Search results

This can work pretty easily in a sandboxy game; there's a very natural division of responsibilities. Even then, though, you *really* need to sit down and chat about some important stuff -- tone, power level, and so on. For a non-sandbox game, then you should have regular planning meetings, IME.

Exactly. When the players have agreed to play, say, a pirate campaign, it's not a sign of "railroading" when the mounted paladin proves to be a bad character choice.

I'm not sure if this is an appropriate place for this, as these creatures are for a product and are not a fan creation. However, this seems like the best place to post this... I'm working on a 4E product that required me to develop a significant number of creatures, and I'm looking for...

Both. A player who builds a character without consulting his DM is just asking for trouble. A DM who doesn't tell his players important information about the campaign is just asking for trouble. The root of the problem is the whole model where players make characters without consulting...

The James Wyatt Interrogation, Part 2 – Dungeon Mastering – D&D blog, DM tips, Dungeons and Dragons Tools The question was "Last question. If you were going to start work tomorrow on 5th edition, what would you change?" So there's a couple of big IFs in there.

QFT, especially the first section. Whatever the solution to the problem is, it has to have the buy in of the players. Or you'll soon find yourself without any. And really the whole "Adventuring" economy as portrayed in Greyhawk et al is based on having most of the players' opponents...

Lots of great suggestions in this thread. Let me add another one: PCs with lots of bling can easily become targets not just for burglars but also for muggers, thugs, assassins, et al. Historically, a Spanish galleon cost more money to maintain and outfit for a year than it cost to build. I...

Exactly. Guns in Seventh See == me happy. Guns in D&D == me not so happy.

That's a good question. I've had some luck just posting to forums -- but, as you'd expect, reliability of those playtesters has varied widely. Looking at the forums here, I'm not even sure which forum would be the appropriate one to post in for a call for playtesters.

Yeah, the tools available to evaluate before buying are quite lame. Even the user reviews are of pretty limited utility - the reviewers rarely explain their criteria. I've bought a lot of the packs, some turned out to be useful, some didn't. If it would be useful, I could write some reviews...