Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 3164370" data-attributes="member: 29398">Re: swimmingTrue, but it only needs to be noted once (or once every very long while); it wouldn't be tied to a stat or anything else that changes all the time.Re: roll-up randomnessJust like now; players adapt.  Or, they come in with a few different concepts and see where the dice take them.  In 3e, most concepts can be done with most rolls anyway.Then don't give out so much treasure. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  This is one game aspect the DM has complete control over.  And to avoid the "sacks of ingredients" problem, clerical spells in particular could be paid by sacrificing anything of value; it'd be easy enough to come up with something similar for wizards.Then don't rely on core rules. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Any decent palace, temple, or whatever will be proofed somehow against entry by means other than mundane, never mind that the key individuals inhabiting such places will have personal scrying defenses.You're quite right about the lessened impact of travelling due to transport spells, but a very simple limit is to only allow travel spells to get you to somewhere you have already been; thus new ground has to be explored the old-fashioned way. (and your SH+T problem goes away unless the person providing transport has been there before...)Re: failed resurrection rollsIn 1e, resurrection failure chances were fairly low provided you had a better Con. score than a fieldmouse.  But perma-death can and does happen, though not to the rather overstated level you imply above. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />This can become a problem, agreed, but even with this it still seems that people hit the 0 to -9 range quite often.  The only real way around this is to have opponents deal out damage more often but in less amount each time; most parties don't let the bad guys survive long enough to be dangerous this way, so I find myself running more and more monsters with lots of small-ish attacks each round.Only disruptive if your game is predicated on everyone surviving.  At those levels, revival effects are available and most parties will try to bring back a valued companion even if there's a chance it won't work.  Fine with me.Disagree, agree, disagree.  Regardless of the "roles", gameplay will always be exactly as inventive as the players can or will roleplay; the characters are much more than just numbers on a page, and if the players give them some character the mechanics being the same pales into insignificance.  Buff spells will be overused regardless of the role mechanics.  What you call an unbalanced encounter I call interesting...a military patrol meets a lone Kobold "Yeah, Sarge, leave it to me; I can take 'im with one 'and behind my back" "OK, Private, go to it" then gets the shock of its life when Private turns coat...I fail to see a problem.To scale the game to 100th level you'd have to make it mighty boring for the first few levels, and as that's where most gameplay usually takes place (particularly for new players) that'd end up being somewhat self-defeating.Interesting discussion! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification