Search results

Basing your arguments on how you assume hypothetical people would respond to questions you've never actually asked is always - and I mean ALWAYS - a very bad idea.

So long robes and a silly pointy hat are out for the wizard, right?

To you. Don't project your preferences and biases onto other people.

Indeed. The D&D wizard 'archetype' comes from D&D itself. It did not really exist before D&D.

I'm going to suggest that you can imagine any context you like. Imagination tends to be encouraged in D&D.

Indeed.

It's not your DnD...

Surely they've been consulted enough in the last 30 years? New eyes and new voices should be encouraged.

That's a pretty myopic opinion. It's not your D&D.

The example you provided in the very same post was only being able to do a roundhouse kick three times a day. Suggesting that it was someone else (me) who associated your post with x/day powers is disingenuous. Literally just used the example you provided yourself. Cooldown periods are not the...

Are you using "videogamey" to mean "something I don't like"? Because x/day powers are far more characteristic of D&D than they are videogames.

Obligatory comment that Joseph Campbell is a hack who cherry-picked stories to arrive at the pre-determined conclusion of the monomyth. This does not mean that the hero's journey is not a perfectly good way to tell a story. Just emphasizing that the monomyth aspect of his writing is itself a myth.

The idea that 4E teamplay draws more inspiration from football than any other team sport is rather silly. If anything it's much more like baseball, due to the initiative order and turn-based actions.

Yes, my favourite 4E character was an arcane centre-back! The roles were not inspired by football. They were already established in the gaming community. Striker and defender are positions, while controlled and leader are qualities. A striker can be a great controller in football.

Of course, don't forget about selection bias. People who like this sort of mechanics are far more likely to play the game. People who know they dislike the mechanics generally won't play it.

Given the massive selection bias that will inevitably infect the result, it can't really be seen as anything else. Unless, I suppose, he just doesn't understand things like selection bias, in which case he shouldn't be doing any surveys.

It was a suggestion to improve the design of the character sheet. The amount of pushback is getting silly.

Leaving out the whole part where they negotiated with Chaosium and added language to the book and continued printing the material does indeed suggest the material was removed immediately. Especially since the post was specifically about the book and is not some passing comment. So while I agree...

They explained why in some detail. Currently moving a weapon from inventory to active involves actually moving the weapon's info from the inventory section to the active weapons section. It would be better to just have checkboxes to show which weapons are active.

Indeed. And many people understand how systems work together. RPG rules are not rocket science. Not saying this applies to everyone, but you said you couldn't understand why anyone would do it, and this is why some people do it.