Search results

There is nothing built into 5.5 that is anything specific. Quite deliberately so.

That's how most fantasy writers who aren't called Tolkien work. The world starts out largely formless. As their protagonists move through it details become defined in a way that supports the narrative. If they continue to write in that world for long enough it ends up highly detailed. Doctor Who...

Solasta is fine and all, but it don’t have the the narrative tools, like the ability to set flags on characters and items, that NWN has. It may look horrible (and it did when it was new) but it is by far the better toolset for building D&D.

I don’t. Settings are separate to rules. If I want to play a D&D game in Hyboria or Lankhmar, like 1st edition did, I can do that in 5e just as well. You are talking about two separate silos, the rules are one and the setting is another.

Which is the worst feature of the setting. The last thing the game needs is bumbling super powered children intervening in every narrative. When I run an FR game the gods are always busy elsewhere, or monsters for the PCs to kill.

You still stuck on this? 4e was ditched because it didn’t sell.

I never had the 3.5 rules but the default setting for 3.0 was Greyhawk. I assume they commissioned Eberron because Greyhawk was not popular.

And for situations not involving breeding or prostitution there is no reason for putting adult humans in separate classes.

And I would tell them to start with small county-sized region, or maybe an island, and not worry about other counties or even a national government at the start - such things rarely affect the lives of ordinary people or 1st level characters. What do you do when WotC give advice, and you don’t...

It’s not a failure of D&D, it’s a failure of imagination. Eberron and Dark Sun deal with religion differently, and paladins are not tied to gods in the current edition. And the rules work fine. I would like to see a setting inspired by His Dark Materials - monotheistic, and the church keeps god...

French does like to give everything gendered nouns, but personally I would prefer them to disappear completely. Unless you are planning on breeding with something gender is irrelevant for any occupation.

Yeah, judging by the comments on this forum I would say that setting assumptions and social contract issues are far more divisive than anything mechanical.

Those are a very small number of people who make a lot of noise. “You may not change a jot or tittle” nonsense. Most players don’t care.

Subclasses are a set of mechanics, lore has nothing to do with it. I’m quite happy to work with players to refluff whatever they want so it fits into the narrative.

This is the sort of interpretation of polytheism that I find irritating in D&D. People do not select a god and worship them. They make a sacrifice to whatever god they judge most likely to grant them what boon they desire.

Greyhawk is generic, any Forgotten Realms adventure can be set there, just change a few names. And anyway, how many adventures have been published since the DMG? Oh yes, none.

I saw that irony, as well as trotting out the same old 1970s Christian polytheism model for region rather than doing something creative.

Ah, that player has played lots of exotic characters since. Even that character was a half orc.

Misspost.

For the first couple of years SCAG was the only setting book available, so that was the only place they could set adventures. But they moved away from that when they could. And the fist setting published for the new rules was Greyhawk. FR is the second setting (and we are getting Dark Sun next...