Search results

We didn’t use a computer when we played 4e and I doubt you truly need for PF2e either

Can you give the cliff notes version of what you like? Or maybe that is a different thread

You simple go the all sources folder and the basic rules are there. Similarly, anything with the “basic” tag is from the basic rules and free to anyone. So if you look up the orc it’s “source” is listed as basic - that means anyone can look at / use it. Not sure how this will be handled with...

Wouldn’t that result in even less quality and possibly less sales which mean you have to reduce quality even further?

In what way? I would imagine pricing is strictly purview of the one doing the work. IDK, I think you have to work pretty hard to blame WotC for this. It is more on the mfr and you IMO. Unless your blaming WotC for making a popular product (D&D) that others are trying to profit from. I would...

Yes, several on DMs Guild. However, I recommend waiting for @Upper_Krust upcoming Immortal Handbook

Then just say you don’t like it. Don’t say anyone with AI can do better. Be respectful of people’s hard work and talent.

I know, and my statement stands. Tyler Jacobson who did the cover art for the 2024 is a very talented and award winning artist. Comparing his hard work to AI is an insult. I expect better from the creative minds in these boards. I guess I shouldn’t have.

in general I really like the cover. The nostalgia value speaks to me obviously and it is technically well done. However, I do think the overall image is a bit dark. As someone you rarely adventures in dungeons, it doesn’t quite suit my tastes. Nice work overall though. Also, who is the artist...

Please do not belittle the hard work of a truly talented artist.

I feel that works for martial, I feel less convinced about magic using classes. I don’t feel like all of those are skill based. Though I understand the appeal

Because people haven’t been presented with a better option and / or they are stuck in old tropes? ;) More seriously, I think it is just easier to separate the fighter and the expert, so that why they do it. I prefer them as different sides of the same sliding scale of one class: At the end of...

Of course, never meant to imply otherwise As you said: your worldbuilding, not mine. From mine it would be they are both experts: on in fighting and one in exploration (though I don’t imagine that as the rogues role myself). So if I took your world view it would be 2 classes: Expert Mage

I added a bit to my post. Arcane cast spells, spiritualist do not. And anything a rogue could do can be covered in the same class as a fighter in my opinion. That way you can mix and match expert and warrior to your desired level

Ok, how about I just say a different perspective then?

That to me is looking at solely from a game perspective. We look at from a world building perspective: Martial: natural abilities Arcane: magic earned through study and research (stealing magic from the fabric of the cosmos), cast spells Spiritual: magic given by another (god, patron, spirit...

Why separate rogue from fighter if your not separating cleric from wizard? There is, or should be, as much separation, IMO, between a cleric and a wizard as there is between a fighter and a rogue

Maybe every class isn’t for you? I mean having a special ancestry / background is a pretty common trope in the fantasy genre. I definitely think D&D should support that

We are moving to three: Martialist Arcanist Spirtualist

My DM is working on a 5E reboot based around three classes. So I guess I will say three.