Search results

Just like fast cars are required for fast driving, It would be definition require high level games to have high level play anyone can have a low agency high level one shot. Trouble is the fact that in wotc's zeal for simplicity one shot resulted in a situation where they designed against the...

That bold bit cuts both ways, but this is a discussion about why higher levels get less play not purchasing considerations. The post wasn't about what people like and neither was the tangent discussing how the encumbrance rules are insufficient in specific ways that make high level play more...

Regardless of if a well designed encumbrance system can be done in d&d without invoking Barbie: "math is hard", what 5.0 & 5.5 gave us is just that. It's on the shoulders of those pushing for simplicity to explain such a system and describe its merits to d&d gameplay. Shaking a finger at a...

The hulk comic book character is written for a different medium that builds the character covering a different scope of "story" than d&d. Some of those differences are things that are mostly/totally off the table when it comes to having a meaningful impact (IE the green guy/banner disagreement...

That sounds more like the result of bad information or well meaning but misunderstood logic. I think that the responsible & functional version of that is to change "flood" to "appropriately award based on party composition & differing levels of CharOp in order to adjust the individual PCs as...

The point was about participating in the play test. That would have involved the play test forums wotc ran and associated surveys on play test packets.

Being alive "during" the dndnext play test and participating so they could contribute to it are very different things. Once again you are talking about something entirely different than the post you are responding to.

The dndnext play testing that created 5e started 13 years ago in 2012.. a 25 year old today would have been in middle school at the time... Are you claiming the next play test was significantly shaped by grade schoolers?

Going to agree with this and give an example of that specific bit. Mearls recently did a q&a/interview where he mentioned the old dc chart that did not have a dc for climbing a wall covered with butter. While his example could have been thinking of dc30 climbing a slick wall, it overlooks the...

Quantity of the single style of high level campaign supported doesn't even pretend to acknowledge that differences in style wrt agency and the world as discussed when this came up are even possible. Your tunnel vision on 5e's single supposed style is so deep that you can't even consider...

We were not discussing the ability to run "a" high level campaign. This came up because of how 5e simplifies and streamlines away so many of the subsystems that support the GM in running broader styles of campaign other than low agency one shot string style.. that takes more than "A" high level...

The level of effort in ignoring the point is painful. It doesn't matter what they were deliberately making design choices to simplify for whole not considering the results of those deliberate choices on other areas of play. The end result of deliberate design choices in 5e is still that only...

Deliberate design for simplicity. That deliberate choice has consequences. Some of those consequences impact things you yourself stated that wotc doesn't consider

Perhaps morality is the last link in the chain that snaps with the bomb in injustice, but it doesn't change the result of losing his obligations and responsibilities [to the world] with the death of Lois and the unborn baby. Ironically Superman probably balances the budget while creating a...

Responsibilities are the difference between world of cardboard and injustice . I don't agree with everything upper krust wrote, but it's critical for high level PCs to need their player to care about the world once the game reaches high levels and it causes problems for high level play when...

That kind of blame shifting to excuse 5hr result of deliberate design choices is not made is not relevant. By actively choosing to endlessly design for simplify & streamline to the monorail song tune, 5e actively makes choices that also impact what styles of high level play. Not considering...

There is a wide ocean of difference between running a one shot or even a series of pseudo one shots that happens to be done at a high level compared to actually running an ongoing game at high levels that leans closer to sandbox than one shot. The mechanics I mentioned are examples of...

I remember owning the ELH and never even seeing 3.0 core books. It wasn't until years later I realized that the ELH wasn't a 3.5 thing. The ELH was probably hamstrung more significantly by focusing on a level range well after the system started and thoroughly broke down. As a simple example...

I don't think Nevin was taking about the GM needing to pull out that elephant because the players used high level abilities to win a fight. High level abilities are things that reshape the very foundations that reality is built on and the rest of his post gives multiple great examples of NPC...

Running high let gameplay without just treating it like a high level one shotis a totally different skill set that needs a lot of mechanical support that usually only starts becoming somewhere in tier2 of play andsn't really have it's value start to bloom until the solar death ray of tier3...