Search results

If that's the only difference, I agree. In practice there should be many ways they are different, with resource used only one aspect. All I'm saying is that if you leave that aspect out by making all characters use the same resource mechanic, you have even less differentiation.

IMC, spells like zone of truth are only considered about as conclusive evidence as real life lie detectors. The subject can always shut up, skirt around the truth or even make the save. Regarding player vs. character skills, those who want the player to handle them can just ignore the skills in...

I would have, of course, switched if the rest of the group would have wanted to, but they didn't. The main reason was that we felt the old rules were better. Another important factor was the campaign setting. We play in the Realms and everyone hated what happened in 3e->4e. Still, if the rules...

I would rename the two ends of the scale: "DM as machine" and "players as puppets". The former is where the DM's job is just to follow rules and react to player input. The latter is when nothing the players do matters because the DM will just rule it so. That way it is clear that what is really...

There's a scale of options and how to present them. Wizard choosing which spells to learn is an option. Fighter choosing which weapon to be good with is an option. Wizard choosing to switch some spells for At-Will magic is an option. The first one has been a part of all editions in a very...

The stated intention wasn't to support the mechanics of every edition, but the play style.

So you don't like skills and feats because those versions of D&D didn't include them? That's not a very good reason, IMO. You could use the same reason to argue against anything that was added or changed in 3e or 4e. Or, if using OD&D as baseline, anything added or changed in AD&D.

That's not a very useful answer. I presume it wouldn't help if they renamed feats "talents" and skills "proficiencies"? Do you hate any character options outside class? (Then class specific bonus feats could still be ok.) Do you hate the complexity they add? (Then a short list of simple feats...

What is it you don't like about (was it 3e style) feats? Maybe they've fixed those things in 5e. No way to know yet.

People with strong opinions on either side often disagree on the definitions, so maybe you should define what you mean by these.

Maybe PF style? Sorcerer uses the same spells as Wizard, but different casting mechanics and other class features are different. (Bloodline abilities instead of metamagic/crafting feats.) I don't really care all that much since I don't play Sorcerer very often - as long as they don't double the...

I disagree about separating sight and hearing again. When it matters (e.g. low light vision) use modifiers. The rest is pretty much what I also think.

Because it's magic? :) No, seriously that was one of the "hp as meat" things pemerton mentioned. I'd like to get it fixed, but it isn't difficult. I should have qualified: 4e makes all hp loss that isn't immediately lethal (work as if it is) non-physical. I'm sorry for quoting myself, but...

But the mechanics resolve it in a certain way, and constraining the mechanics of conceptually different actions to be resolved in the same way limits their differentiation. (Even if there are other ways to differentiate!) Are you really saying that it doesn't matter whether a character's...

With the side effect of making no hp loss physical, since it can always be "healed" without healing.

Only if they work exactly the same. What you originally quoted was: If magic uses spell slots, martial is at will and psionics use power points, they all have a very different feel that the mechanics reinforce. Martial is consistent, psionics is adaptable, magic forces you to think ahead. Even...

Yes. I'm just saying how they do things also matters.

The gish should be called the spellsword. That's the coolest name by far, before looking at more specific concepts like the bladesinger. I think the default spellsword class should be the Bard, which I would tweak more to the direction of Kvothe from the Name of the Wind. Something like kits is...

You could argue that there is already an Excel-intensive aspect to current editions of D&D. Namely, the reliance of 4e and PF on character (and monster) builders. (No, I'm not saying you can't play without those, but they help a lot. The same is presumably true for an Excel-intensive domain...

They don't actually separate all cursed items from the non-cursed. Is ring of truth cursed or not? (You can't lie, but you detect lies.) How about rod of terror? (You cause paralyzing fear, but may permanently lose Charisma.) I simply disagree that items with disadvantages or drawbacks are rare.