Search results

I've been playing with an idea for firearms: they do d10 damage, but they ignore armor and natural armor. It makes sense to me for modern firearms; maybe someone knowledgeable here can tell me if it makes sense for renaissance era guns.

I finally just got around to reading the 5E PHB, so, yeah, late to the party. I was pretty happy with the battlemaster. I love the idea of the warlord. I'm a big fan of the Black Company series and there are several awesome characters in the books that could be well represented by warlords...

I saw 2E as a cleaned-up version of the 1E rules. The flavor wasn't as good, but the mechanics were the same, just presented in a more intuitive form.

I'll quibble with this point. Aristophanes, who wrote his plays ~2400 years ago in Greece, is still hilarious to me today, and I'm hardly alone in this. There is some humor that seems to be universal.

Marvel led with Spiderman and DC led with Batman and Superman, whom most non-geeks know. Once they had established that they could make movies worth watching they moved on to the minor characters. This was good marketing, not much luck. D&D doesn't have any characters of such stature.

Looking at the popular geek franchises mentioned, they all have something that D&D lacks: strong, recognizable characters. The only character that comes close is Drizzt Dourden, and there's enough hate for him among the existing fanbase that he's probably not feasible as the main star. And I...

It's always been hard to nail down roles for D&D across the editions because there are so many things a PC can specialize in that affects combat. This is even leaving out primarily noncombat PCs like social, loremaster, or exploration types. Here's a short list: Single opponent damage...

I'd rather just have the DM make a call and move on with the game. I've seen rules discussions like this go on for entirely too long, and that's not what I'm at the game to do. Accepting a DM decision, even one I don't care for, and playing for the next hour is far preferable to spending that...

I suppose that depends on one's opinion of vegetarianism. :lol: (kidding) Seriously though, I don't dismiss philosophy entirely. But there are many ways people seek after wisdom - philosophy, religion, personal experience, common wisdom, case studies, leaders, etc, etc - and of these I find...

Using philosophical theories to inform real life behavior or anything remotely like it produces absurd results. Predictable but kind of funny.

Having experiences like those described in fantasy books and novels is exactly the reason I play RPGs. Having such experiences does not require scripted outcomes.

I don't know if this was your intent, but you just totally sold me on 5E.

I picked them both up on ebay pretty cheap a few years ago, as I'd lost the ones from my childhood. Of course my original copy of Mystic Woods then immediately appeared in the game cabinet somehow. Edit: Checked ebay and WOW! $550 for Fantasy Forest. I'm sorely tempted to sell my extra...

Fantasy Forest by TSR. Also Mystic Wood by Avalon Hill, one of my favorite childhood games.

This reminds me of a game I played in. We came to a ferry in the underdark and the ferryman demanded a most unreasonable fee. We chatted for several minutes, mostly jokingly, about whether we should pay or just kill him and take the ferry. The ferryman ran off in terror. We had intended this...

As an adventurer, a for-real member of the party? Never. But there have been plenty of henchmen, guides, people to be escorted safely, fellow travelers on a ship, rescued princess, etc. There's probably an NPC with the party at least 50% of the time.

You're ignoring the point that many folks new to RPGs haven't even tried roleplaying. The in game tactics I and others have mentioned in this thread have the goal of getting them to try them out. If they try them and like them, great. If not, then you're right about not trying to force them...

I really liked the idea of skill challenges but thought the implementation was really boring in play. I'm hoping WoTC introduces new-and-improved skill challenges at some point.

To me, metagaming is just having your PC act according to information that he doesn't have, but you as a player do have. I consider this a bad thing as it interferes with roleplaying and immersion, two aspects of RPGs that I enjoy. For folks that don't care about those two things, metagaming...

The finale in Ladyhawk immediately comes to my mind. Still, D&D doesn't model combat with sufficient fidelity for this type of thing to make a difference, so I agree, just let 'em pick it up.