Search results

I don't think that's strictly the goal. Both players have to be willing to play the game as a muddled middle. So the game won't necessarily have the same feel as either 4e or 1e, but some people don't care about the Char-Op that 3e or 4e expects, and some people don't care about the rigid...

Well, 2e and 4e didn't have iconics, while 1e and 3e did. 2e and 4e don't seem to be as well recieved or as 1e and 2e. Coincidence? I think not.

To be fair, that was also accompanied with the general idea that gnomes weren't going to be a player race in the marketing of 4e, and there seemed to be an internal dislike of gnomes at WotC. So there was no news of a forthcoming gnome in the PHB2 when the gnome was announced, nor any clue yet...

If we could trade in five 40 year old players for one 12 year old player, I think the hobby would be healthier. Maybe not for WotC's sales though.

I think if people get hung up on the specific rules preferences like that, 5e is not for you. I don't think 5e is going to let you show up with your old 1e or 3e PHB and start playing. I think there are going to be options reminiscent of various editions, but if you as a fan aren't willing...

The Magic items in 2e are pretty much the same as 1e. A paragraph of text that tells you what the item does, usually with its own rule. A lot of items were unbalanced, some were useless, and some were just odd but it was never about boosting an ability you could already do in a level...

I'm a big fan of magic being mysterious and hidden, to the point that I think that evocation is stone cold boring. In other words, I like Tolkien or Robert E. Howard over Harry Potter. However as much as I like rare/hidden magic as the default, I don't buy that scarcity is necesary to make...

I want to bring back the -10 to 10 (AC 10 to AC 30) with a attack bonus of +1 to +20, and make AC based on dex + armour again. I hate spinning my wheels in place as AC scales up with attacks. I hate not being able to enjoy being powerful and sending lesser adventurers and creatures fleeing...

There is an implicit one, in that generally you are allowed to intimidate bloodied oppoents into surrender. But yeah, it would be nice to know which monsters are the types to fight to the death or not. Most DM's make you fight the until every last man is dead. For religious zealots or...

No. I think that's just because you have a good DM. Some weapons give extra damage on criticals, but critical hits are max damage. That's why when you roll max damage anyway, it is called a "poor man's crit" or "ghetto crit".

Magic items have to go back to 2e, and obligations have to come back so PC's have something to spend money on (strongholds, upkeep, politics, etc). I would have magic items be handed out at a rate of 1 per dungeon/level. I'm tired of PC's being bored by magic items because they get 3-4 per...

I've killed 5 players in my D&D 4e game in the three years it has been out. Most of those deaths were in the 1st year, as my PC's got used to working as a team. With 3e and previous you generally were "allied individuals" rather than a cohesive unit, and with 4e you weren't really allowed to...

A mix of the two would be better. With x2 critical hits, you often do less damage than you would on a regular roll. (when you roll two 1's). That is even suckier than getting max damage. So if I have to choose between the two systems, I'll choose max damage any day of the week. However...

I like standard/move/minor actions well enough. I haven't had any problems with immediate interrupts, but immediate reactions tend to confuse things because it makes people do attacks or movement out of order, so people think it acted when it hasn't had its turn. For minor actions, I hate...

I have a lot less problems with save or die if it isn't a matter of random spell selection or a random monster. If the monster is a legendary creature like Orcus, who you know can destroy you in a single act, then I don't have a problem with it. Especially since you are fighting him at a time...

I rather liked insults causing psychic damage actually. I would insult the monster and the DM would oblige me by acting out the psychic damage which resulted as the monster taking it personally (and deep down admitting the insult was true). Now making a bugbear or ogre cry was fairly funny...

I think having the rules that necessitate such a big book is intimidating to new players, not the format in which you deliver them. The Rules Cyclopedia is just right thickness and covers all the relevant topics. The actual rules leave something to be desired, but as organization and the...

Does that mean my assassin can never sneak attack a paladin? 'Cause that's a problem too.

1) Vancian casting - I may be a fan of 4e, but I missed reading my spellbook. 2) Hobbits - I like kender in Dragonlance, and mere mini-humans not at all. 3) Proficiencies - People don't read lips or brew beer anymore, and that's a shame. Just make it more flexible and/or allow people more...

I'm generally of the opinion that rolling for PC's is more fun because you get to meet your character. However, it is not fun to have a sub-optimal build in a system where monsters do a certain amount of damage at a certain level. 1e/2e is a lot forgiving of random rolls because bonuses and...