Search results

I'm all for having the base combat/class system being able to support all sorts of different styles without having to have special classes or new rules additions just to get them up to par. However I don't want to make players choose between optimal and cool. There should be a way to get...

This makes me feel pretty positive. That it's intrinsic enough to the game, rather than yourself, that you don't feel comfortable talking about it.

I suspect they'll be rolled.

Why would you give up on the game before the public beta when you could look at it for free and see what the finished product might actually resemble in some fashion instead of just guessing you might not like it from a few vague hints and rumors?

While there are certainly tweaks and such that could be made to specific spells and abilities, I don't think an overall nerfing of spellcasters is actually the best answer. Instead of trying to make spellcasters worse I think more effort should be put toward making non-spellcasters better...

You're getting into a pretty subjective area. The only one of those I would rate on par with the original is the Wojcik illustration (I especially like the brains as a stomach from a conceptual design standpoint), for me it's a toss between color and B&W. The second one is just lacks all the...

I'm quite fond of the thought eater. I actually think it's a very solid illustration, it's weird, seems non-threatening at first blush, maybe even a little goofy, but the undertones of its dessicated appearance adds a note of subtle wrongness.

Definitely somewhere in the middle, so taking one option or the other doesn't deviate too much from the baseline expectation.

"Thems the breaks. Movin' on." No option I can vote for. Let's not forget the game part of roleplaying games. You win some, you lose some.

So, could we like, move past this nonsensical non-criticism?

If stats are going to increase I think it should be pretty rare, I'd really like to stay away from the need for ever increasing numbers and the idea that to be good you need to have high stats. More over I think this particular method would inevitably lead to a sort of sameness among stat...

If you can't be bothered to learn what a word actually means you oughtn't go around slapping it on things you don't like as a pejorative label.

I dislike the proposed method in the blog, btw. I think it forces you to have to guess the oppositions current HP state, which renders such powers fairly useless for PC but less so for the DM causing a weirdly imbalanced situation, or it forces too much transparency which highlights the...

And subsequently lead to demands that the healer take care of every last nick, scratch, and booboo immediately.

Modularity is the word of the day IMHO, to that end here was my suggestion (cribbed from earlier postings). Give certain spells/abilities keywords, like Death, Petrification, etc, those keywords would dictate things like how they interact with certain defenses or how they are recovered from...

If I was designing the cleric from the ground up I would probably allow them a small selection of at will and always on abilities that made sense with regard to the deity the worshiped, and then let them have more of the situational stuff as rituals of cleansing and the like, but be able to pull...

I'm frankly not sure how you could look through the galleries I linked and then look at WAR's work, or pretty much any D&D artist's work, and think that they share the same aesthetic DNA.

This is the part I don't quite get, why are all those things okay, but not psionics? They are all psychic powers. So why should a class that specializes in them be so offensive?

I sincerely think you're seeing things that aren't there.

People always complain about them how unbalanced psionics are, put them in the main book so they get properly playtested, make sure the properly mesh with the rest of the rules. People complain they fell tacked on? The reason for that may well be because in the past that's what they were...