Search results

Talk to the DM first to determine how your play effects the table. You may have to change some of your habits that may irk other players, but the DM overall controls the tone of the game. If you keep the DM happy and are willing to make some small changes, the you have the best advocate at the...

From a design perspective I prefer classes have similar progression, so if certain classes get spells at first level, it makes perfect sense to me for martial classes to get maneuvers at first level. The same concept applies for feats, skills, etc. I do not like the 5E concept of tiers where...

Every table I played at for the most part had some DM version of a rule that was not followed explicitly by what is considered RAW. With that stated, 5E did a pretty poor job with stealth and related rules overall since technically they did not have to re-invent them, just improve them. So as a...

I am curious is this all boils down to the base argument or whether PCs and monsters should share the same mechanics, and if those mechanics should increase in complexity based on level. If there was anything 5E could change for the better it would be to build everything from the same building...

5E is a mixed bag. From a fluff or even mechanical perspective 4E was the easiest to manage for me as a DM, with the exception of AEDU if you wanted to go old school mechanics (vancian, multiple attacks, etc.) As to other items that are considered cannon for a particular setting, I just wish 5E...

I agree with your reasoning.

Part of the discussion needs to focus on the base system that player characters, NPCs and monsters use. So if movement is very basic, the action economy is limited, terrain or environmental effects lack depth, or skills/saves/attacks specialization is limited (for example martial based abilities...

I believe the hardest part to address for iconic monsters like Strahd is from a historical reference when considering different editions of D&D and how vampires are represented mechanically. Using that reference, 4E and 5E versions appear to be weak sauce.

5e is all about bounded accuracy. Does that make monsters easier to kill? Obviously the answer is yes. Can the DM compensate? Obviously the answer is yes. Does 5E provide the building blocks to build in complexity by using a mechanic like CR? The answer is no, because monster CR is all over the...

I don't see UA as the vehicle to add more complexity in regards to depth added to existing and new classes. It is just a mechanism to explore new concepts. I believe a third party release that rebuilds the PHB classes and then adds other classes has the best chance to add depth across the board...

With 5e you lose the high magic of previous spells, but overall it is still plausible. I ran a campaign for 2 years using GURPS and dragon lance. And GURPS is low magic in comparison.

The 4e version of a warlock's curse was much easier to use. I am not sure why they went with the spell version, when at-will casting is still present in 5E. The concentration aspect complicates it even more. I guess it is just one of those things that leaves you scratching your head. Probably...

Mechanics have no limitations, but it may show some limits on the assumptions they made when creating the initial classes. I would call it a scope problem, and anything that strays outside that circle may question the base assumptions.

I can just imagine a DM at the table telling the players to put down their cell phone because they are not allowed to play D&D.

I was thinking along those lines where the artificer is an attunement personified or self contained magic system, since attunement overall probably gets ignored. Especially for the capstone ability.

The ability to create magic items was introduced with the playtest wizard but was removed. The artificer suffers from the same fact in a game where magic items are not assumed to be part of character progression. Add to that the notion of needing a magic container to create magic items or...

By ignoring something you are doomed to repeat the past, so I doubt the forums or any other type of media or surveys will be ignored. All of those just represent the minority in regards to the big picture. But as a developer you do have to be more guarded on how you respond so keeping a low...

Sticking to the lore, or sticking to the rules is all about control and consistency. Just note that you will stray from lore at the beginning of the game and remain consistent on how it applies, versus being a random ad-hoc fest to attempt to counter player control in regards to the setting.

Change cantrips to a short rest, and then deal with the biggest problem on how you want to handle healing.

Let the players use the cleric as they see fit and if the returning player has a problem with it then let them right down how the cleric behaves in the future. As a DM, try to stay neutral.