Search results

The 4e version of advancing was great and easy to use. Side note: Monks have to be lawful in D&D because . . . that is the way they were written back in AD&D. Plenty of monks in the Chinese source stories have non-lawful monks, to say nothing of non-ascetics that are martial arts experts.

DDN reminds me of AD&D mixed with 4e.

I often point out D&D's origins to folks that despise minis, or malign later editions as being too-focused on them. Only 2nd edition de-emphasized minis. I had thousands for AD&D, and the tactical rules were written with miniatures in mind. Good article.

I added classes to monsters back in AD&D all the time. No special rules are really needed. The reason that 3e and 4e create systems for this was so that monsters could be pegged to a CR or experience value. I had ogre clerics and frost giant wizards back in the day with no real hassle at all.

I also would like to see spells that are exclusive to specialists--this would be good for some cleric domains, too. Third edition did a touch of that. I liked how illusionists were so different back in AD&D, and how sphere access in 2e really made different clerics seem, well, different.

In my 4e games, character turns take 2-4 min per person once they are level 6 or so. I also need about 5 min to run my monsters and NPCs (more for setpiece fights). With four players and me, that means about 17 min per round. Most combats at heroic tier would last my group 4-5 rounds. On...

It isn't about discounting people under 50 (heck, I am under 50). The problem is talking about a time as if he were there (which he wasn't), and about over-generalizing a playstyle.

I so agree, and it so bothers me. Old School playstyle? All the playstyles we see today were around back then, too. My first experiences with D&D were more like an rpg-boardgame, except we made the characters instead of picking from the box. Since there wasn't much story in our games, mechanics...

D&D level magic, research, and alchemy allows the equivalent of modern alloys and techniques, though, doesn't it?

In game terms, "cambion" has always been one human parent and one demon parent (or two cambion parents, perhaps). Tieflings simply have tainted blood, not a full fiend as mom or dad.

I don't think even specifying ability x for fiend/alignment/plane y is needed. Many tieflings would have no idea of their particular heritage.

No subraces. Simply have a short list of racial traits that each tiefling can mix and match from. Tieflings aren't half one outsider, half human. They are humans with a bit of something fiendish in their background. Let the racial features reflect that variety.

Warlock: magic of great power but limited scope gradual trading of one's soul for power supernaturally tough Monk: mystic warrior combination of unarmed/unarmored martial arts with mystic powers best saves/survival of all classes Psion: psychic powers/magic best at telekinesis, telepathy

Darkvision has always been annoyance in my games, especially at low level. The party with 3 demihumans and a human . . . poor, poor human. Also, it simply obviates an interesting low-level challenge, lighting. Finally, having most monsters have darkvision means that non-darkvision heroes...

I just simply love that someone on the design team is saying, "Every humanoid creature doesn't constitute a race." Lots of monsters could and SHOULD be one-offs, single tribes, cursed individuals, etc.

Um, I think troglodytes worship the loathsome Laogzed. *folds arms* I mean, like, really. ;)

I much prefer when specialist wizards have either specialty spells on their lists, or when the specialist wizards each get an unusual, different benefit, making them play differently. Abjuruer: some bonus to saves vs. spells, using dispels/counterspells Evoker: bonus damage, maybe a specialty...

If Theater of the Mind is going to encompass combat, it's going to encompass exploration, too. I hate the disconnect when DMs want a described, somewhat abstracted battle--using no minis and no grid; but then, when it comes to exploration or searching, the game suddenly turns into nitpicking...

I'm just waiting for someone to chime in with, "I own my own set of realistic, reproduction-quality full plate armour, AND I am able to do cartwheels and backflips while wearing it." How about this one: "Even simple leather armor is FAR more difficult to move around in than plain clothes. Why...

Wow. There wasn't even one thing I was interested in.