Search results

It goes beyond DCs and TNs, of course. One of the frustrating ones for me is level based encounter charts (not Dungeon Level based ones, but PC level based ones). What lives in that forest should be true no matter who walks into it.

Most things in life are not random. Vaugn did not "roll a nat 1" -- she went out there when she was not up to the task. Yes, she was an amazing athlete, but she is past her prime and did not want to accept that. You see that a lot in sport. It is actually too bad few games capture that part of...

I'm impressed. I literally can't think of a less satisfying, worse way to produce TNs. It embraces neither the fiction, nor the game mechanics. Bravo.

Wait. Isn't D&D OWNED by a toy company?

mmmmmmmm

Oh sure. Players LOVE that.

I agree witht his. I will take the 3.x lists of DCs over the loosey-goosey 5E categories any day.

If "compatibility" is just "slot in the Nimble version of this monster" then, okay, I guess. But I can do that literally with any system.

I don't know if that is true. Seems like there is definitely some changes happening, and we still don't have any idea what is on the horizon, which could be taken as evidence of schedule shuffling.

I wonder about that "5E compatible" claim. Eww.

This came up in he Daggerheart General thread and I thought I would move it to its own thread for discussion. In games that havel levels, ranks, tiers, etc, do you prefer difficulty or target numbers to be dependent on those levels, or should they be independent of levels? For example, let's...

How could you forget "deviled"?

Right, but Tier 1 PCs can still attempt Tier 3 challenges (even though those challenges are much harder). That is the way it should be. I was arguing against the idea that Hard (for example) might be DC 15 at tier 1, DC 18 at tier 2, etc... I saw that sort of thing recently in the Marvel...

I'm sure it is not actually this way, but that quickstart makes it seem like all PCs are humans. I would back it just for that, I think. But searching the art suggests there are the usual suspects.

I am not sure what this discussion has to do with 4E, or why it seems to be a proble.

Hasbro owned D&D for 20 years before they really started to care.

Almost all riddles or puzzles.

Thanks. I did not scroll far enough the first time.

I must not be explaining myself. If the PCs' tier sets the Difficulty Number (rather than the tier of the adversary or environment) then PCs effectively never get better.

Oh, I did not want to suggest that was likely, or even a state of affairs that (like you say) has ever been true for very long. I guess the other option would be for it to lose its pop culture appeal and go back to being relatively obscure, so no one in corporate cares enough to mess with creative.