Search results

Yeah, it was only ok.

That's true, but I dont think a game for every taste is a bad thing.

This thread is label D&D General.

Of course, if the only thing you're doing is re-skinning skill use and reducing or eliminating spell slots, that's a straight nerf.

So if they had zero slots? Are they still casting spells, or just using class abilities that feel "magical"? I suppose in 5e you'd end up with something similar to warlock invocations, with different choices, schedules of acquisition, and flavor. In which case I'd be strongly tempted to make...

First if all, I haven't commented on the artwork, and have no issue with its existence. So let's not connect my comments to that. Secondly, there are many possibilities. Options for enhanced exploration and social challenges and general play, choices in PC abilities as you level, mass combat...

Yeah, my last game with my family they all dumped intelligence. It was quite frustrating as a GM because they wouldn't let me remind them of anything that had happened in previous sessions (beyond what they remembered themselves), because it wouldn't be true to their devil-may-care PCs.

I do run my own group, and far prefer to GM than play. Actually, of late I've enjoyed design, worldbuilding, and imagining game rules for existing fiction more than either. I'm not thinking about me really. Just musing on things I liked in the official game better in the past than today, and...

How much less? How many slots do you believe casters should have? Is this another stab at having all casters play like the warlock?

Who says every spell is available to every caster of every culture? Also, dispel magic is third level. How do we know they even have 5th level-equivalent casters?

I'm claiming that more preferences than just the majority can be catered to simultaneously, in some cases. Please stop turning my opinion into a binary.

You can always come up with a reason if you want there to be one. I'd rather not unless it's obvious, usually. And a lot of stuff we know in the modern world is because of modern tech and globalization.

IMO neither side should have that information unless they learn it in-setting.

I never said a majority. Smaller groups still matter.

That's a great way to do it in setting, but Saurials are clearly not a major species in the Realms.

If everyone's having fun, yes.

I very much believe that, yes. More than ever before in 5e (perhaps earlier).

Talk if you can (or gesture, whatever), whether through persuasion, bargaining deception, intimidation, or seduction. Or stealth. Or offering food. Or violence. Whatever it takes. People overcome challenges with other creatures without killing all the time, in fiction and in real life.

I'm not ranting. But D&D is by far the most popular RPG. You think everyone playing 5.5 is doing so because it's their favorite RPG and they wouldn't play any other game or version if it was entirely up to them? People on this forum have said otherwise. People play the games they do for all...

I don't think anyone said they "talked their way through every encounter" in 1e. PCs have a variety of tools in their box, including violence. It just isn't the only one.