Search results

Right, this can go round in circles with point/counter-point. Both are right to want what you want from a game, and both wrong to assume that what you want is somehow a constraint on D&D Next's skill system. KaiiLurker - I don't want a skill system that means I have to choose 20 out of 90...

This. You had to be pretty certain a spell attack was coming that you had a chance of countering (even with improved counterspell you had to match the school of magic and level), and even then that the consequences of it going off were worse than you not casting an attack or buff on your turn...

Using 2d20, 71% of the adventures were completed with "light injuries". This is a randomly chosen example of that typical result: Start adventure: Delve. Fight against ten Fire Beetles Initiative Bill makes Dex check. [Roll 2d10 = 11 + 2 (Dex) = 13] Bob makes Dex check...

This is a second attempt to post a full adventure log. They are quite long, so I split them into two posts. Using 1d20, 49% of the adventures were completed with "moderate injuries". This is a randomly chosen example of that typical result: Start adventure: Delve. Fight against ten Fire...

Take that with a pinch of salt though - the Survivor specialty makes a big difference . . . characters without it are not nearly as robust at level 1.

Me too actually, but this is a hugely open-to-interpretation part of the game, and a little bit unsatisfying in the degree of choices. We have publsihed rules of 1) High enough stat, or simply having training, is successful. Great for obvious "the character should be able to do that"...

Monte-Carlo results. This is team of three level 1 Dwarven Fighters, with Survivor specialty. They are pretty tough, so I put them through the following four encounters: 10 Fire Beetles (Average) 3 Hobgoblins (Tough) 1 Bugbear (Average) 1 Ogre + 1 Bugbear (Tough) I chose "brave" dwarves who...

A bell-curve distribution used for action resolution emphasises distance from the average value. In a game designed to take account of this, low modifiers from -2 to +2 become more important. High modifiers become more like auto-success and auto-fail. IMO the skill system benefits from this...

Really this kind of rule set is closer to what I'd like to play. I have a strong preference for a foundation of unified mechanics that all characters in a game access to perform actions. Unfortunately, this moves a long way away from any previous D&D. I'm not sure I would even ask for it in...

Using 2d10 would IMO have a much more positive impact on skill rolls and checks where a difference in bonus should make a difference (arm wrestle using Str, or any skilled job where it seems silly that an untalented person might still get 25% success rate).

What this will do to attacks IMO. It will have a minor impact on attacks by PCs. A few, with high attack bonuses, will hit more often. It will have a major impact on attacks by monsters. The D&D Next balances monsters out versus PCs by giving them low chances to hit, at least at low levels...

It was IIRC (edit: and I do, MM 3.5 pp 315). Anyway, thanks to the OGL, I can just post it: Swarm :: d20srd.org

Sure, what I'd really like is the stats for a single killer bee! :D A swarm in real life has very different traits to the individual creatures that it consists of (Edit: before we get dragged into "realism", I'm talking about traits such as the area it might threaten, the volume it contains...

From the angle of how to set up an adventure, we don't have to second-guess motivations further than this basic split: 1) "The game needs to be harder, and lowering recovery rates is one way towards it". For this motivation, just set the dial to low recovery and go. Easy. 2) "I like lower...

I like this. Although the usual scenario is that e.g. 20% of the bad guys are now dead - replenishing or re-enforcing them often makes good story sense, but can make an adventure drag. Finding good rational things for them to do during PC healing time for slower-recovering heroes works for me...

Not really what I wanted to talk about. It's important to the game, and potentially related (in that too loose an adventure can let the players do 5MWD if they want) but a different can of worms I think ;) This is what I'd like to discuss. My understanding of your suggestion quoted is that...

The optional heal rates and guideline total xp for adventuring day are not completed rules yet. However, I did notice that we were given in playtest 2, a dial for heal rates, but no corresponding dial for "adventuring day". To me, the two are linked, but this also brings in adventure-level...

I quite like the idea of "magic battle" that would be something casters on both sides could put actions/resources into, and it might be a way to fend off save-or-die effects on either side. I do see a problem with that idea though - NPCs are often single power source (all casters, or all...

Hit point inflation, and what the various heal/rest mechanics changes have brought version-to-version, are one of the things that might coinceivably be "rolled back" to a particular version. If you want to consider that, you need to look a little deeper at what is going on. How hit points have...

I haven't seen any generic rules for multi-attack to compare this to. However, I think it "feels right" to allow the dual-wielder to split their attack in this way. Balance-wise it gives something extra for dual-wielding, and the option isn't particularly powerful, so could do with some nice...