Search results

Then I guess my response to that is: I know what I want out of pacing, and I, personally, cannot want "constant" pressure in the way you're describing it, where your only outlet is "it's not your turn". I know you've spoken previously about how "color" scenes are extremely important--and that...

I just would not be able to accept as realistic a world where nothing ever has a time limit on it. Again, I'm coming from a position where I'm very specifically saying: "Constant pressure is bad, it would upset most people." But just as I would be surprised at someone genuinely wanting to have...

I would not say that, as I presented it, it does. Some people are going to be good with lots of pressure almost all of the time. Some are going to be good with extreme pressure in bursts. Some, a slow and irregular oscillation. Some, a fast oscillation. But I think it's reasonable to say that...

I've called this out myself, very recently, within the last couple weeks at most. I was dismissed with, in brief, "It's in our imaginations, so that doesn't matter." I found that an unproductive, thought-terminating response, but I didn't see much point in digging further on that specific thing...

That's not what I was saying. What I was saying is that the GM does, in fact, need to apply pressure for there to be pressure. The way D&D--especially 5e, but all editions--is designed, it has to be the GM providing pressure, because the players functionally cannot pressure themselves, as they...

The problem, of course, is that constant pressure is absolutely exhausting. Like, you're right that the GM needs to do this, but the materials we get from WotC are...let's call it lacking in guidance or models to follow, at least thus far in 5e (whether 5.0 or 5.5). But the GM also needs to not...

So do I. Casting aspersions isn't going to help you on that front.

Exactly. "Tanking" in 4e actually meant controlling enemy attention, because controlling enemy attention was a thing you could meaningfully do, and the mechanics made it both worthwhile and necessary. In 5e, it just means being extremely survivable. And if your features have intimidated the GM...

You keep saying this as though you can't do both things. More importantly, the question was about min-maxing. Min-maxing for defense is a perfectly valid approach. That there might be other options doesn't mean this one isn't also min-maxing.

A 1-level Fighter dip is excellent for anyone aiming for a caster-martial mixed character: Bladesinger Wizard, Pact of the Blade Warlock, etc.--doubly so in 5.5e, where it gives you both a style feat and weapon masteries, on top of the Con save proficiency it already gave. Other than that...

Awesome! You can exploit that 'til Kingdom come, moving around the battlefield with impunity, and using all your spells for powerful utility effects rather than wasting them on combat stuff you never need to do. Doing a blade ward and a mirror image near the start of combat is plenty of benefit...

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

Bladesingers make better tanks than actual defense-specialized Fighters. Of course, it's even better if you start Fighter and then MC to Wizard for the remaining 19 levels. Shield for days, amongst other defensive benefits--and the 5.5e version of blade ward is an amazing tanking option. Start...

So, if you know, in your heart of hearts, that a particular design is actually bad--as in it will, objectively, result in problems at real tables, you KNOW that it will cause problems down the line--but you also know that it will sell super well for the next five years prior to folks getting...

And I have seen enough complaints now that I don't actually think 5e will last. It had a good run. Folks have seen the cracks now, though, and they're growing tired of the ways that their preferences got majorly, majorly compromised on/about. Obviously the 4e fans felt that right out the gate...

Your preferences, from everything I've seen, are: 2nd edition 5th edition 3rd edition/Basic (not sure relative ranking there OD&D/1e (again, not sure relative ranking) 2nd is far and away your favorite of the bunch though, if I've understood your preferences correctly. Like if we were putting...

It's only non-representative when it doesn't support you though. As soon as it does, it's super representative. That's part of the problem here. Like genuinely. The survey data isn't representative. Ever. That's why I'm calling for actual well-designed surveys, which take into account biases...

Indeed, the edition everyone accuses of requiring "lockstep" fights or the like says, explicitly, multiple times, in multiple places, "DO NOT exclusively run combats exactly matching the party's level, because that would be boring." But, as I've said previously, responses to a game often have...

An undiplomatic, but fairly accurate and very pithy, summary. PF1e is much the same way. When all are trying to address the same set of problems, one should expect the solutions to look similar, but not identical.

If what I said made you or others feel that way, then I apologize. That was a crappy thing for me to do. I still do think that it is quite possible for folks to hold beliefs about what is "correct" in design or execution which are built on a flawed foundation. Both because I've experienced that...