Search results

That may work in your group and that’s fine. Just keep in mind that not every group works like yours. I may decide to not use Tabaxi because I don’t like them; and that is the only justification I need. I honestly would be surprised if my groups tried to then convince me into allowing them...

Understood. I think of the whole concept in the opposite. There are so many people interested in playing D&D and also so many people interested in running D&D that it makes sense to take the high way. I run my game if you don't like it you can walk... and find another DM that suits their needs...

Well, depends on the nature of the erroneous ruling. How do I know the DM is not changing things up to work better for their intentions. They may have a reason for it. It is not my place to interrupt their game and second guess them. I am player in the world they are creating. Why would I want...

Personally, I will definitely admit a certain level of familiarity with Tolkien races. They have a rich pedigree and tons of content and thought spent on them. There is a rich lore and history that cements those races as staples of D&D. The newer races just don't have that same pedigree. To be...

I played Basic D&D when I was 10 years old and I play Basic (B/X and OSR retro clone equivalents) now as a 40+ year old. There is an enormous difference when we played as kids to how I play it now. Now, revisiting the rules as an adult and playing them as intended creates a much different...

I don't know what to tell you. That is not how it works for my group. I have already mentioned that group dynamics get handled fine in my games. Everyone (DM included) is coming to the table in good faith with everyone's best interest in mind. Players and DMs come with new homebrew stuff they...

There are a number of ways to decrease the deadliness of OSR games. Hirelings & retainers: The players can hire retainers and henchpeople to round out their group. They will likely siphon some XP away, but having a couple extra fighters in the party can improve survivability of the whole...

Absolutely not. Although, it may seem that way... Old school games tend towards the more deadly when you look at the character death and dying mechanics. And the OSR movement is an effort to play the games as written in the style of the original as it was played back in the day. Even then...

As I said. It is important for everyone DM and Players to act in good faith and work together to create a fun, safe, and engaging gaming environment. But at the end of the day, if a decision needs to be made, if a final determination needs to be given. The DM is the final authority. I'm not...

Sure it is best to work together to engender a fun and engaging game situation. Of corse every one should operate in good faith to look out for each other’s enjoyment. But the buck has to stop somewhere and that is with the DM. The DM is the final authority.

The DM is the final arbiter of their campaign. Who is right or wrong comes down to the DM making the final determination. Of course, players have a right to ask if a certain option is available in the campaign. The DM can then inform the player if that option is allowed. It is better if the DM...

As far as fudging goes. I don't do it as a DM. And I don't want it as a player. I've been playing D&D for 30+ years. I can tell when a DM is fudging. I don't really think you need as much experience as I have to tell. Your players will figure it out. If you have set your session zero up such...

I don't have any BBEGs in my campaign. I have a Brigand captain who lead 100's of mercenaires. I have an archmage nemesis seeking to steal arcane artifacts. I have dIvine champions opposing an upstart religion. I have ancient dragons holding sway over their domains. I even have a particularly...

I don't know all too much about Curse of Strahd. But I've always thought that Ravenloft was his domain. Nothing happens in Ravenloft without his knowledge or consent. Of course, if players use an effective strategy you should just run with it. The players out-thought you and they deserve the...

I've been away from the thread due to the holidays. I've followed some of the direct responses to my message but not the entire thread. I just wanted to state that I've reached the conclusion that this was a thing that's personally 'on me'. I've made my post a little more aggressive and...

Well this is a good point. I don't use feats. So if you eliminate feats, players take weirdo classes that grant them feat-like abilities, instead. So humans are rare and weirdo flying, swimming, animal PC become common. Because they need the weirdo special abilities. In the absence of feats...

Eh... not a fan. Think spell allocation should stay as is.

Well, when trying to run a human centric campaign. You have players playing anamorphic ostrich bards and dragon men and turtle people. I have to put limits down on what is appropriate for my game. But players expect to be able to play turtle people and cat people and elephant people. So I have...

I'll admit I'm an old school D&D player/DM. I've never discounted a player idea in osr or 5e, but I still wonder. Turtle people (tortles) flying people (aarokara), dragon people (dragonborn)... and so on. Why do people chose these races? To me, elves and dwarves have a human element. But...

I use over under initiative. Players all roll their normal initiative. I roll for monsters. Player who equal or beat monsters go first (any order), then monsters go, then players who lost go (any order) Roll initiative every round.