Search results

Are your players proactive? Are you good at taking notes? If so, you might want to check out Mythic: Game Master Emulator. The system is designed to help DMs generate an interesting, dynamic narrative with an emphasis on improvisation. Black Vulmea did an excellent write-up of a session on his...

My answer is edition-dependent. In 1st Edition I'd follow the rules for deity intervention (DMG pages 111-112). In 3rd Edition I'd likely call for a Heal check with the DC reduced by 2 (PHB page 64). In Mythic it would be a straight-up role on the Fate Chart, with the odds set based on the...

For a fatigue-based system to generally model human endurance -- let alone dwarven endurance! -- we would need to reexamine how much time a round represents, or substantially increase the number of rounds a combat lasts. A character falling unconscious after 5 rounds of combat really strains my...

I was under the impression that most of the criticism of resource mechanics for mundanes was because they were: a) pervasive and/or b) disassociated, and not because they were a resource mechanic per se. Hence why we saw backlash against the fighter but acceptance with the barbarian.

In 3.x the Barbarian's Rage ability was a resource. 3.x was a broadly accepted edition by D&D players. Cadence has already pointed out the Pathfinder Gunslinger and Swashbuckler. So, yes, I think the D&D audience will accept a mundane class having resources. They already have!

Mixed thoughts. On one hand, I like the general direction they are going with the game; and many of the changes to the mechanics. On the other hand, I am not sure I am interested in investing time and money into learning and mastering a new system. Plus, if I do decide to go with a new system, I...

I am digital. As are a couple of the other guys. I am assuming Wizards will have some digital tools for D&D Next. I am assuming Wizards will release the books in PDF format. Passing around laptops is not going to happen.

Indeed. Compared to many forms of entertainment, $50 is fairly inexpensive; and amortized over the life of the game may amount to mere pennies per hour of entertainment. That's a pretty good ratio of dollars to fun! However, it may only take a couple of players per group who are in a difficult...

Close. The wording was: [alignment] is the most dangerous alignment because..., slightly different connotations.

Undecided, but not because of price or content. Whether I purchase or not depends on if my group is ready to transition to a new gaming system. If they are content with our current system, then there really is no point for me to purchase a Player's Handbook.

You quoted a line that was a summation of my original post. I engaged the OP's question from a very selfish point-of-view; that is, what works best for me. I am fairly certain that for me it is more convenient to have one book to access information from rather than three.

I doubt that you and I will see eye-to-eye on this issue, Mistwell. If there is an option that affects the character sheet, then it belongs in the Player's Handbook. Magic items affect the character sheet, they belong in the Player's Handbook. It's just more convenient for the player, and at...

Doesn't this same reasoning also hold with races and classes? I mean, if I don't want gnome warlocks to exist or I want to make changes to how they work, then putting them into the Player's Handbook is a waste of space. :confused: At this point, for me, it is a practicality issue. Being able to...

Generally speaking, if it is something that has a long-term effect on my character sheet, then it should be in the Player's Handbook. So, that includes races, classes, skills, feats, spells, alternate class features, alternate race features, familiars and animal companions, equipment, and yes...

Indeed. I hold that opinion, as well. I want faster character generation and quicker play at the table. That doesn't mean that I want options expunged from the Player's Handbook, though. When I answered those same surveys, the complexity and play issues I was objecting to were mostly...

A couple points... First, lets not underestimate the capabilities of new players. There is room in the game to present players with some, if limited, options without creating a bloated system. I don't see my suggestion as being too far removed from what was done with Essentials. If I wanted to...

I disagree. Whatever ACF WotC ultimately chooses should be placed right alongside at-will cantrips in the Player's Handbook (assuming they use the three book model). I see no reason why the class write-up shouldn't say something like: Wizard Ability Pick one: At-will Cantrips or [Insert ACF]...

It's interesting, but players are often known for not liking game elements that affect them negatively (see 3.x experience point costs for certain spells, for example). Even though it is a short duration, I can see a lot of players not enjoying it. Personally, I like there to be some tension in...

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing while reading through the article. ... The literary themes present an interesting discussion, but I think those themes works best when they emerge organically from the players decisions as they interact with the setting. I don't think the DM preplanning...

My campaigns are almost exclusively run in Greyhawk. Exceptions have been: three forays into Ravenloft and one into Planescape (thank you Die Vecna Die!), and I ran Red Hand of Doom twice in its setting (and once as the Pomarj invading the Wild Coast). I am pretty invested in Greyhawk lore...