Search results

I don't really care. I don't understand why we need "floating stats" to replace racial stats, since the racial stats served a specific purpose that we are intentionally removing. But no adjustments and floating adjustments are both better than the AD&D or 3e/4e/5e racial adjustments. There...

Because all of the classes available to other races were designed as human classes. Nobody wanted to design classes that weren't available to humans... and when they did, they placed them in the "kit" design space. Battlerager and Bladesinger could very well have been dwarf- and elf-exclusive...

In most settings, I don't think Orc Wizards make sense. Witches, Sorcerers, maybe some flavors of Magi? Totes. But where I am going to agree with you is that any class an Orc is allowed to advance in, an Orc should be able to be good at. To the fullest capacity of mere mortal game designers, any...

Class/race restrictions, yes. Level limits are terrible.

It wasn't anything about the OSR, actually. It's all the nonsense I saw in 3.5. I loved all of it at first, but it started to wear on me after awhile.

I'm 110% in favor of a sidebar telling umpires that it won't ruin their game if they decide to shuffle those restrictions around for their homebrew settings, or toss them out entirely if their players don't want to play that way. Starting about '96 or '97, I started rewriting the whole...

I've already stated it several times: it overcomplicates character creation for little gain, it makes character ancestry an even less significant portion of most characters, and it encourages players to make ridiculously implausible characters at the expense of immersion.

I generally prefer adding bonuses and rolling high-- because I like the ability for abilities to be open-ended-- but there are some advantages to the straight roll-under. It replaces table math with pre-calculated numbers, and if you're really clever you can straight-up import the MOGA system...

I'm really not going to sit here and try to give you advice about how much you should set players up for character moments... especially since you already tried and the player didn't step up. But I'll tell you that I would self-defense an entire orphanage off a cliff to get players willing to...

Except, as befits its origins... it stuffs the "simple caster" class full of fiddly, irritating mechanics like Burn.

Legit. Both this, and your analysis. You want to start another thread?

Sure. That argument can be used against any criticism of the rules, existing or proposed; if you can just "come up with your own" rules for separating ancestry and heritage, why do you need the official rules to allow it? (I'm not making that argument. There are good reasons to do it.) I think...

edit: Withdrawn.

We don't need Hasbro money. The D&D brand can get all of the marketing we'll ever need from people who'll pay for the privilege. I know it's a pipe dream, but a private holding company that only owned two things (Hasbro stock and cash money) could eventually own enough of both that it could...

We don't. I'm not trying to slag the developers over at Wizards of the Coast, but you couldn't assemble the dev team of your wildest dreams out of every current and former employee of TSR, WotC, and/or Paizo-- any of their third-parties, any top shelf OSR, anyone-- that could make D&D good...

I don't really care what the specific limitations in the books are, because I'm going to change them for my games anyway. I just don't want the structure and the precedent of those limitations to be further eroded. I mean, given my preferences, ancestry would be a much more substantial portion...

In that case, why are you even playing a game with discrete ancestries and classes when there are so many games that would allow to create any character you want, within the parameters of the campaign setting and premise? I mean, honestly, aren't those limitations on your imagination, too...

Man... I saw "old psionic classes" and came in here to say there was only one psionic class in AD&D, the Psionicist. You already got a good breakdown of the 3.X psionic classes. Paizo didn't want to touch 3.5's epic rules, deities and demigods, or psionics with a ten foot pole-- and couldn't...

... that is exactly new rules. They also imply that these categories can be mixed and matched, which are new rules for creating characters. You don't see how rules whose purpose is to allow players to make characters that combine any ancestry with any other ancestry, or that allow characters of...

"They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder." I understand the impulse to have rules to distinguish between these aspects, but I think it is both seriously overrated as a worldbuilding priority and mechanically they lead to overcomplicated and...