Search results

I have a few of those. The Stormlight Archives one and another that I can't remember. They were fun, but not so much fun that I wouldn't rather play D&D or a better board game.

I really don't know how you got there from "a few tweaks," but okay.

There were supposed to be two, but my morning brain forgot to type in Lords of Waterdeep. :p

I rarely reply twice to the same post, but since you've already seen my other response... There are two exceptions to the D&D adjacent board games that I forgot about. Tyrants of the Underdark and Lords of Waterdeep. They don't play in anything like a D&D like manner, the way Gloomhaven and...

D&D actually does a really good job at that with a few minor tweaks. You also need a really good DM, though, because a DM who doesn't know how to set up and run political intrigue is going to bring down any game set around it.

Gloomhaven and more. Personally, I don't go in for the Heroquest/Gloomhaven types, because if I want to get that D&D adjacent, I'm going to take one more step and play D&D. Right now my friends and I mainly play, The Lost Ruins of Arnak, Terraforming Mars, SETI, Ark Nova, and Apiary.

There is no ability that the game gives to the players to rest unbothered and in a time stop, so it can't be railroading to say no to something they don't have as part of the game. The game provides that you can long rest with the possibility of interruptions, time passing outside the rest...

Unless the party is evil, it's going to matter to them some way, some how. If the party is evil, the hero(not villain) getting away is going to matter to them in a different way, because an evil party has different priorities.

Sure, you can play D&D like a boardgame, but of all the playstyles you can engage with D&D, boardgame is the one D&D is the worst at. It's just not good. If I want to play a boardgame, I'm going to pull out a real boardgame that is designed to be a lot of fun, not D&D.

Except no. From True Strike. "The attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity." This is what I mean. You need to read everything and stop trying to use things in isolation to win the internet. That sentence sets the context...

I remember. I also remember them telling us that they were radical and would likely fail.

Yes, but my point is that they are only adjusting a small portion of it. Most of the work is set in stone before it ever gets to us. Basically, they're building the car and we are picking what color we want and whether we want air conditioning or navigation.

You can't design anywhere near an entire game by consultation and the 70% mark. It's inevitable that you will get individual things that get to the 70% mark, but when put together make both worse or are downright incompatible. There's a reason that Design by Committee is a well known bad way...

Wouldn't the financial success be better if it sold super well for more than 5 years?

Not really. If it were, you would do damage even if you miss. The attack as a general rule can either hit or miss. If you hit, you then move on to damage dealing. An attack itself deals no damage. Hits do. The rules lump it together kinda sorta, but it's separate rolls. Once for the...

Unless you are arguing that I can walk into a store and any weapon I buy can do radiant damage if I choose, the spell is breaking the natural laws of physics simply by empowering the sword with that energy(used or not). And if the caster is 5th level or higher, the radiant energy emerges...

You need to read better. I said the SWING OF the weapon(the attack) does no damage. I never said the impact of the weapon(the hit) does no damage. Just that the attack doesn't.

Which just adds more evidence that it isn't the spell that is doing it. It's you. If it were the spell, your stat wouldn't matter. The bonus from Bless is a good example of a spell that is providing the bonus.