Search results

I feel much the same about Brom. I don't get it. I'm glad some folks do, but it's overrated to me. This, unsurprisingly, means I also don't get the Dark Sun love.

Right. The rules don't say any species are more rare than others. So don't design a setting in a way that forces players to contort their backstories just to play a specific species. Make the setting cosmopolitan and species agnostic. Or at the very least write each species in a way that every...

I mean, that works too. The tendency to want some species be rare and others common is leftover nonsense from previous editions, beholden to "realism" in a world that doesn't warrant it.

The setting is a nexus Demi-plane that draws from all worlds. The setting is very old where the entire civilization is completely cosmopolitan and job/background has a much greater impact. The gods ordained that the world would be evenly divided amongst their people. Each species has one god and...

Hear those crickets? They're why people post click bait and hot takes.

So, in the place the PCs are likely to be from, a significant few of the PC species options are rare? yeah, this is why 5.5E needs a setting of its own.

Did you ever get a test print back? I'd still love to buy this map.

What people respond with when asked for "under rated" or "obscure" media things tells you A LOT about them.

I went with this. Looking forward to it.

I am not positing a setting. I am saying D&D 5.5 should have a setting made specifically for it. I think we can all imagine what sorts of elements might be incorporated intoa setting to make it unique while still allowing for "if it is in the 5.5 core books, it is in this setting." Settings I...

White space is useful, but it isn't the same as intentional system design. not every GM is capable of easily adjudicating every kind of situation not covered by the rules.

At least as far as I can tell, DH is getting a lot of actual play. I don't think it is a shelf game.

More geek things should be stand alone. One season of a show. One movie. One novel. One comic miniseries.

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.