Search results

Yep. Strongest classes in 3.5 are wizard, cleric, druid, psion, and artificer in some order. Get rid of the PHB, get rid of XPH, and don't use artificer (other Eberron stuff is fine), and you've got a system with a ton of versatility but none of the Tier 1 abuse of standard 3.5

I mean, even if 5e had a coherent cosmology of "power sources" (it doesn't), 5e seems to lean pretty strongly towards class being more methodology and not a 1-to-1 linkage between class and power source. 5e fully supports having a primal or arcane themed paladin, instead of divine.

"Not gonna like" or the related phrase "I gotta be honest here" are both used as points of emphasis mixed with some humility. It's presenting a narrative of "I know I might come across as a little silly, or not very serious, but what I'm about to say now is actually something I want you to know...

Honestly, the best way to power down 3.X is to not use the PHB (outside of core game functions like skills). Only using books from 2004-2007 is much more balanced than PHB games.

NGL = "Not gonna lie"

The desire to protect and provide for one's family/children, and the empathy to share our limited resources with others who are struggling, are both typically defined as "good"/altruistic, but that doesn't mean they can't be at cross-purposes. Whether or not a population tends towards "everyone...

Selfish genes outcompete altruistic genes. Altruistic communities outcompete selfish communities.

About 20 sessions of my Monday game (2 hrs each), 8 sessions of my weekend game (4 hrs each), and about 15 sessions of my Friday game (3 hrs) would put me decently over 100.

Sessions are roughly 3 hours. Between Dolmenwood, Daggerheart, Mork Borg, Sickest Witch, and Monster of the Week probably about 30 sessions.

Ultimately, the comparison between 5e24 and other editions doesn’t matter. What matters to people is the success of 5e24 compared to the hypothetical paths WotC could have taken instead.

Hmm. I mean, gamification is a real term. "Let's make a game of it" is a real-world phrase that has meaning. And the implication of those terms and phrases is that something can be added to a non-game activity to turn it into something that is recognizably a game. And that something to add...

The most obvious use to me is handing off a powerful concentration spell to a martial or other attacker (or your familiar) who can leverage it better. Haste or spirit shroud or greater invisibility come to mind. Or passing wall of fire or a summon spell off to your familiar.

It isn't too much for us dedicated nerd types. But for the people I have at my table whose only gaming is our once-a-month 5e game? Or even the weekly gamers I play with who are more vibe/storytelling types than "rules" people? That's where I see the pain points of the constant "if-then"...

When you apply it has rationales, but it isn't really intuitive unless you're just really familiar with the rule set. It boils down to each stat has 2 "modifiers" (the raw mod, and mod+stat), and it's extremely situational which one you use. (And of course the modifiers are different from...

I feel like the odds of having 2-3 characters die in the first few sessions, all of them choosing to roll to live (because they can't bear the thought of the -1 Hope loss of taking a Scar), and all of them failing is somewhere around 95%.

Proficiency bonus is the worst and I hate it. Outside of spells, it's easily the part of the game that confuses novices the most. Personally, I've found dice additions to flow faster at the table than addition of an additional constant. As long as the core resolution is (d20 + stat mod)...

Depends on the RPG, to my perspective. Various D&D versions? Sure, you can move into either a challenge-based game or narrative activity direction. But I'm not going to try to use Brindlewood Bay or Monsterhearts to try and make a challenge-based game. :)

It's a fairly major issue in this particular case, since wererats in A5E are hellaciously punishing compared to 2014 wererats. I mean, it's right in the stat block that they average 12 damage a hit if they have advantage, and they have 2 attacks (3 if bloodied), and they have pack tactics...

It's a frustrating article to see especially because this topic was litigated over and over again in the first few years after 5e's release, and the explanatory text in the PHB is unfortunately opaque enough to confuse people pretty easily.

Exactly right. 5e certainly has flaws, but the interplay between known spells and upscaling combined with the overall spell design is one of the system's main strengths.