Search results

I'm looking to start up a group near Richmond, KY. I am leaning towards D&D Next, but I am fine with pathfinder, 3.5 or 4E. Whatever the group agrees to. You can contact me at silverblade52000@yahoo.com

That's kind of irrelevant. Who has a level 40 character they actually play

I will most certainly buy the PHB even if it's just a pdf of it. If I end up running it, I'd buy the DMG and MM (or their equivalents) and some adventures or a "Dungeon" subscription (if something like that still exists). If I like it and end up playing it a lot, I will buy more stuff...

I don't know about hiring Rich Baker back. He was one of the chief architects of the horror that was post spell-plague 4E Forgotten Realms. I think the horrible treatment of their flagship setting helped to speed the demise of 4E. It's not good to bring someone bag with that kind of baggage if...

I have indeed found a much better way than quinggong monk. Aasimar monk (sohei) 1/sorcerer (empeyreal bloodline) 1/Eldritch Knight x. I have not gone crazy. The folks at Paizo have stated that spell like abilities from race or domains, etc. can count as "Ability to cast x spells of x level or...

I agree with that. 5E or simply "D&D" would be much preferred. If they keep the name, it has already won the "dumbest name for an edition" award.

I don't think that WotC's marketing is a powerful thing, at least not as far as D&D is concerned (maybe for Magic, but that is another topic). Their "marketing" of 4E probably did more damage than good to sales. Now, D&D the brand is something different. That is powerful, at least to current...

For me it would be in order 1) Having enough people interested in buying/playing it longterm or at least giving it a go. If my gaming friends aren't interested, it's pointless for me to buy it. I just don't have the time to add yet another gaming night a week for a new D&D Next group. 2) Price...

Really? Not in my experience. I mostly played multiclass (demihumans) characters in 2E, and so did many others. They were simply better than straight class characters, the ability score bonuses were nice, the level caps were ignored or never came into play becuase the game never got that far...

Some friends of mine have recently started Rise of the Runelords anniversary edition. I'm not sure how far they are, but I will be starting at 2nd level. So far they have a paladin, barbarian, gunslinger. cleric,and sorcerer. Seems they have a lot of melee and blasting, so I'm thinking something...

Well, when you compare them to fighters who could specialize in weapons or rangers that could dual wield, and get favored enemy bonuse plus skills, and some spells, they were pretty lackluckster. They had to waste a 17 in a stat that did nothing for them in combat, all so they could get detect...

You have a large party, parents with a newborn, and an English as a second language speaker gaming with you. You will not have quick fights with this setup. The fact that you are using possibly the slowest running (as far as combat is concerned) version of D&D in existance isn't helping things...

On monk/sorcerers (assuming both at the same time): Had several in my games. And they were strong because they usually ended up taking Enlightened Fist (3.5) and kicked so much butt. Same goes for other combinations (monk&cleric/wizard, sorcerer&fighter) but that's not the point here. On...

I say ditch them. As powerful as feats are and as much as 5E focuses on ability scores, delaying or missing some ability score boosts/feats is a fairly steep price to pay for multi-classing. It still doesn't prevent dipping much, especially for humans, and just punishes people that want to...

I didn't realize how old the thread was until I made my post. Why did a two year old thread show up on the fornt page anyway? Different tables do play at different speeds, but there are fundamental differences between the systems that make (I believe) 4E combat much slower over all. 1) Hit...

"Entitlement?" I prefer "choice". Or was I the only one that got frustrated by having to roll well to play what you wanted in 2E, or liked playing a stealthy roguish character but hated that he was terrible in combat? I am still not satisfied that it's impossible to make something like a...

Okay. Do you know what isn't interesting or fun? Not being able to make your character concept mechanically viable or relevant. That, in my opinion, was one of the major flaws of D&D prior to 3E. I didn't roll well enough to be a ranger. My elf can't be a paladin. My dwarf can't be a wizard...

If you want fast combat, do not use 4E, unless you want to use all minions, which would make combat so easy as to be pointless. A low level combat in 4E will take at least 40 minutes, by the time you hit paragon 1 and a half to two hours if you are extremely lucky. I have seen a 4E LFR combat...

I agree with that. It is really irksome for PFS, epecially since they often reference Bestiaries 2 and 3 which I don't have.

I am not sure about the proficiency bonus thing. It seems weird to call my fighter's attack and save bonuses proficiency bonuses. Maybe class bonus or training bonus. I can see the benefit of having a universal bonus to things like in 4E, but it does seem a bit clunky. I think that...