Search results

Another thing about making it a spell is that then turn undead can benefit from the hinted changes about making spells scale by slot instead of caster level. What we are seeing in the current spell is no scaling, because they haven't introduced that mechanic. Once they do, it will probably be...

If you have bad coupling, the above is true. That's what makes a mechanic embedded--having bad coupling in how the mechanic attaches to the thing (class in this case). If you have good coupling, not only is the above false, but counter-intuitively, using the mechanic in multiple places...

I don't know about the power of the spell, as it is early, and we haven't seen it used yet. I do know that I like it as a spell for the reasons that DefCon1 gave. If the cleric was using the old casting style, I might like it less, since it would have to be slotted each day specifically. But...

This is an argument for not embedding mechanics, not for singular or multiple. The whole idea of a module is that it isn't embedded. If you embed it, it may be a good class feature, but it not a module. That I picked that particular item out should not be construed as agreement with the rest...

In passing, part of my objection to 3E professions and crafts is that they have details flavored as if the system was such as simulation, but in no way deliver even a hint of what the flavor suggests. Meanwhile, they are overly fiddly for a quick-and-dirty system that only cares about results...

Not even then. If all you used fencing were straight attacks, a kid with one year of good training and average speed would eat you for lunch. Against someone more competent, you'd lose a bout 15-0 or maybe 15-1. Same way with boxing. All of these aspects get magnified as soon as you remove the...

It's the "progresses independently" part that makes it unlike 3E. So if a fighter pays the 5,000 premium to be able to start getting wizard XP, he can advance as fighter or wizard, each using the same chart, but not stacking the levels. I didn't talk about it in the original, but I was also...

Certainly. Well, ok--mostly. :D That is, if the designer binds the mechanics to the fiction, this is about as "early association" as you can get. I guess the only way that would be sooner is if there was some kind of master plan imposed by someone else that the designer was supposed to adhere...

I think this is what they intend, but with each class having perhaps a handful of such "conversions" spelled out in the rules as an option. If there are 20 spell-casting systems, they won't show you how to use every one of them with a wizard. They will pick out the 2-5 that are either really...

I'm fine with that as a design rule provided that the obvious corollary is also honored: If we don't have a good unique mechanic for some particular class, then we don't get that class. If they'd stick to that, great. I don't think they will stick to it, and I don't think they can come up...

That is, it's not "disassociated" but rather late associated instead of early associated. There are certainly different advantages and disadvantages to late and early binding, but there is nothing inherently borked with either. Now if when you go to look up something late, you can't find...

Here's a petty complaint spun off of something with perhaps more heft: The disparity in ability score adjustments between humans and the rest means it's somewhat of a pain to convert a character from human to something else or vice versa. We used the playtest pregens this weekend, but let...

I more or less agree with the analysis, but not the premise. Or rather, I disagree that the premise as implied fully accounts for all the choices. If CS is going to remain a niche thing, without much more scope than it has now, then I agree it should remain for the fighter, for the reasons...

As a kind of short-hand in passing, by someone that was just making a quick statement, I wouldn't have any problem with blurring the distinction. After all, people do that all the time. Heck, I do it all the time. It is understood to be a kind of short-hand, subject to clarification if and...

Dang, really must spread some XP! :) Only thing I want to add to that is that if said Grand Unified Theory of Ugly Shirts manages to drag in some really offensive concepts in the course of its bastardized, critical inquiry, then this is going to tend to drag the whole discussion down into the...

Yep, and we are once again back to the start of the circle, where it becomes clear that the essay "disassociation" is "the player is unwilling or unable to associate the mechanic, with something acceptable to them or the rest of the table, to the fiction." Which is about the person, not the...

I also got the impression from the wording of the announcement on the latest classes that the current configuration is a playtest thing, not set in stone. It's easier to test separate magic systems in separate classes, but that doesn't mean those magic system can't later be pulled out as...

Weapon and armor weights, comparable uses, rate of fire--those kinds of things are my proud nail. I can grin and bear it with D&D because I know why they did it that way. And I can even appreciate it as a game design element. But I have to keep the details somewhat at a distance during play, or...

I also like this because while theoretically it doesn't address the "mental", low hit point characters being harder to charm or confuse, in actual practice it often will. Those "physical" guys are out there getting beat up, which is knocking their hit points down to a lower level. Characters...

I don't think this is the primary goal at all. The primary goal is to get the majority of gamers from different factions to buy the product, and then sit down and play it with like-minded friends. On that criteria, I'm still wait and see, but think it has promise. That is, I like where I...