Search results

But D&D is not a sport, it is not a competitive endevour. There are no teams and neither side is trying to beat the other - it is a cooperative undertaking. Has it been played that way? yes. Is that the norm or the default? I would say no. If you run D&D as a game for players to game, then you...

Well said.

Hasn't that always been the case though? Iconic effect, but troubling to implement. They really need two spells - one designed to be used on enemies, and one to be used on friends (one to hinder, one to augment).

It plays like it reads - well done! Looking forward to future updates.

Mearls said it best: "I always like a rule change that mimics what a lot of DMs and players are already doing at the table." Me, too. It's good to know that many XP options will be presented and that the game will work to accommodate a broad range of play styles.

My list looks like yours - with quick combats being the key - they manage to be fast without being simple. Hopefully the tactical module will not slow them down too much. I would add the Social interaction rules to my list: adding Ideals, Faults, and Bonds is a quick way to add depth to social...

Absolutely. These kinds of considerations and choices are the mainstay of the groups with which I have the good fortune to play.

And Pompeii. . . that certainly fails to qualify as historical fiction.

My bad, I was remembering the number from the "How to Play" doc from Scourge of the Sword Coast which still says 10+. The Classes doc does list 8+

in the public playtest docs the DC is 10+spellcasting mod. . .

Dwarf Wizard in Scale Mail with a 14 DEX and his 4th level feat/ability score improvement spent on Shield Master? Congrats - you have an 18 AC. Not hard. Waste of feat choice for a Wizard, though. The argument on whether said character can "out damage any other class" is still very open. As...

. . .Aaaannndd you lost me. Our paradigms and definitions are too far apart meaningful discourse, I fear. If by culture you mean anything close to "a collective group of peoples who might be wronged or offended", then I have to admit that I cannot conceive of a "culture" that doesn't have a...

No because adding another caster will mean choosing not to add something else - assuming the number of players remains the same. More casters means a need for more meat shields to keep the monsters at bay :) Figuratively speaking, of course.

This matches my experience as well. As I primarily DM, my problem was magnified by the fact that only a minority of the party enjoyed the optimization/system-mastery aspect of the game - the rest of us were there to enjoy the plot and move the story along. But as they rose in level, the math...

Measurable objectives are necessary, yes. Not "telling" - creating, there is a difference. Go for a run - with or without clocks, start, and finish lines - and you have created a story. Whether you choose to tell it or not is entirely up to you. When 6 people sit down to play D&D, a story is...

Good news indeed :) Fighters have always been my favorite class to play and I am a recovering Warhammer addict myself. . .

To clarify: not choosing the pew-pew would make your character sub-optimal in combat. Whereas choosing the pew-pew makes your character sub-optimal in other aspects of the game. To some people/groups that matters. I can see the OP's point in regards to the feel he is trying to create - and...

. . . or take away the scaling, or lower the damage die.

Polymorph has always been contentious. . . but I think martial buffers could still work: a martial class with a few concentration buffs to choose from mixed with some instant or round-only buffs/aids. . .

(in response to question #2) Which he specifically says they have rejected because of balance issues. . . ...Now you are upset with them because they won't do something you don't want them to do (make casters more powerful/have more options) for the very reason you don't want them to do it...