Search results

I do not want to see a repeat of a dwarf wizard in a string bikini blasting a galltrit, as was shown in the monster tables at the back of the AD&D Fiend Folio. Please, please no.

I have a friend who is a huge FR fan. He didn't like the Spellplague and its consequences for the "world", the novels, or D&D. Yet he feels bound to use the current FR setting, because that is cannon now. He can't imagine not being in line with canon. I am glad that I don't feel that way, but...

Your story brings back memories of rolling for stats in my AD&D groups over the years. We started with 4d6, but so often, a player simply wouldn't make a PC with stats that weren't good enough. Initially, I would say, "Too bad, that's the rules." Soon enough, that PC would be dead...

I wish the "iconic" D&D cleric would go away. Myself and most of the players I have had over the years dislike them. Since that isn't going to happen, I sincerely hope that priests of specific deities is given as an option out of the box. They match the fantasy and mythological archetypes that...

I guess you missed that part of my earlier post, Odhanan.

So you agree with me: the alignment system does need to be modified for the new edition. For instance, presenting options about using alignment (different systems, or using it at all) would be different than any existing edition of the game. Glad to see some consensus. :)

Ah! Now there is a point I agree with you on. The new player, or the casual player, might want something very simple to start with.

Have fun with it. I am waiting to join a friends-and-families playtest group, myself.

Absolutely, Andor. I tried playing the magic lite game, but using modules changed how the game actually went, and colored my view as the DM. In my current homebrew game, magic is actually rare, magic items are almost non-existant, and people with PC class levels are unusual. I then needed a...

I respectfully disagree with you and Mearls. My suggestion is not "taking" away. Why must everyone use the model of "base system plus add-ons"? Different is different. Again, if the base game is made at the same time as some initial options, it wouldn't be "taking away" from the base game. In...

I like when there are customizable choices, like feats, that have Race X and Class Y as requirements. It is an easy way to add meaningful racial features to classes that match the flavor of both.

The assumption in OD&D and early AD&D was that magic was rare. The majority of the clergy at a church, for example, were non-casting NPCs, perhaps with a 1st-5th level cleric leading them. Wizards of any real power (9th level or higher) were to be very rare, and magic items even rarer. I think...

Fair enough. Each DM and group should use the systems and flavor they like. Still, there are also the tradeoffs of design time/effort, space in the text (column space is column space), and use of words that could be themes, classes, and so forth.

I was referring specifically to the idea that the base game, off of which options (or modules) will be based, does not have to simply be the core mechanics. The base game could be the mechanics, PLUS the "swashbuckling module" you state--except not as a mod, but as the standard. An optional set...

Neutral, in the 9 alignment system, had at least two different interpretations (described in the books): Balance and Undecided. No other alignment had two really different options like this. In addition, Balance had a couple really different interpretations: Nature, and Cosmic Balance. When a...

I liked the Dragon Magazine version of the bard more--mix of illusion and druid magic, but single classed.

Except, LostSoul, that would require that NPCs actually saw you performing actions worthy of the title. Also, that line of reasoning implies that a variety of people would all describe your level of ability with the same word. For me, that breaks willing suspension of disbelief.

By your own statement, there is already strife. Modifying these elements might resolve some strife and create new strife. That might be move the discussion towards consensus, though. As for alignments, I like the 9 alignment system, except I also feel an unaligned option should exist, and that...

I contend that "simpler combat" could be the optional system. I don't see each module or system as an add-on. There can be different ways to do something-- that doesn't necessarily mean more complex. For instance, the gridded tactical system could be the default, and a simplified system could...

If both the simple core and the tactical combat system are created together, and are compatible with each other, then either one can be introduced first. I don't see a problem with that.