Search results

First I agree about the save or suck spells, but I think that is a different issue. These spells though, Guidance, Comp Lnag, Goodberry, Pass w/out trace, tiny hut, summon steed, find familiar, augury, invisability, spider climb, locate ____ and I am sure more with a bit of effort of thought...

I have long pushed we need updated restarts of all the settings. 4e did it for darksun. reset to basic 1st box set BUT with updated concepts (so building warlock sorcerer warlord ect in) I keep saying Marvel Comics showed the formula with the Ultimate line

Crisis on infinite editions...

Okay this is like a thread built for me. I ran a 5e game that brought in ideas from every edition. I did it as a multiverses game and had a 2e wizard as a main NPC. From monster/NPC stand it was easy to just make new cross over rules... the problem with players getting it was a bit more...

after the last few playtests my group had lost faith in this playtest. I had not even down loaded this one right away. However a buddy told us "Hey it's more like just a revision now, look at how they rolled back stuff" so we picked it up. Overall I still have my fears, but I like this playtest...

you actually have this down better then you thought, I don't personally like games that DMs tell you what you can and can not say (as long as you get your point across). It is a BIG pet peeve of mine when someone knows what you mean but wants you to rephrase it 'correctly' I call it "word games"...

Yeah, I have gone round and round with others before on this, it depends on the skill. Some skill they will let a good description allow a player knowledge (either real life professional level or just enjoying same stories and knowing the DM so they know what to say) to trump what in game the...

yeah I wish there was an "all of the above" option

if the rules of the game in anyway had physics in mind, the designers live in a VERY different world then I do.

so are you singling out 5 people to personally assign them an attack, what 5 by chance? Do you think if you name them THAT makes it personal? A good rule of thumb is if you can't name them you shouldn't say it. What is the difference between "Jon stinks" and "Someone in here stinks" while...

if agenda has such a bad connotation, maybe YOU shouldn't use it to describe what people are doing here on this board (that again in theory has an address the post not the poster rule)

no, been here since 3e, but I keep hopeing things will become more friendly and less adversarial.

so are we complety abandoning the 'don't make it personal' and the 'address the argument not the poster' so we can read minds and assign agendas to one another?

I just did mine... I filled more then 2 of those typeing boxes (3 or 4) and I gave my opinions... but I don't know if any of it matters any more.

oh it was an issue... I know people who called us power gamers for "letting someone get 3 attacks in the first round"

yeah most likely they are not meant to be cantrips but someone decided "make as many things a spell as you can on spell casteres" (see scribing a spell for wizards) and so the terms are a little muddy

I didn't know that... my group defaulted to more 1st less second.

if sense were common more people would have it... but I mean come on, I agree the intent was most likely (I would say I am 80% sure) not to be able to take them... but there are plenty of good faith readings that would confuse or even contradict that.

oh man... is that 3 attacks round 1 2 attacks round 2 or 2 attacks round 1 and 3 attacks round 2? that was a HEATED debate at 2 different local cons in the 90's and at my college gaming club.

I don't know if you mamba are trying to obfuscate anything (cool I know that word from WoD) but I do feel that WotC is... or to take the term Gamer girl used "mudding the waters" I mean out of everyone involved I would say the only CLEAR agenda is WotC... the agenda to keep selling for next...