Search results

Sure. But there is also room for mechanical subsystems that cover specific things, making it easier to use 5E for different subgenres and story types.

That is not the same thing as being good for this or that style of play or fantasy subgenre.

It was a great opportunity for WotC to introduce some of those tools into D&D. I used to love when each new Paizo AP would introduce a new subsystem integral to that adventure, always expanding on what Pathfinder was capable of.

Over the weekend, I listened to the brief (3 hour) lecture series "A Short History of Role-Playing Games" by Jamin Warren, from the Great Courses and available on Audible. In short: it is okay. It is definitely a "short history" and glosses over much of the kind of historical detail that...

I find it very strange when people will simultaneously argue that 5E is laser focused on making awesome dungeon crawling gameplay, but also is so general in its design that you can do anything.

5E has a pretty narrow scope for its mechanical implementation. So while you can do courtly intrigue or romantasy, the system does not help you in any way. Nor can you do world building kind of magic.

At the very least, that backlash surely contributed to Daggerheart wearing its inspirations on its sleeves and acknowledging all the elements it drew on from other games.

If the answer is neither on the character sheet nor in the rulebook, there is a distinct danger of failure to communicate. I am not saying that you can't play an RPG in that space, but people need to be clear about intent and adjudication -- and then write down what you did, because that's "in...

I avoided this series for a long time, mostly because I love the comics so much and I was afraid an adaptation would not be able to do the story justice. I just finished S1 and boy do I feel wrong and stupid for sleeping on it. So good.

Also, write this stuff down when you make a ruling. It isn't necessarily "law" but players appreciate consistency and when a similar situation pops up 6 sessions later, it is valuable to have a ruling to look back on.

Look, if it isn't a D&D killer, it is hardly worth doing at all.

It's pretty clear CO did not set the world on fire, but that should not be the bar.

I am pretty sure the adventure book was not by Darrington.

I am waffling. It kind of depends on how much time I have. But I also love random elements.

Just bumping this.

It isn't that. it is that people think, for soem reason, that they are supposed to like D&D because it is D&D, and when they don't, they don't know who to process that. When you are talking about good games that are lesser known or played, no one feels compelled to liek them. if you don't, you...

I think it is worth differentiating between actual "low prep" and moving prep around. Mostly, this is frontloading it: developing the setting and the factions and the NPCs and the locations so that during play, most of the responses are improvisational. But that isn't necessarily "low prep" if...

As usual with OSR style play,I think the answer is "it depends." I would allow an attempt at Disadvantage if the target was being noisy and/or in an obvious location regardless of sight. But if it would be impossible for the player to tell where the target might be precisely, then no chance of...

Then there is no argument to be made. Time travel can be anything. It's pure fantasy. It only has value as philosophical discussions about what to do with it.

Musing on convention game options: So I am wtill thinking about running "Power Lunch" the corporate portal fantasy thing, but I am also considering a convention West marches thing. I am thinking of bring a big, almost blank Hex map and let the players for every session explore however they want...