Search results

Fair point

Benevolent DM goes out of their way to make sure the players enjoy their game, catering to a crowd that isn’t interested in random deaths and killer dungeons. Adversarial DM says I’m playing against you. Referee DM says I’m playing for you. Benevolent DM says I’m playing with you. There’s a...

Of course you can do that. A benevolent must do that. Only, « playing to the best of your abilities » as a benevolent DM doesn’t mean trying your best to kill the PC, it means trying your best to give the players the most challenging tasks without killing or ruining their PC. I pull the red...

I consider myself a benevolent DM. I’m definitely routing for the PC, even if my job is partly to give the players a good run for their money. So yes, this means going the extra mile to make sure they 1) sufficiently challenged and 2) not being TPKed. I’m aming for « survival against all odds »...

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback! As others said it looks like they did a good job in having as system flexible enough to allow different playstyles. I’ve got plenty of games going on now but I’m keeping an eye open for DH

I’m 48 and I’m in my prime. I know what I like. I know what I’m good at. I know my « type » and therefore can decide to go with or against it. I’ve got a good group of friends. I’m much more aware of making it fun for everyone first and foremost. We have a wide spectrum of games and...

The skinny; if you think the ranger class is unnecessary, this thread isn’t going to convince you otherwise. If you like the ranger, this thread isn’t going to make you think it’s more superfluous than the paladin, bard, or barbarian.

Indeed Less is often better than more, but more is often preferable to not enough. Current D&D hits my goldilocks zone for character classes but im happy when specific settings add a touch of uniqueness in the form of a class, like Eberron’s artificer for example.

A class in 5eD&D is two things: a concept that cannot be easily and accurately reproduced with another class, and enough variations on the said concept to allow several subclasses of its own. The two most obvious classical archetypes for rangers are the beastmaster and the wilderness hunter...

Yes, as much as I may seemed reluctant to narrative results in the Daggerheart thread, special results happening twice in 20 rolls in average is an acceptable frequency. For years now, I’ve been treating 20s like a success with bonus, and 1s as a complication leading to a failure. Not a fan of...

My issue with those systems is that it kinda locks you into a « and » or « but » etc. Typically, these systems discourage you from just ignoring the « and » or « but » if you just don’t feel it. Also, it can create situations where the GM feels they need to justify themselves when they introduce...

Yeah if the designers purposefully meant it be either a narrative tool OR a purely mechanical device OR both, that definitely goes in the plus column

Played a bit of BitD. Loved playing (GM was great!) but couldn’t wrap the game around my mind to GM it. I find things like success with woe or partial successes exhausting when they come up frequently. Looks like Daggerheart dice rolls produce a « special » result 100% of time. I’ll keep an eye...

Hum, not sure if this is for me then…

How does the Hope/Fear mechanics plays out, exactly? My biggest gripe with systems like Star Wars/Genesys is that advantages/setbacks happen too often, but in Daggerheart it seems it happens literally on every dice roll. This makes me wary, but reading through post there seems to be Hope/Fear...

Sounds good so far. Arcane of divine? D6 hit die with no armour proficiencies, or D8 with some armour/weapon proficiencies? What would its main attack mode be?

To be fair though, that’s one of the reason some people have issues with multiclassing: it often makes no narrative sense. It was a background joke for a segment of the Order Of The Stick too.

Oh, non-class abilities based on the six? I kind of dig that. I presume all five other abilities would have similar « traits »? but other than Hearten, these traits don’t particularly favour a high Wis score however. Unless you can only have them if you have a certain Wis score?

There’s many ways of defining archetypes but the « what they do » is the easiest tool to use for a rpg. Otherwise, I remember a few systems running around « how they do it », giving archetypes such as « the strong dude », « the quick guy », « the clever girl », « the pretty chick » etc, which...

So that’s why you can’t see the frightened ostrich when it puts its head in the sand! Whoa, I didn’t expect D&D rules to be so realistic!