Search results

Well, sure. But "matter" is kind of a limp word without any definable metric. Of course we're all going to disagree on that.

This seems to boil down to the "My odds are 50-50, either I make it or I don't" meme.

Usually you pay double for that kind of action, Cotton.

I mean, people have been iterating on skills for basic D&D for decades. Why not?

Skills are definitely the one part of Dolmenwood that our table, especially our DM, has trouble with. The impulse to test basic noticing or investigating or basic athletics is very ingrained after decades of D&D.

I think there exists a path where D&D is made into a more focused, defined game while still retaining almost all of its current player base. I'm not saying I know that path, or that I think it will be discovered, but I think the possibility exists.

Wizard should not be part of the basic line, at least not all its "hundred of spells with Vancian/pseudo-Vancian casting" glory. Make another class, call it mage, and have it be a simple blaster.

I'm a fan of campaigns running somewhere in the high teens to early 20s for number of sessions. Campaigns that run into the many dozens of sessions start to feel more like procedural TV shows than an epic adventure with continually rising action. That's what many people enjoy, of course, but...

Yea, I’ve done that narratively, but there definitely is a gap for something systemic to add to the system.

I mean, that's the nice thing about magic systems in general; you can always come up with some kind of fictional rationalization for its proud nails.

I see them being developed in parallel (if this was the approach). You keep a simple resolution core, resolve some of the novice pain points from 5e, and then use the advanced line to add in more complex modules that are generally class specific.

How I would do a 6e Basic (although many of these changes impact the 6e engine as a whole): -Stats are as previous editions. Mods are stat-10, instead of (stat-10)/2. I'm agnostic on how stats are generated. -There is only one kind of check in the game (an ability check). d20+mod >= Defense...

Extra attack is definitely stronger, especially considering the abundance of buffs that benefit all attacks. I think design is easier if characters are limited to one attack per round as an action. If there are multiple attacks, then almost all damage riders should be limited to "no more...

They built their colony in the summer, not realizing that the land is only there in the summer; in the other seasons it moves back into the Feywild. And you don't want to be there when winter arrives.

I'm sure they will. But this is a thread for how I think they should do it. :)

After Book of Nine Swords, I really thought that was the model 4e was going to do. They pretty much did it, but I think it would have been better if they had kept the classic nine-tier system to do it.

I don’t want them to start by redesigning the mechanics; I want them to start by examining, consolidating, and revising tropes. Have the game engine and rules transmit a coherent picture of what the game is supposed to be like. Then make the mechanics flexible enough for 3rd parties and...

I mean, in a fantasy setting, can’t you just justify any “metagame” currency as being a blessing of the gods diegetically, and thus now OK? Did Micah just end the 4e edition war? :)

Sure, but the point of a relatively lightweight and robust resolution system is to just get to the resolution, and not worry too much about the input parameters. There’s always corner cases, but ideally they’re minimized.

I don't know a lot of people who know RPG "theory", but I have RL several players/GMs in my groups who quite enjoy discussing ways to improve the game, in ways that are fairly "high-concept" (as opposed to "how can I make this monster tougher").