Search results

i've probably already said this in this thread but given it's inclination to disappear and resurface every couple of weeks it's probably worth restating, i really liked what baldur's gate 3 did conceptually with favoured enemy(admittedly focused on humanoid archetypes than creature categories)...

'railroading' is not primarily used as a metaphor, it's used as terminology, but in the metaphor that represents the terminology, the tracks only go to one location, through one pre-established route, with no deviations or branching paths allowed for the players on the train, saying things like...

i dont really know much about what the 4e gnome identity was besides 'i'm a monster, Rawr', could you enlighten me?

gnomes IMO ought to be a 'nature spirits' archetype but Wizards likes the tinkerer ideas too much for them to really play into that.

same, and then they built the '24 version around it and a part of my soul died on seeing that design choice.

if i might offer a middle position, the ranger is a collection of several mostly interrelated concepts but with a few that some people deem unnecessary or undesirable on their ranger(magic and animal companions are the first thar come to mind), and it's difficult to have a single class that does...

I can see where you’re coming from but I disagree with your first (and third) points, especially considering a 20th level character, a level 20 pc with 20 spell points (15+max mod) the difference between a 1st and 2nd level or 3rd and 4th level spell is negligible, for 20th level i think id...

i'd like to see an attempt at a spell point mechanic where, rather than progression happening by you getting a bigger pool of spell points to cast higher spells that cost more, as you level up it costs less points to cast spells of increasing levels. so like, at 3rd level you have 15+mod spell...

it was never decided it was a weapon for fighting dragons, it was decided as a weapon for 'humans' to fight each other and then they just extended those damage values to cover fighting every other creature they could think of without considering if anything ought to be altered in the process.

Oh, entirely did not notice that under the robes.

no more than i would also mistake the first one too, what's the difference? the first has more whiskers?

well it's at least longer than a dagger.

this reminds me of conversations about people who think superman stories are inherently going to be boring because he's invincible and super strong, but writing for superman isn't about if he can beat the bad guy into submission, we all know he can brute force his way through all his enemies and...

i don't think we need another more niche skill, we just need to give nature, arcana and religion more opportunity to pull their weight in identifying creatures and their weaknesses

very much not in the spirit of the rules like people have said IMO however, there's a small chance i might be convinced to let them if they agree it counts as already using their magic action for their next upcoming turn, still hesitant to do that though, wouldn't want to set a precedent on...

eh, i was just aiming for a low bar of better scaling damage or bigger AoE and more consistent use of breath weapon/flight but yours is good too.

now imagine how well they'd be doing if they took that innate cool concept and added good design on top of it!

you know, sometimes i wonder if the designers put the knowledge skills in the game for like, a purpose or if they and their bonuses are just there as decoration on the character sheet (a similar thought is had about social skills)

at least fizbans made the adjustment that it only replaced a single attack rather than your whole attack action, that made it feel so much more able to slip into your action economy on alot of classes, and the ones that it didn't were the fullcasters who didn't get extra attack.

you mean how GWM/SS builds outclassed what they could achieve in damage so much it made them seem underwhelming by comparison?