Search results

As Darklone, Piratecat, and others have said -- any DM can kill a party. A RBDM can make them suffer, and a good way to do that is to make their own actions backfire on them. MarauderX did this to our group for months -- every time we thought we had done something good, it turned out to make...

Let me rephrase. It's not how much content, it's the quality of that content. "More" content doesn't matter. You could, for example, add 200 0-level spells for the bard to the PHB. It wouldn't really be a significant improvement to the class, although it would give him far more options and...

No, I don't see that as a problem at all. The number of pages alotted is not some measure of the respect shown to a class. It's not the amount of text that matters, it's the content. More options in what sense? More options in any one given situation? More options for actions that can...

The wizard's rules take more space to explain because they are more complicated. The cleric's rules are also fairly complicated and take a lot of space to explain. I'm not sure this is the same as "favoring" them. I imagine that the 4E PHB will still include a lot of text on spell details...

The core rules are already subject to one huge discrepancy in character power between various PC groups -- ability scores. At 8th level, going low-magic vs. high-magic is probably similar to going 22-pt buy vs. 32-pt buy. Going low-magic would be "more challenging" just as going with the lower...

In my experience, the cleric has the ability to be as good a fighter as the fighter for brief periods of time in which he has several rounds to prepare and isn't likely to face a Dispel Magic. The extra boost from certain spells generally balances out the lower base Str (having invested more...

Book of Vile Darkness had some GREAT stuff that I only got the chance to scratch the surface of. Sadly, never got my campaign to the point where the players were trying to stop Apocalypse From the Sky.

At the moment, I'm thinking a B/X-3.5 hybrid is the best way to go. I'd play B/X or BECMI again in a heartbeat. The only things I'd really miss would be the skill system (mostly for allowing non-combat low-level challenges such as cliffs to scale and rickety bridges to cross) and the -10 hp...

No, I'm not a troll. I've been around here for years and have gone into these points on numerous other threads. Let me explain. 1) Basic/Expert D&D had several design elements that I loved. "Wizards start off weak, but can eventually become very powerful." "Magic has its uses, but magic is...

As to all the mockery of the monk... The monk is obviously the most fun class because he gets a special ability every level. That makes it so much fun that it's going to be the standard for 4E. Because only gaining HP, BAB, skills, saves, feats, and ability points isn't enough. You need...

A mix of folklore, 1e stuff (it was gorgon's blood that blocked teleports IIRC), and imagination. Why do kings wear gold crowns? Give gold a *reason* for being valuable.

No need. With mundane counters to magic being so readily available, nobody bothers using magic anymore. And so relatively few people need bother with the counter-charms. I'm being facetious. But still, the concept allows for a low-magic game to work exceptionally well. You allow mundane...

As a player of B/X and 2E, several things impressed me for their return to B/X simplicity -- such as standardized ability score charts, removal of weapon damage by enemy size, and the end of Exceptional Strength. Rolling high for everything made sense. The revised saves seemed elegant and...

Not switchiing to 4E -- if I ever run anything again, I'd like it to be B/X. The breaking point for me was several things that they described as "problems" that would be "fixed." 1) "Wizard should never have to fall back on a dagger, staff, or crossbow" 2) "No more 'dead levels'" 3) "Paladins...

I saw it as a spotlight hog ability when the cleric/prestige paladin was around. She had all kinds of neat spells and combat abilities, but the barbarian's massive damage sustained meant she often had to just focus on healing him. When he was using his shield, he did much less damage, but he...

That's my fault. I really worked to make All Offense All the Time *not* be the optimal tactic. I threw hordes of mooks that couldn't hit the barbarian if he was paying any attention to defense, but would make mincemeat out of him if he raged, charged, and dropped the shield. Why? Because...

It was not that any one single modifier was complicated, it was that they appeared in various combinations. "Does a 21 hit you?" "Okay, I charged this round (-2) but didn't use Shock Trooper (0), I'm using my shield (+4), I am Enlarged (-2), and I'm not raging (0) so... no." Granted, these...

I found the barbarian relatively complex in play. The player, who was extremely bright, had to keep track of his weapon choice (1-handed vs. 2-handed), decision to rage or not, to charge or not, to use Shock Trooper or not, and to be part of the inevitable Mass Enlarge or not. All of these...

Blindsense means that his targets will still have concealment. He'll be able to pick the right square to attack, but still have a 50% miss chance.

And as I said, I agree that it was a problem with 3E. It would be nice if 4E would fix this problem instead of making it worse. Some aspects of 4E might lead to an improvement here -- removal of iterative attacks is one variable-math thing gone. MCaE was a neat idea that was unfortunately...