

The DM's roll in the open and we roll for stats. :D

With this kind of person I would have skipped the Correct and Deflect and hit the ABORT button instantly. But as some say, I'm mean. :cool:

You role play your character and keep yourself in check? NPCs and the world reacts to you? Or maybe you don't speak bad your are just horribly disfigured and have horrible hygiene? That's the way it has always worked in our games. Anyway this is not a concern for our games and never has been...

Quick answer: No I don't. (see below) Longer: I have DMed a lot of 3.0/3.5 in the past and have run games like you run yours. The other main DM does use the social skills in game quite a bit as well and I see your point about helping players who are not good at RP (and want to play Face).

This might be the wrong way to put it, but I hate trying to make the playing field 'level' for everyone. Thats just the way I am though and the way I learned to play. I feel that if you want to play a leader/bard/face guy then you should break out of your mold and play it. I guess I am mean. :)

I have noticed a trend in all my characters that I don't like to put any points into social skills even for classes that have them as class skills. I would prefer to role play and let the DM decide how the NPC reacts rather than leave it up to the dice. Or when I try to bluff, sometimes I do it...

We give new players a 2 or 3 session probationary period then its thumbs up or down, and they generally know this in advance.

You don't have to KNOW the AC when you roll. Just roll the dice, adjust the number for modifers and tell the DM what you hit using your ThAC0. I like ThAC0 but I don't think its needed.

In addition to the below they needed more XP than the fighter to advance and had race restrictions Any change to non-good alignment immediately strips the ranger of all benefits, and the character becomes a fighter, with eight-sided hit dice, everafter, and can never regain ranger status. No...

Old quote from Aaron L about 1e rangers.

We currently play PF/1ed and have for years(well 1e). We don't have a wizard problem or a 15 min work day problem and never have. In 1e most of the XP comes from the treasure anyway, and that helps players play differently sometimes.

Its actually much simpler. If 5e is not 'good enough' in the direction me and my group like we will just not play it (or spend money on it). We will just keep playing 1e/Pathfinder and they are more than 'good enough' already.

We play PF/1e and we like: Thac0 Vancian magic Save or Die That's like your opinion man.

4] AD&D: 1st or 2nd edition with unified, d20 mechanics But if it does not I will just keep playing AD&D/PF and Wizards will not get my money. No big deal

I would like to see it moved to the DMG and only available if the DM allows it. I also think it should be made much more difficult.

Mike Mearls Interview at MTV