Search results

I hope this release goes down in flames, if for no other reason than to send the noisome idea of a CCG-RPG packing.

Not apropos to the scenario of the OP, but AFAIAK, the bane on the 3e DM was power creep in the late 3e era and the attitude that magic items were to be treated as part of the "character build".

Huh? I wasn't referring to a main point of a post, but the main point of Pathfinder. The main point of pathfinder was to, in essence, keep 3.x in print. As retailers and distributors are loath to stock product for an out-of-print game. Sorry for being "conversational". ;)

Which was sort of the main point, wasn't it?

I'm ready to, you know, use all the stuff I already have for 3.5 that I haven't used. ;) (Though I do desperately wish Razor Coast would cross the finish line.)

Indeed. I find the fact that 3e worked from a consistent baseline made it pretty trivial to houserule. You just plug into that baseline. If you hate the baseline to begin with, though, then your problem might be too big to simply houserule.

Well... ;) Seriously, I certainly understand what I and my group want more than they do. And a game is written to some big assumed heap center of mass within a theoretical target audience. Given that I'm rarely quite at that center of mass and implicit corporate attitudes and designer...

Thanks for sharing this. No, I was not aware (I'm planting my flag with Fantasy Craft these days.)

I thought that was mainly the loud rhetoric of a few (one I could name...)

Funny, I don't consider Ticket to Ride a "geek game." It's the sort of game I play with "mundanes". (shrug)

1) Lack of iterative attacks 2) Mechanical play not exclusively focused on combats 3) Scaling NPCs 4) Emphasis on endurance over power in magic as compared to core d20 5) Distinction between standard and special NPCs 5a) Terminal effect rules 6) Cheating death rules make raising magic seem like...

Hmmm. To me that's not muddied, but just another aspect worth praising. That it could cater to tastes for such diverse fanbases as those of Castles & Crusades and Spycraft is a testament of its awesome. :cool:

Interesting way to put it. I chose to answer the question in the context of what the system has given me. To wit: love it. Now I do pretty much despise the sort of mindset such as "Mordenkainen's Disjunction is a horrrrrrible spell and should be banned because it can do milllllions of gp of...

Never tried, but WRT some other publishers with the habit of PI-ing names of races/classes/spells, I've seen just re-naming the thing and being done with it. Vexing, I know, but better that fumbling around with designer intentions.

No. This is another thing I never see happen at the table. Only on the internet.

One wonders what your day job is like. I don't know what yours is like, but in my job, even if I do a fantastic job and achieve my goals, there is always more to be done. I don't suppose that any world worth adventuring in would be any more ideal in this way.

It depends. Often enough, a properly textured game has a feel and implicit consequences of its own that makes great grist for game settings or campaigns. What role does magic play? What can groups do? Etc. OTOH, sometimes I'll get an idea and look for the proper system to drape it around...

YouTube - Kronks Mission. "He's trying to lead you down the path of righteousness. I'm gonna lead you down the path that ROCKS!"

I can unequivocally say they love chargen more than any other game I've played with them. I will caveat that I gave them a pool of "reroll points" to help temper the downside of the randomness, but the way the system builds a backstory, makes connections between PCs before play, and ensures all...