Search results

Playing video games is insulting?

No, it's big. Look at DCC or even Shadowdark. The PCs are puny but not completely useless. The key is how you market The Everyman: you build up the other classes making them seem so amazing - then introduce the young, lovable, naive farmboy from Tatooine. The smily-faced, charming, club-footed...

Cool character sheet! I never really understood Pendragon though.

Nope. The current list of skills easily port over (y)

You make the point: players want capable - even hyper-capable - PCs. Exceptions noted, most D&D players don't want to play 0-Level Joe Nobody. Unless you can make playing that kind of PC interesting.

Okay. I respect your knowledge of ttrpgs and your polite conversation. Always. Even when you're wrong. Like now.

Well. Let's not go crazy here. Profitability is the finish line IMO and marketing can drive popularity which can drive profits. But that's not this discussion, is it? I'm waiting for someone to make the next big ttrpg that isn't like D&D or Shadowun. If it were me I'd start with no abilities...

People still play 3e, 3.5 and PF1e. You can find those games being played all across the internet (live streams and Play-by-Post). So they aren't dead, especially since designers are still producing content for those games (check DrivethruRPG). But I'd say keep working at your ttrpg because it...

Ok ... but if they have spell-like "non-magical abilities" and capabilities that (at a glance) resemble Feats, is that an Everyman? That said, that looks like a cool sci-fi supplement. The 5e system is producing some interesting non-fantasy games 🤓

What's cool is when people are allowed to disagree. You disagree with me. Cool. I disagree with the OP. Why can't I be cool too (especially when the OP violates ToS)? :unsure:

Warlocks and Sorcerers have POWER. Characters don't need exceptional training if they can blow up orks with magic. This "Everyman" is being pitched as an untrained, non-magical PC - aka "monster food". This kind of reminds me of the old D&D cartoon where the kids are thrown into a fantasy world...

I'd describe the gems (color, size) and OOC allow PCs skilled in Appraisal or something close (being a Dwarf) to make a roll to determine the gems' approximate (what it's worth and what they can actually sell it for are often different) value.

Ah, but IT IS thought-policing, by definition. Not my rule ...

And I'll go a step further since we're knee-deep. En World ToS states: Keep it civil: Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your discussions. Say how you feel or what you think, but be careful about ascribing motives to the actions of others or telling...

My concern is mostly how opinion can shape forum policy. As I posted above, I've seen it happen in very bad ways, to the point where people get banned from sites not because they violated ToS, but because they posted an unpopular opinion.

And I don't think it's helpful when someone posts: When one should generally NOT invoke Gary Gygax's name:

100% agreed. My point was .... your point :ROFLMAO:

The great John Williams:

Yeah but, this is how institutionalized censorship begins: with somebody's opinion. I've seen entire forums transformed based on the opinions of a few. And not in a good way. If someone wants to name-drop a game designer, I don't see the problem. But, telling people what they can discuss...

Well, IMO WotC has little sense of balance in designing D&D. It's been a mess since the 3e changes. Or, maybe not a mess, but definitely an entirely different game. But, again, I liked your attempt at designing the Everyman and I hope others like where you're going with it. The concept is...