Search results

You're not going too be able to 100% shove in all of the Iron Man lore that exists out there into your D&D game. Its ging to be adjusted, changed, modified. Heck, even adjusted, changed and modified based on what sources you find the most relevant Its inspiration from lore, but you're not...

I mean, you say 'Courage' but uh, I'm gonna be honest on this one? D&D since day 1 has always been a high fantasy thing that's about as far from low fantasy as you can get. The fact the base game comes with three fantastical races and two magic users right off the bat is pretty much indicating...

I want the wizard to have its own flavour. "A big list" isn't enough of a key identity in a game where you've got fighter, barbarian, rogue and ranger as seperate concepts. I'm not fighting for a wizard subclass because the wizard's mechanics are awful at emulating and don't live up to the...

I mean, I'll put this simply: That isn't good enough. That's a terrible thing to build a class identity around. That's bad design. Its that simple The wizard has the worst designed sub-classes in this game and should be re-designed from scratch. "Full access to a list" isn't an exciting...

It isn't stealing the spell list? The list is the Arcane Spell List. Anyone can grab from it. Sorcerers, artificers, bards, wizards and warlocks (along with certain other random sub-classes) all grab from the same list but I don't see you saying they're stealing from it. Its a universal list for...

Also has Aura Battlers as well. Just, called Spirit Warriors. But given they have a big three seater one named after the villain of a then-popular Aura Battler OVA and are. Giant bug mecha, that one's a little obvious if you know the source material (course Aura Battler Dunbine isn't as famous...

I get the exact opposite from this: The wizard isn't designed well, given it has no feature outside of being spell lists. That's not enough to build a class from. So we should be scrapping the wizard or making it the sub-class. The sorcerer ideas don't fit into wizard, but wizard can fit into...

Gamera isn't a dragon turtle! There is, however, a Spelljammer critter that is just Gamera

See I thought dragon turtles are more associated with the sea and ocean rather than swamps. Frankly stat wise, based on your average snapper, I'd be wanting to look more at red dragon stats without flying rather than black dragon. Because they're absolute tanks, and black dragons aren't.

I mean, I'd say a cavalier should moreso be a reckless, probably fast warrior, generally associated with horses Hot Rod from Transformers is a cavalier and I wouldn't really call him any of that

You're saying "Ditch the sorcerer because the mechanics aren't great". I'm pointing out previous classes that had downright disruptive mechanics to the game (Barbarian's whole no magic items and go after other party members BS) or just didn't work on a mechanically equal level to the same...

I disagree entirely. If we were deleting classes based on not having interesting mechanics, then Barbarian and Bard wouldn't have made it past 1E and Monk wouldn't have lasted past 3E, but those are three absolute mainstays of the game at this point that you can't just sub-class away. The game...

In my defence that thread also does get like, 30 pages a day so its a littttle hard to keep up with the current topic there at times

did we. really need this one necromanced while there was an active discussion going on with the same discussion Sorcerer isn't just "My ancestor made a deal with an entity" though. Its also "The blood of dragons runs through me" or "My bloodline received a divine gift in ages long past that has...

In 1E, a bard was some insane hybrid of Fighter/Thief/Druid, and I'm pretty sure even the biggest bard haters around don't want to go back to that hot mess. What do you see wrong, aside from the fact that 1E slapped on random pop culture names as different levels of magic user? Because I sure...

I've seen some freeform stuff done so I think its possible, just it needs to be carefully made as its incredibly easy to veer one way or the other. But its going to be complex no matter how you do it, and probably not exactly "hey its D&D the easy RPG that everyone's heard of and you can play...

But this also results in massive backlash as suddenly 'Bring the sorcerer back' replaces 'Bring the warlord back' as the big class request. The sorcerer has a longstanding tradition as a base class in the game, they're not going to scrap it because of one bad edition. If they were going to do...

Oh, completely fair But if we're saying "kill the sorcerer because its 5E interpretation doesn't have interesting mechanics" then, well, classes having good mechanics doesn't mean why they stick around and also by that justification I can kill off half the classes in the process, not just sorcerer.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'd gut like 75% of the classes and rebuild them from scratch if I had my way. Just, when sorc's on the menu, we at least know they can do better from playtest sorcerer, the ever inattainable dream. So that's at least the one we can go "We had a better option"

I mean, we had a whole edition of interesting mechanics and the fanbase by and large rejected it The Sorcerer has evocative flavour and is basically a ready-made backstory generator. The game should give it proper mechanics, not ditch it