Search results

So, what else did you do with charactersheets to a game you didn't want to play anymore? Burial with full military honors? Burned them ritually in a shrine and scattered the ashes into the river? Sealed them in plastic and kept them in your safe?

I don't get this. All he did was tearing up a piece of paper (presumably to throw it away). What are you reading into this?

What's so childish about this? It's making a statement, like walking out of a movie you don't enjoy.

The missionaries are as bad a problem as the people who don't lose any opportunity to complain about the new edition.

Or just house rule it until it works for you. I don't really get why people complain about something they can easily change - especially with now 4 editions and their sub-editions to mine for ideas and mechanics.

I dislike the "and we split the enemy up in several groups, so the players can have several battles" way of running adventures. If the PCs would not defend a keep, dungeon or town like this, then the NPCs shouldn't do it either.

4E did something for the "raise dead means we can't really kill anyone" "raise dead means we can just raise the king, and ask who killed him" "without raise dead the game is too lethal" "with it it's too surreal" Debate. The "Only those with a destiny, aka PCs, can be raised" rule is a neat way...

As far as consequences go, I am in the "death is boring and counter-productive" camp. There's lots more to consequences of failure than death (aka "get raised after a time out" or "you get to change your build now, including name!").

I'd like to know if they offer more details about the two genasi states and the new Imaskari Empire. The FRCS was a let down, nothing really useful or detailed about those regions.

I don't want healing surges to permanently heal damage taken, since that just doesn't work well with my playstyle, narrative style and flavor expectations. That's all.

Well, in those cases, I'd rule that they are "held together" by sheer act of will (and some help from the gods), but their wounds are neither healing nor closing. They are effectively dieing still, just taking a few seconds longer. I would also rule that a bard's song couldn't keep them going...

I require people to hear a Bard to get inspired by him or her, so unconscious people don't get inspired. All other sources of temporary hit points I can think of right now are of magical origin, so they can temporarily staunch a wound.

It wasn't made clear. What was made clear is that for some players who like a more simulationist game, hitpoints without healing surges are kind of more acceptable than healing surges.

Do you want all classes to be easy to build and run (and maybe boring for smart people) or complex (and maybe frustrating for dumb/lazy people)?

Half the hitpoints seems too much, especially compared to the barbarian's rage. And I wasn't annoyed at the discussion going into a direction I didn't like - I was annoyed at the discussion going nowhere. To use a cooking metaphor: Our likes and dislikes are well known, we need no more...

I didn't know there was a steam-powered airplane that flew, but I recently read an article about it: Steam-Powered Airplane Video Some steampunk ideas could be gotten from this.

It's a two-way street. I would say (and did so, to players) that the more difficult their characters are to be motivated, the more active I expected the players and characters to be in game and in starting their own plotsand adventures. If the players don't want to be active, don't want to...

I mean, seriously, can't we focus on what we have in common, instead of trying to convert people who already play D&D? Better spend that energy converting more people who don't play D&D yet.

I don't want it triggered by others at all. Just the "I am not dead yet" effect of a seriously wounded character pulling himself together, lashing out at the enemy, and then, once the fight is over, collapsing, will to fight gone with the fight. I'll Check Raven's house rules. (And, Raven, I...

No, I am looking for people who can understand that they said their piece, and can agree to disagree, and argue without trying, for the nth time, to push their well-known, well-discussed and well-refused proposals up again. I read your arguments in many forms before in this thread, and they do...