Search results

Not of benefit because it’s old school. You got the taste part right to which there is clearly no accounting here.

If you want the game to be an encounters game, then yes short rest makes sense. If you want an adventure day attrition model, long rest works better. Having both leads to 7 lunch break work days.

4E encounter powers drove the quantity up. Folks dont want to give them up so now we got 7 lunch break work days for encounter power short rest classes..

Ours were a lot like the recent chat logs from -redacted- that got made public recently.

Social media just took the bathroom stall wall and expanded it to everyone everywhere.

Depends on the group. I mean, the rule book is 80-90% combat stuff. So, its not like folks are wrong to think its a significant part of the game, but I don't understand it either. As a wargamer id rather be playing something thats all good stuff all the time. Though, a lot of these groups form...

They dont have to say it for it to feel like its a concept they are trying to achieve. I think 5.24 spoke volumes on the subject. Even if they make it 30+ years folks will still chirp about being right about evergreen being an impossibility and something they never should have "promised" despite...

It just occurred to me that a PFS scenario is likely a 6-8 encounter thing (Probably closer to 4-6). Are adventure league nights set for the one adventure day is one session dynamic?

Yeah, you are always going to have folks playing and never paying. Though, most owners I speak to are cool with it as folks that do buy stuff tend to make up for it. Having a bunch of people playing is always better than having two people playing. It makes things look happening and then it...

Awesome, i'm glad you find it easy. Not all folks have the time and some of us want WotC to do it. I get why they dont, but id like them to.

We have been over this before. Its not nearly as modular as discussed and not even close to the satisfaction of folks that would like it to be. They discovered it wasnt needed because 5E sold like hot cakes. There has been no driving need. Will that change in the future? I think this will be...

I can see that. I think there has been some reduction in the suburban mall nobody goes to anymore variety in the mid-west. Though, one of out largest stores (former FFG HQ event center) tried to go full fee to play for any game. Turned the place into a ghost town and nearly ran them out of...

I agree and think if the modularity they talked about in NEXT was actually developed further, a lot of complaints could be answered in 5E.

Me too, I try not to be like those folks (I dont associate you with them either) but understand these topics get hot and the common quotes of dismissal get annoying for everybody. Even when folks dont mean to be flippant, but are just stating their experiences.

Paying to play at FLGS isnt something thats common here. I hear about it, but only tournament formats do it. RPGs are basically free first come first serve game space. Though, I could see a fee going towards the store and materials and helping keep attendance up. I think the reason its uncommon...

Never heard that one before.

Thats fair. Folks who enjoy 5E constantly being told its bad and that being popular is no substitute for "objectively" better design but they are just too stupid to understand that is also not particularly friendly. Just sayin.

So almost nobody is like the O'Briens? That is what seems unlikely.

While true, I do like that they addressed Molly a bit in the O'Brien family dynamics.

Yeap, ive run into more "wake me up when combat starts" types than combat disengagers!