Search results

I am SUPER disappointed in D&DTube. No one is talking about class design. For shame.

I understand your point but we really, really should not be beholden to player expectations.

Nothing in 5E stops you from doing that. There are literally hundreds of resources out there for making 5E monsters unique. That's not even to mention that 5E doesn't even rely on particularly tight math, so just vibing unique traits is completely acceptable.

I don't see how it is an important distinction. The difference between playing B/X and OSE is almost entirely aesthetic.

Tweak the stats and reskin everything. Best of both worlds.

Force Points exist in the fiction of the game. They are just a resource.

All of the Lord of the Rings was filmed in New Zealand. Rivendell was filmed in Kaitoke Regional park.

I think for it to actually be metacurrency, it has to be a player resource, not a character resource, that manipulates the system, not anything that exists in the world. Other wise it is just another mechanical abstraction (like hit points of skill ranks or whatever).

I am currently running a 2024 campaign, which I am pretty sure will be my last 5E campaign.

I did a search and could not find a recent thread, so I thought I would start one. Here we have a thread to share bits of natural history and geography we have discovered that are powerfully inspiring for TTRPG campaigns. The only real rule is No Human Construction. I will start with this: The...

They did not "ruin" dragons. D&D dragons have always been meant to be used at all levels of play -- which is convenient given the name of the game. I love city buster, apocalyptic warms too, but that isn't what dragons are "supposed to be" any more than St George style angry crocodiles.

This is a thread about mechanics, not game theory or philosophical sniping. Please take this line of discussion elsewhere.

I'm a big fan of "every monster is unique." There is A CHIMERA, and A GORGON, etc...

This show continues to be one of the best on TV. Ep 7 was righteous.

I want to be clear: public playtesting in general is not merely performative marketing nonsense. Game companies that give people the time and materials to really test a thing are doing it right. That's not what WotC does.

Putting out a new class and asking for responses a month later is objectively on its face performative. It is the playtesting version of day 1 reviews of campaign level adventures. It is nonsense. It is marketing. It is worse than useless because at best you get white room theory warriors...

Not a criticism of your preferences or anything, but i really like watching Mercer run CR combats. Ill watch clips of their jokes and emotional moments all day, but I really love to deep dive the fights (especially after watching how they did it in the animated series).

I literally don't believe that. It is actually worse if WotC "listens" because only the most vocal and most always-online fans respond. That means D&D development is steered by the people you want steering it least. I'm a game designer. I don't believe you should ne engineering your design...

So what are folks broad feelings? Worth watching?

No. I am saying that WotC specifically is using their playtest format as performative marketing.