Search results

I mean, multiple fights without a rest is kind of 5E's whole shtick. At its core, 5E is a resource management game. If you're doing multiple deadly fights without a rest, well then - that's a risk, depending on the level of your party. A good chunk of this entirely depends on the Tier of Play...

It's changed over the years. Up until recently, it was a very non-specific, "if I think it looks cool/does something interesting/is a genre I like". Nowadays, it's, "is there a realistic chance I and my group(s) will actually want to play it?" I have so many RPG books taking up space on my...

Ah ha, so maybe we don't agree! 😂 In my view, fighters and barbarians should do more than just bonk! By Tier 4, the Barbarian should be able to smash through a mountain; the fighter should be able to cleave through a horde of enemies like an isekai protagonist. Bonking harder, in my view...

That's been my suggestion before (using the Tiers of Play), and I would love a solution like that, but it steps on the toes of people who just want martials to swing a stick and bonk a goblin -> orc -> demon -> dragon -> lich. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think WOTC is so risk averse...

IMO it's an unsolveable problem (for D&D and its derivatives). 1. You can't make martials like spellcasters because it'll make people mad. 2. You can't nerf spellcasters because it'll make people mad. 3. You can't give martials spell-like abilities because it'll make people mad. I've...

Nothing D&D, but I’ve run DEAD PLANET (for the Mothership system) and BLACKWATER CREEK (Call of Cthulhu) multiple times for different groups. Both are absolute blasts. DEAD PLANET in particular is a short sandbox with a bunch of fun opportunities.

Depends entirely on system and setting. In 5E? No. My fantasy superheroes don’t need to count ammo, especially since it’s likely just the ranger doing the counting. In Call of Cthulhu? Yes. The fear of running out of ammo while facing down a deep one directly hooks into the energy of the game.

Generally speaking, I like points over slots. I think Savage Worlds does a good job with it. There's flexibility in what you cast, how you cast it. A fireball isn't always a 20-ft radius sphere that does 8d6 damage. Not only do trappings differentiate everybody's spells (allowing for...

Being the age that I am, I can only anecdotally speak on this - and only by using what one of my players, who is running a fantasy world for his nephew and their friends (who are in high school), says. Basically: their main touchpoint is the Lord of the Rings (I realize that is cheating)...

If you can't tell the difference between a flesh-and-blood character exploring a dungeon, instead of an invisible, flying eye that can pass through openings as small as 1-inch, then yeah - I guess it wouldn't be significantly different. edit: I might've been a little harsh with that, so I...

You're right, it's the point of the spell. I'm saying it's a bad spell, because that's a bad point. Arcane Eye gives one player the spotlight, and the gameplay looks like one of two ways: Option 1: DM: Okay, you see a long hallway, with one door at the far end, a hole in the wall on the...

Ooooh if you hate that, wait until they get arcane eye. It just kills dungeon exploration. Had a player use it to map out an entire dungeon, and then afterwards he said, "this kinda feels like I'm cheating". I don't think it's cheating, but it is incredibly boring. Why is this spell in the game?

I mean, spell durations are typically "1 minute", which equals 10 rounds. That tells me: a battle will almost never last long enough for the duration to matter if it does matter, that means the DM plans on having 10+ round combats, so I'd make sure I'd have plenty of ways to entertain myself...

I'm running two high level campaigns at the moment, and for me, it's genuinely because it's just less fun. Prep is a weird thing where it takes less time, and yet more time (depending on the session/encounters). Sometimes it is genuinely better to prep next to nothing, because you almost have...

As someone who is running two high-level D&D campaigns at the moment: no. no we don't. The players love it, but I stopped having fun about four levels ago (around level 12). I'm rocketing both groups towards the end (they both want to go to level 20), so we can say that we did it, and then...

In my opinion, it's a foundational issue. It's easy to make money mean something in a Cyberpunk game, because the squad is constantly desperate for money. Cybernetics, living conditions, food, bribes - eddies make the world go 'round. In 5E, all of those are solved by magic. Goodberry, charm...

I have fundamental problems with 5E, and I wish martials could participate in the cool stuff, but the easiest 'fix' (ie, avoid spellcasters running roughshod over your campaign) to the martial/spellcaster disparity without breaking the bank is just to use multiple encounters per Long Rest...

It's basically what I thought it would be. It's 5E+; it's errata that you pay for. I mean, it's good errata, but it's the same dish we've been eating for the past 10 years. And for that reason, it's just not interesting to me.

I have two groups, and both run weekly (or rather, they try to run weekly 😂) Once a year, I’m the guest GM for a friendly group, and that runs weekly. That’s currently ongoing, so I have a very busy TTRPG schedule at the moment!

I just finished the final book of THE EXPANSE. I normally don’t read series, but I had a great time in that world. Now, I’m doing something completely different - Salem’s Lot (Stephen King). I’m about 40% in, and I’m enjoying it so far.