Search results

The DM would describe / narrate our characters being pushed-pulled-slid around and we imagined how that appeared. No different than any other movement really. Is being pushed 10 feet really that more difficult to imagine than walking 10 feet?

Maybe that was the design intent but it sure worked well without a map or minis. We didn’t use either of those more in our 4e game than we did in our 1e game, maybe even less sine the rules were easier to follow.

The comparison was to other TTRPG companies. I think they look much better in that light, but I could be wrong.

Yep, the title says it all

I don’t know about all the positions on the RPG side, but the ones they posted for recently were quite high salary.

Why? I mean the game doesn’t really need any more resources. They could do nothing and it would be just fine.

Question: isn’t a reaction that cast magic also Magic Action?

Lots to like in Shadowdark, but there is enough I don’t like that it will not pull me away from 5e

We had the conversation before actually. It was an experiment. Our GM had heard that this style of boss monster works well. It did not. But perhaps it was just a poor fit for this particular combat as well.

I wasn’t trying to say it will make you better. I was suggesting that some might think it will.

I’m not being sarcastic, we just disagree and I was trying to gracefully exit from the conversation. If you don’t understand the fun of random and unexpected results the you don’t. Nothing I say will convince you.

Sure, but where is the fun in that!?

My thought was you are more likely to get something you wouldn’t choose. Thus you would have to RP something new and at take you out of your comfort zone. Therefore potentially improving your RP

I don't like it either, but I can see the appeal to do something like that for a one-shot or short campaign. Something to stress / improve your RP skills.

OK, everyone has opinions and we often exaggerate them for emphasis. I don't think such comments are intended to be taken literally. That is a strawman. That is not what I was discussing. Consistency is good only if you like the results. Being consistent doesn't make a rule good, it just...

IIRC, the story at the time was that someone added / edited that information in after the final review. So except for fhe art, it was one person. That could be a lie of course (or I am remembering incorrectly).

Perhaps you didn’t see the post I was responding too. We were talking about a monster getting multiple full turns and the idea of getting 1 turn per PC. That didn’t work IME because the troll had a full turn: movement, action, reaction for each PC. That means it had something like 180’ of...

Disagree. Everyone I know plays as fantasy. I’m not going to say medieval because I don’t know enough to say that is accurate. However some version or LotR, Conan, and Norse and Greek myth all mixed together is about right. No steampunk

How does the descriptions of a Tasmanian devil (from buggs bunny) make it sound static. The whole point of describing it that way was to say it wasn’t static - it had crazy amount of movement- actions

And yet that has nothing to do with my troll story. You said or implied I felt the troll was acting crazy because I was used to the static nature of 5e combat. Here is what you said: “…and given your description of a Tasmanian devil like troll the limited mechanics are informing your perception...