Search results

This was always a missed opportunity. The only character they ever designed was the Champion. It should not have been that difficult to have at least also a low-complexity Wizard, Cleric and Rogue. OTOH feats being optional is definitely a great idea. Good points on the rest, but you missed my...

First and foremost, ability score damage as a special feature of selected monsters. I have done this sometimes and it works better and more easily in 5e than in 3e! Somewhat related, but not easy to pull off properly, would be level drain. This definitely requires some thinking, I wouldn't...

I haven't played much of 3e since 5e, only some Rokugan adventures and it's been many years ago, but I largely prefer 3.0 over 3.5. I never really converted to 3.5, back then I DMed in 3.5 heavily (and exclusively) for a year using the SRD, then decided to go back to 3.0 which, in my opinion was...

Because RL economics are sooo smart?

They are awesome! But at 4 bucks each, and with all the minifigs I already have, I'm probably gonna pass.

Nah, usually just a generic "dragons and giants once ruled the world, then elves did, then... it's now". Mostly, I have abandoned any interest in worldbuilding including history. Nobody cares except the one who does it, and I stopped caring.

The "pushover encounters are not fun" is not what you claimed to be a common school of thought. What you claimed, I re-quoted above.

Not a bad idea... with modern editions you might want the ability to scale a bit differently, maybe not that fast but at the same time becoming progressively usable with higher HD monsters. Should be fine in BECMI though. I wouldn't be so sure about being common. Pushover encounters are not...

Your post is spot-on. The PHB isn't out yet and some are already complaining that the power creep they got (free feat) is restrictive. But as soon as you make it flexible, they will flock to the same few feats most of the times. Maybe then they will ask for those to became default mechanics...

Using a classic vanilla adventure like KotB in a starter set is a great idea! I don't know if the starter set is supposed to cover only level 1 or at least a few levels, but I hope KotB doesn't get reduced too much to fit. I haven't read the whole thread to see if others already mentioned it...

It's a great idea. I don't have the resources anymore for planning or running something big, but if I had then my ideal campaign would be always a blend of multiple adventures running in parallel, sometimes overlapping but I wouldn't really need to shove them into crossing each other, they would...

The thread posted as a reference does not collect house rules or "fixes" but only a list of things in the game that can work oddly if treated RAW, at least according to the creator of that thread. Something like that is feasible, and useful as a list of "warnings" for DMs. Compiling instead a...

Anyway... nobody cared about these when we only had ICE vehicles even with their costs and inefficiencies, and most EV owners can already stop caring as well given their typical ranges. I still think too much about optimising energy consumption because our first EV had only a 100km range thus it...

It is kind of a deceiving statement considering you're paying a lot more for ICE fuel, but then you are also paying more for the EV itself. We stopped caring about theoretical discourses once we got the first EV, ran our own numbers and realised it was worth for us.

Things we learned about energy consumption: - range is affected by MANY factors, manufacturers can't really describe range with one single number, once you have a few EV models in mind, research as much as possible; the ratio between the highest and lowest ranges we  think we would have covered...

The best advice I can give you is to only collect information from people who have or had EVs. Their experience varies, so you'll have to weigh pros and cons depending on your own situation. There are forums on the web but less than I would like them to be. We switched to EVs about six years...

That is simply not true. There will be more or less the same things, probably slightly more expensive but at the same time there would be less unemployment periods in people's lives therefore also more money for them to spend.

Good design exercise. If you have to choose before rolling whether to "do nothing unless both attacks hit", it means converting advantage to disadvantage (in terms of probabilities only, not counting fully as disadvantage) in exchange of an extra benefit on success. So yes it's a significant...

This is more or less the only "rule" I have ever needed. All the rest sounds just like a huge waste of time. They can't even establish solid definitions to base rules upon, because different people have different things in mind when talking about "heavily obscured" or "three-quarter cover"...

I agree with many here, it's quite funny that the actual general meaning of tactic is related to having a plan, while it seems more common to me that RPG players call 'tactical' a game that has lots of rules and options which in practice allow (or soft-force, by overwhelming options) them not to...