Search results

Ok, let me get back on topic here - 4e Essentials. The reason I think there might be a transition barrier is that the Starter Set is only 96 pages total. The combat chapter alone in the PHB is 32 pages. The full Rules Compendium is slated to be 320 pages. The numbers suggest to me that the...

Speaking as someone who has played quite a bit of both, my experience is that they are quite compatible (I'd say about 95%). Modules written for Basic (any version) are usable with AD&D (either edition) and vice versa. Actually, a lot of people who play the old editions mix AD&D (both...

I got my D&D Expert Set (Mentzer edition) and my D&D Master Set from Toys R Us. (Basic and Companion from Consumer Distributors and Immortals from Kaybee Toys) The old BECMI box sets were readily available at major chain stores back in the mid 80's. If it wasn't for D&D showing up in the big...

The simplified format and limited choices only exist for levels 1-3. After that, you need to dive into the full Rules Compendium if you want to play levels 4-30. There might be a contingent of players that want to stick with the simplified format and limited choices over the whole 30 levels...

There are a lot of classic boardgames like Risk, Monopoly, Scrabble, etc. that have done quite well for decades even though they only require the purchase of one relatively cheap set. I'd love to see Hasbro/WotC put out a simple, single-box version of D&D that would be available at big stores...

I think I'd start with one core rulebook and make it concise. Something very similar to the 1981 B/X edition. I'd make the following three changes, though: 3e-style attack rolls and ascending armor class; the old 5 saves condensed into fortitude, reflex, and will (but they would still be...

There are already a multitude of roleplaying games that are free of D&D tradition. If you create a "new" D&D that's free of D&D tradition, then you would be creating yet another non-D&D roleplaying game and then sticking the D&D logo on it. The only reason to do something like that is if you...

Interesting. The starter set is two books: 32 & 64 pages. That sounds reasonable for newbies, but I'm surprised that it only covers levels 1-3 in that 96 pages. So, starting at level 4, players are expected to buy/read two more 300+ page books (over 650 pages total)? DMs would require even...

1. Streamline & simplify - the game is way too bloated. 2. Put the focus back on dungeon crawling. Right now, the focus is too much on the combat aspect of the game. There should be a lot more focus on exploration/adventure. 3. Make grid and minis optional. I know this might eliminate a...

You're right. I forgot about the cap. The group I played in didn't use the damage caps for spells. Still, any spell with a level variable will be more powerful if cast by a bard than if cast by a mage with an equal amount of experience points. This distortion gets very noticeable in...

Thoughts on 2e: - I really like the fact that the monk and assassin classes were removed. - Demi-human level limits are sky-high, which make humans clearly the weakest PC race. I rarely saw human PCs in 2e campaigns. - Bards cast more damaging fireballs and lightning bolts than magic-users...

Ask if they'd give me a good deal on their books. :)

You can play the game any way you want, but there are a lot of old-schoolers who think that those things actually detract from the game rather than add to it.

Very similar rules also exist for two weapon combat in Basic D&D. I think they're in the Master's Set and the Rules Cyclopedia.

D&D has been emulating video games since 1978? That's funny, because my 1e Player's Handbook doesn't say anthing about a pong paddle character class...

As others have said, treating death like a speedbump is a high-level D&D tradition. If characters are powerful enough to physically travel to the homes of the gods, then why shouldn't they be able to call a soul back and return it to its mortal body? Epic characters may not fear death, but...

If we don't get Greyhawk, then I'd at least like to see some kind of setting that's based on the old fantasy classics: Howard, Leiber, Moorcock, Tolkein, Vance, et al. If WotC doesn't do it themselves, then I hope that they'd give a 3rd party permission to do it.

Simple: As a DM, if I don't like a class or if it doesn't fit my campaign, I'll just tell the players they can't use it. I didn't allow monks in my 3.5 game. My campaign was based on medieval Europe, so monks simply did't exist. If I ever run 4e, I'll do the same thing.

I'd say he was a wise man. The common consensus among 1e diehards is that the 1e barbarian, cavalier, and acrobat classes are poorly designed. A lot of 1e DMs won't allow them. Ever wonder why all three of those classes got dropped when 2e came out?

I love the 1e cover, but I think that something like it would be a bit too hard-edged for WotC. They wouldn't use an evil idol unless it looked cartoony and they'd never put bloody corpses on the cover! I'd love to see them do the 4e covers!