Search results

It may be scenes, but it's also just good basic Dungeon design. Dungeons work best when, on top of whatever else players are doing in the dungeon, unravelling the mystery of the dungeon, what it is, how it works, what the history is, is a part of the game.

With D&D I do dungeon delving, because if I don't I'm not really sure why I'm using this game and not something else like 13th Age which I feel does dramatic scenes better. (Or a non D&D game entirely) But when I do dungeons I do it in a much more modern way. My touchstones here are things...

This is seriously why pretty much why we all hated elves in my last group

This is kind of my issue wth Genasi. For one genies are kind of just fey from a different part of the world, and two genasi and half-elves are both kind of filling the same niche of 'humans but a little bit more interesting'. (Tieflings also use to be here too, but that changed somewhat with 4e).

THis is interesting and I'm surprised it didn't receive much comment. This is a dramatic change from 2017! Elves use to be no. 2 and Dawaves number 4! Half-Orcs have leapt up from 9 to 5. Perhaps this is generational change, with new players no longer having a particular attachment to the...

Is Your D&D Character Rare?

Where does this idea the noone plays halflings from? The data I posted was from 2017, but if there's something more recent where is it? In 2017 the only non Players Handbook race more popular than Halflings was Genasi. That's an argument for including them in the PHB, but it's Gnomes who need...

It seems obvious to me that when people want balance they mean "within acceptable tolerance". Therefore a game is generally considered well-balanced when a significant number of people agree that it is within what they feel is within acceptable tolerance. Everything else to me just seems like...

Yuck. There's bat guano on everything.

Outlander is a background and yet the Barbarian and Ranger are classes.

No that's rubbish. What that really means is that the skill system is not a problem if the GM works around it.

Effective yes. Interesting or fun? No.

The Samurai level 7 feature is actually quite good. The problem is 1) you don't get it unti level 7, and 2) It's attached to the rest of the Samurai subclass.

Then everything I said can safely be added to the Fighter. The elite warrior throughout history, your Knights, your Samurai etc don't just study hitting people with pointy sticks, they study war, and are expected to be able to inspire lead and direct your basic warriors.

Honestly giving Fighters more skills doesn't really achieve that much. The skill system in 5e is pretty awful. The random element overwhelms the actual skill to a significant degree.

Honestly the problem is basically this. Fighter: Guy who fights Barbarian: Guy who fights and has a little bit of nature skills and does seem to get more skills fairly randomly as he levels up. Ranger: Guy who fights and tracks and hunts and has some nature magic. Paladin: Guy who fights and...

I'm not sure I buy that a Fighter should spend so much time fighting that they don't have time to learn skills. What does proficiency actually mean in Arcana, it is like having a Masters or PHD? How much time does the Rogue spend learning their sneak attack? What about the Bard? Lots of...

I reckon you could just roll Purple Dragon Knight and Champion into one subclass.

Yes. But the thing is, if Planeshift is on the table, then something like was posted by Pemerton below should be at some point. The issue is the idea that only casters get the tools to accomplish mythic things. Now I know that a lot of people don't like giving martial characters access to...