Search results

Intelligence can't be perception, because animals wouldn't be able to spot or listen.

Severe MAD should be a goal for the game, IMHO. The problem with MAD characters is that SAD characters are so much better. And that's wrong. Every ability should be important to every class in some way. If you want to have a low stat, you should have some consequences. It's dumb that in 3e/4e...

Xmas tree (starting by Ye Old Magic Shop and magic item crafting, and finishing with stacking spells) System mastery requirement to avoid making characters that suck (ie: trap choices) SAD characters with dump stats (you should be able to dump a stat if you want, but it should bring a real penalty)

The best word for a period of time is Mississipi. "I explore the forest for three mississipis".

Do you think AD&D2e was unbalanced toward non-casters? Do you think in AD&D, fighters were much better than wizards? Let's see what did 3e mean to fighters: They lost the unique perc with physical stats: no longer able to have 18/00 str, or being the unique beyond +2 Con bonus to HP. They lost...

Players are always happy to have freebies. If you give them Cleave for free they'll be happy too. That doesn't mean it makes any sense that the sharpshooter has cleave, from a design point of view.

It's not going to happen, the Six are a big sacred cow. IF they weren't, I'd go with 8 ability scores: Fighting, Stregth Agility and Constitution (the old "FASE" from FASERIP in Marvel Super Heroes) as physical stats and: Intelligence, Intuition, Spirit and Charisma as the mental stats (with...

That's bassically it, yes. Let's suppose 2 classes, Mage and Thief. At first level, the Thief can do several things: 1) acrobaticly jump around the battlefield 2) stealth and sneak 3) killing people with sneak attack of 1d6 4) skipping the HP with some sort of Knock-Out or Stun "trick" On the...

Only if you think you can acomplish the feat to bring to the table both the very vocal 4e 4vengers and the very vocal 3e h4ters. For those more in the middleground, the fact that somepeople think it's too much like 4e and some others it's too little like 4e, means it's a compromise. Assuming...

There have been timid attempts. In 4e, rogues had a power, Knock Out, that bassically ignonred HP and take someone out of combat. But yes, I agree, that a fighter being able to "hold person" with Pummel (stunning for a duration, just like hold person does), or "casting" Fear with an intimidating...

I was explictly answering this: "One thing I keep hearing is that wizards are/were "overpowered" because they can do so many things that other characters cannot. "How can a fighter and a wizard possibly be balanced when the wizard can do things like fly, teleport, and turn people into frogs?!" "...

That's pretty much a standard thing in human behaviour. When somebody goes to a Hotel and finde a cockroach in the soup are probably going to write it in his Facebook status, write a letter to the newspaper, shout it to every people they find, and ask for a customer claim form to make their...

I like it so far. It's far from finished and polished (damage output is too big), but it's cool. I find incredibly funny that some people don't like it because it's too 4th edition, and some people don't like it because it's too little 4th edition. I guess those people really like either 4th...

I do see the big difference. And those warriors who faced the spartan phalanxes also did. Learning to protect yourself is almost instictive. Learning to open your defense to be able to protect your teammates isn't that easy.

PArry is self defense. Even a sharpshooter can learn to defend themselves, and Legolas do a few good defensive movements in the LOTR film for example. Same goes with a vanguard fighter with a big 2h axe. However, Protect others is a different beast. Not everybody is trained on it (that's why...

The problem in balance is not that wizards can do things that fighters can't. The problem is that fighters CAN'T do things that wizards can't. If the wizard could fly, teleport, and turn things into frogs, it might be balanced with a fighter ability to stand punishment, instantly slay enemies...

It says an optional system with facing. If some group want to play with facing it's good that they have the option (and it's something that is mentioned here and there with people asking for it. For example, with stealth rules) Why? Does it matter? If some group want to play purely encounter...

I'd rename Wisdom as Intuition and get rid of the Willpower part of it, which should go to Charisma. But it's not going to happen, as renaming the stats is way beyond the scope of 5th edition, because it wouldn't look like D&D.

This. When deciding if a class feature should be free for all the class, or a chosen player option, I always think three different archetypes and see if it does make sense. Does Protect make sense for every fighter archetype? Knights, sure. Myrmido bodyguards, phalanx soldiers or me at arms...

But the d10/d12 has other possible benefits, such as being random. This is useful for things like the rogue skill tricks. If you go with the 0-5 route (which I like more than the dice, for that matter), you need to change the rogue skills and build something different.