Search results

this is more curious speculation but, i wonder what DnD 6e would be like if it fully abandoned spell slots for a spell points/mana structure like final fantasy typically does, spell levels could stay pretty much as they are i think (you can't learn a 3rd level spell before you're fifth level)...

this may not be what they intended with the metaphor but i took it to mean 'yes, these spells exist, yes, their existence should definitely be acknowledged and accounted for, but just because they exist that doesn't mean their existence is definitively beneficial or should be gleefully embraced...

while i don't know what terms those tags specifically refer to they aren't used in 5e so it's a little bit of a moot point, however there's references to being empowered by 'primal energies' in the description of rage and similar indications in the flavour of many of the rest of the barbarian's...

regarding the discussion of 'trunk and leaves' class design metaphor, i'd like to see design allowing much more sharing of leaves between trunks, and even some bits of trunks being turned into leaves, reduce the amount of redundant subclass design and increase the ways you can play a concept, if...

this is sarcasm...right?

wasn't half the original point of tucker's kobolds to make the low CR, outclassed monster punch above their weight?

i feel like this would be have horrible consequences for martials, we already have them so limited to barely 'guy at the gym' standards and stating in such plain language that 'magic is the only way to be exceptional' would be the final nail in the coffin for worthwhile nonmagical characters.

I think I disagree with everything here except the one about the art

i assume it's that fallacy of belief where people vote for something assuming they'll be one of the ones on top and living the high life rather than being crushed in the wheels of the system. that and/or just seeing Good as some sort of 'con' where they'll be forced to give up their hard earned...

these two posts touch on the biggest reasons i find alignment so enticing, DnD is kind of built on and full of these tropes about cosmic forces and various entities associated with them: gods, demons and devils, mystical creatures, sentient objects or wards that keep the unworthy from entering...

never played 4e myself so i've never really managed to grasp what differentiates the druid from the warden, but when i say split the shapeshifting from the druid i mean split it properly, flavour and all, make the resulting class closer to the sorcerer's concept (not as a caster, i don't mean...

i've come to the conclusion for a while now that druid needs it's 'shapeshifter' aspect to be fully split off into it's own thing from it's 'nature caster' core.

separate more avenues of post-character creation customization away from class level/progression, like, is there a good reason why your acquisition of ASI/feats is tied to your specific level of training as a ranger, warlock or whatever rather your character's competency(level) as a whole.

i agree casters need to go down but the two concepts can meet in the middle. if it's a new edition you can build it up from the ground to be less tied to combat.

there's already been some suggestions i agree with, throwing in my own few cents -species to have their mechanical identities strengthened. -class versatile subclasses (i don't mean prestige classes but i do want those too). -some sort of martial system to rival the effectiveness of spells...

all the posts which emphasized what qualifies a railroad as denying the agency given to the players actions during the adventure rather than their lack of buy-in to the premise?

okay perhaps my choice of example was a little poor, what with the diverging parties and storylines, aragorn, gimli and legolas probably got the bulk of the 'intended questline' to fill in the distance from moria to mordor but we all know that the destination was never going to be anything other...

both railroads and linear adventures have a final destination intended and the path to that destination outlined, the difference is that a railroad is more like an extended sequence of scripted cutscenes where your character is basically a passenger in the story and there was only really one way...

mostly because people don't associate those negative connotations with the term sandbox, and some of them are just outright untrue.

i said nothing about the difference being player buy-in, the destination is fixed in both cases, in linear and railroad, but how you get there, what you choose and are able to do at the stations, who you pick up or help along the way, those things matter in a linear adventure. i rather feel...