Search results

I didn't ignore your opinion. I'm not sure I even disagree with it (don't know enough about either game to do so). I merely object to any support of a subjective opinion based on popularity.

My answer is not to handwave them away, but to have the ability in-setting to create such effects.

My answer is to not give that ability to anyone, PC or NPC, and replace with appropriate abilities/spell either could conceivably acquire.

I endorse everything in this message, point for point.

I do like Dragonlance, quite a bit, and this is going on my wishlist!

I always saw templates as mechanics adjusting to the changed in-fiction concept. In other words, process sim.

The relative importance of a character is not a matter of process sim. It might be a matter of genre sim, but honestly I see that as a misnamed concept (or the other one is; either way, they shouldn't IMO both have sim in the common name for the term). Process sim and genre sim are IMO far more...

I hope they have tried harder on the other two pillars. For my part, A5e has covered them far better than the official game ever has, and I see no reason to go backwards as I see it.

I just explained my personal opinion on the matter, @Ruin Explorer , and it simply doesn't align with yours. These issues aren't minor to me, and they are factors I consider and try to follow as best I can when I actually play D&D. That's all. Your feelings on the matter, as valid as they are...

If you choose to engage with the hobby as a game primarily, that's fine. To me, that simply isn't enough to hold my interest. I want a reasonably consistent setting that feels like a place that could exist for my players to explore and interact with through their PCs. That's what fun about the...

I always try to minimize reskinning, and prefer to have the mechanics follow the fiction, not the other way round.

Skeletons and zombies are types of creatures in the setting. Minions are a type of creature in the game. Apples and oranges.

Well I have to agree with @Crimson Longinus . Classes have an associated story that justifies playing one class over another. If you're not going to engage with that story, then you are only playing the class for the mechanics. To me that makes the class pointless, because you are not engaging...

Wouldn't it make more sense just to say that you like Mothership more than the Alien RPG, and why, rather than insist that your opinion means more somehow because you believe a lot of other people you don't know share it? What value does the latter bring to the discussion? Are we talking about...

In Level Up, they provided an in-fiction explanation for creatures who have legendary actions and the like. And if they don't, I put them in.

Not me. I use a metric ton of 3pp material, to the point where very little of my personal "D&D" actually comes from WotC's game, and none from their current game at the moment.

So you don't think 5.5 represents a shift in intention and assumed playstyle?

Fair enough for you, but I'm not willing to write off any inconsistency as a "game convention" that should be ignored for play. There's no reason that anything an NPC can accomplish can't be duplicated by an equivalent PC under similar circumstances. I simply don't want to play a game where that...

You think this was actually the sentiment they were expressing? That's certainly not what I got out of it.

That's the issue. The veteran players who feel strongly about what D&D should be, and who do a lot of answering the surveys and talking incessantly online about their opinions? Those people didn't disappear just because the IP holder has decided they're no longer fiscally relevant and can be...