Search results

The 4E Monk at least. Man I had a lot of fun with that one. Even the A5E Adept and Laser Llama's Alternate Monk haven't quite had the same level of 'you're martial arts legend, you're Jet Li/Jackie Chan/JeeJa Yanin' as the 4E Monk.

...I don't think that's the point. Magic makes you more powerful than not having magic. But so does being really good at fighting.

It would take a lot to get me to buy into a new edition of D&D at this point so I'd honestly rather they wait as long as possible and let me defer that decision.

Gnomes aren't tough!

Screw 70s Orientalism, but you can pry monks from my cold dead hands.

Honestly it wouldn't surprise me that for Muls they just said 'use the dwarf statistics but your height range is 6 to 7ft.

When I was running a Dark Sun game in 5E I made a big chart of every class and subclass that showed which ones preserved, defiled, or neither. I actually just had Sorcerers not exist as a class except a Defiler in the setting actually invented one rather like the new UA by running experiments...

...I think you're vastly underestimating a level 1 D&D fighter or vastly overestimating your son. Not that the rest of what you said isn't... like obvious? I'm not sure what GobHag is talking about. If you want range at level 1 you take a ranged weapon. Or roll up Link and hope you stay at...

...But how would that even work? Level alone tells you next to nothing.

Just a quick example since I was looking at it earlier: an A5E Marilith doesn't get Reactive so it loses a massive amount of potential damage and damage mitigation.

I mean... in some cases? All of them have better design than 5E14 monsters but in different ways. TOTV and A5E both make monsters more interesting and complex. 5E24 Monsters are generally stronger and easier to run. Both types have their place in encounter design.

Nope. Those aren't even categories.

I feel like a lot of these discussions tend to veer away from making D&D a better game and turn into making D&D more like a different game they like more. Going back to just four classes, or centering the gameplay around a meta-currency, dropping higher level support... this is all stuff other...

You're asking the wrong person. I don't have either of the 'Shadow of' games.

Absolutely. Like Travis said, it's way too early for them to bet the whole endeavor on their own game.

Shadow of the Weird Wizard

Candela didn't review very well and I presume hasn't set the sales charts on fire. Daggerheart has fared much better.

Kind of clickbait title/thumbnail, but the actual argument makes sense as a potential reason. Comments are basically what I'd expect. So salty and full of conspiracy theories. I'm honestly amazed at how personally people are taking this... it's almost funny, but also kind of sad.

I think it's part of the problem that every D&D edition design team has: D&D is such a broad audience that there's no agreement on what people want. 4th Edition was some players' sweet spot and others wanted to nuke it from orbit.

Wow... I knew the Revised set made the map bigger but I didn't realize it was that much bigger. IIRC the 4E version revised it again so that it was in between the two extremes.