Search results

Along that train of through it would have been cool if they broke down long rests into smaller time increments, like regaining low levels spell does not take a long as higher level spells. Then when a party rests every character benefits beyond just take a break and heal.

I was not speaking about a perfect game, just one that is easy to learn and digest based on consistent rules. With random dice roles and choices someone is always going to be better at any given time. However, with clear and consistent rules you hopefully temper the system mastery issues that...

You can't separate the power gamer from the roleplayer or vice versa. You can talk preferences and which one drives the players decisions, but even that is fluid from one game session to another. I believe if you want to equalize the field then we need to start discussing consistency of rules...

The 5E rest system is similar to the 4E system and I do not like either. A two state system is too restrictive to fit the broadest range of narratives. So if you modify durations you may as well mess around with both short and long rests.

With that stated it makes sense to me to offer a subclass for each type of archetype, i.e. sword mage for EK, intelligence based tactician for battle master, and a stance or forms based weapon specialist for champion. And make them all exlusive to the fighter so you don' have spells, maneuvers...

It is hard to predict since the fighter class is definitely two classes with the battle master and ek, and the champion being simple just for the sake of nostalgia. So you have three directions to take the class with any given subclass. So which one do you use to represent a weapon master...

I am not sure where the border is for domains, circles, etc. where you may have every class have a dream subclass, etc. I am debating if they are getting too specialized or specific.

Classes are the best way to protect fantasy roles or concepts (niches), while more sub-classes and less classes work against it. There is a price to pay for simplicity just for the sake of simplicity and placing a hard ceiling on the amount of classes. And then you get all the white noise about...

I believe they can maintain the pace of 2 adventures, supplements, or whatever else you call it per year as long as there is not major competition. If there is a new breakout RPG and players want something new, then progress forward will diminish or stop. At that point they will have to decide...

You could make a flat -1 to all dice rolls or +1 to spell saves (if a caster is drained) per "level" lost or for every 2 "levels" lost, etc. To recover you can remove a -1 penalty per level the character gains, or when a month or more time goes by, and by restoration spell, etc. That way there...

True. But anyone that is not going down the dark side path of mix/maxer would probably ignore the chart :)

To be honest with the availability of content in regards to monsters and what I already own. I see no need to buy any 5E monster supplements. The only value may be the lore, but I would find it more useful to have a world setting with monster lore included.

In other words, it's a huge generic monster sandwich, and we're all gonna have to take a bite.

It would not call it lazy, but uninspired. However, if the masses buy into the nostalgia factor, then any point we make it mute. To be honest I would rather have them explore Vecna and why the body was severed and link it to a labyrinth or extra dimensional dungeon. Acererak has been discussed...

Martial ability is not represented by maneuvers, so retrofit all martial ability with maneuvers, and then re-apply against the classes. In the end it grants the one main thing martial classes are missing is choices similar to casters with spells.

I prefer curse items that offer a specific benefit but with a heavy cost, versus just detrimental effects. It is interesting to see how the player/character weighs the cost/benefits.

A DM always has authority to make rulings in every edition, so overall I do like the simplicity of 5E, but not the vague rules like stealth thinking that helps the DM. I also love hit points as a catch all, versus specific views like hit points is just physical damage.

With great mobility comes great responsibility, less the monk finds his or herself all alone. May you be able to fight in your in dark places, when all other lights go out.

A revamped tomb of horrors is going to be hard to pull off. I was never satisfied with any derivatives except for the original.

Greyhawk is the only setting that can even attempt the 5E minimalist approach, as every other requires new classes and rules. However, I do not even consider minor settings when I make that statement like oriental adventures, or al-qadim. Which in fact, probably would deserve new clases and...