Search results

Like................what exactly? I can't say I'm used to seeing anything like an armor clad healing spellcaster with a religious bent anywhere BUT D&D. I would really like to see them cite an example of this that doesn't come from a D&D novel or a video game based on D&D style fantasy.

Yes, I do. If the idea (race/class/whatever) isn't sound or doesn't interest me, I could care less what the game system aspects of it look like.

It amazes me that that so many people (apparently) use grid and minis. Nothing (at all) wrong with that, it's just that I haven't used minis since the 80s...which was about the last time I saw them used for D&D. It always seemed that the miniatures using contingent of the player base was a...

Hear hear. Of course, Wizards has only rarely been able to put out adventures that aren't grindfests*. Get the freelancers to write them and I'm totally with you on this. * And really, we don't need so much as one more BBEG who is another damn half-dragon.

Hm. No option for 'yes I want a vancian wizard but less so the cleric.' Though options to change this for both classes would, ultimately, be nice.

I've given up on all of the nitpicky speculation but once (if) those playtest documents come out, I expect my interest shall peak once again.

None. Culture should be dictated by role playing and character creation - skill selection and so on. Themes could also be of great assistance in this matter.

In the past few years I've hit this sweet spot where about 90% of the characters I play or create are human, with the rest of them being half-orcs, half-elves (i.e. some more exotic flavor of human) and a smidge of halflings (which I have, or once had, something of a soft spot for).

Why are we assuming this is legit? I mean, it could be, but I don't see anything terribly compelling to make me believe that it is.

If they're going to shoehorn this "extended rest" type thing into the game, then this is how I would prefer it be implemented, but I think it should remain optional.

I opted for no, but then I think the plusses of a weapon should only add to damage.

Awesome! Thanks Joe.

For some time now, I've had this desire to see a Bard as almost a specialist wizard - a class that is all about the "singing galdur." The class would specialize in enchantment/charm, creation, and restorative spells. Almost an arcane cleric with a dash of Obviously, gets bonuses for...

I would be perfectly happy if raise dead and the like were simply unavailable at levels below 7th-9th, depending on how the game's levels scale. There's just something about some low level scrub being brought back from the dead that trivializes it as a story element for me. Of course, I tend...

Interesting. Not that I have any desire to go back to the "AC runs backwards" era, but it's not something that would stop me from opting into a game as a player.

Ah okay, that's probably it then. I only really have clear memories of the first, oh, seven or so, with bits and pieces of the rest, so I might well have missed her.

Not sure what you mean - I don't recall any artwork looking like the stuff on display at her site from the original DL modules. Caldwell, Elmore, and Easley I recall but not anyone else...and certainly nothing like that. Maybe I'm thinking of a different set of products than you are?

Isn't that most of them though?

Link I like the notion of player complicit complexity, regardless of how the classes balance out, but I'm still a bit skeptical as to how they can implement this. Otherwise, I find a lot of what he says reminds me of one of the 4e design mantras (I don't recall whose it was though) "Down...

From what? Without knowing what's wacking at the fighter, this is a pointless question. Having said that, I should prefer that a beginning fighter be able to take two solid hits (defined as at least a d4 of damage, rolling high) before having trouble, but should still be able to keep going...