Search results

Cute, weird, and magical. Pretty much across the board.

Again, ok. Doesn't mean a thing to me. This is a thread about personal opinions about preferred heritages.

I'm not talking about damage. I'm talking about healing. You create a Basic Healing Rate (an baseline amount a spell will heal you based on your hit die type), and different spells (or the same spell cast at different levels) heal multiples of that amount. So a 1st level Cure Wounds might heal a...

Ok. I can only go by their own experience, and my people like gnomes. I don't use D&DB, and I've never played BG3.

I've never seen the unpopularity. In all the games I've been in as player or GM, I've never seen a group without at least one player who loved gnomes, even if they weren't playing one at the time (and it wasn't me, I'm neutral on the subject).

I don't think it's horribly unbalance good. You balance by the spell (and the level it's being cast at), rather than by the character level of the healer.

So exactly how many people who don't complain about their GM secretly want to but are held back for social reasons in your estimation?

Sure, but I've never seen any evidence that other narrative games would be more to my liking (I've enjoyed playing Monster of the Week, but would never run it, for example, and Marvel Heroic annoyed the heck out of me too), so I've declined doing a deep dive into the playstyle.

They are relevant to me not playing 5.5, and in that 3pp tends to follow WotC's lead, but otherwise no.

Level Up/A5e, hands down. It takes the 5e ruleset and makes adjustments to add more granularity, to mechanically enable options that I feel could use it, and to provide more versatility and choice in the rules to players and GMs. And it does all this while maintaining the 5e core with which so...

I expect they would, and some mention if that should probably be in the text. But what stuff is supernatural and what stuff isn't is always written from the perspective of the reader. I think it would be quite jarring to do otherwise.

They choose not to play because their GM doesn't want to run the game they want to play, and they're unwilling to look into alternatives (or in your case I suppose, they're just very unlucky). Everyone, GMs and players alike, get to decide what they're willing to play or run.

What I'm saying is, if their GM doesn't want to run their game, they can't force them. So your other options are find another GM, be another GM, or drop it.

I don't recall any hard rules governing player behavior. Where have you seen those?

How does the GM feel about this Eberron idea some of their players want? Are any of them willing to GM?

The PbtA game with which I'm most familiar is Apocalypse World, the grandaddy of them all, which as you say does frame it's ideas as rules, and comes out of a tradition of very strongly held opinions not generally presented as such, so I'm gunshy about that sort of thing.

I'm ok with all of that.

Paying for art?

I change (and have changed) my play when I think it's worth it. What changes the official games goes through are not particularly relevant to me. What possible reason would I have to keep following the leading edge if I don't like where it's going?

I get what you're saying, but as I've said before, personally I need damage types to matter if the rules make them matter.