D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Remathilis]

I know you're joking, but I have done that and had fun with it -both as a DM and a player.

I don't have an issue if you want to play D&D like analog Diablo. I just don't want that the default assumption for character, world, or adventure building.

 

[Remathilis]

If part of the ongoing discussion is the disparity between martial classes and magic classes, I am at a loss for how to proceed when presented with the line of logic that says (very liberally paraphrasing) "magic users should have all these cool powerful abilities with none of the drawbacks they had before" while also having complaints about imbalance.

I didn't say that. I don't think balancing the potential power of fireball should be "...and sometimes you kill your friends instead". I'd rather have those "cool powerful abilities" be brought in line with the other classes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't have an issue if you want to play D&D like analog Diablo. I just don't want that the default assumption for character, world, or adventure building.

What does it matter what the "default" is, so long as the options you want to are available? I love random generation, but you certainly don't need to rely on it 100%. It's very useful for inspiration or as a base to build from, and when you're in a bind and need to improvise.

 

[Parmandur]

You know what else would be fun? DMs have to randomly generate all dungeons and make all encounters random encounters! All treasure randomized! All towns procedurally generated. All NPC reactions rolled. Why should DMs not have the fun of having their creative efforts bound to the dice?

Don't threaten me with a good time.

Random charts are wonderful.

 

[Parmandur]

If systems are designed in a way random char gen isn’t so impactful I don’t mind it. Traveller for example, has a much smaller stat mod range and no leveling so your stats don’t change much.

D&D is another beast entirely where the range could be drastic and only grow with leveling. Not my cup of RPG.

Honestly, I've never seen it as much of an issue in D&D. Now, I only started with 3E, so "cheating" has always probavly been built in with 4d6 drop lowest and guidelines to let a PC reroll if it doesn't match the minimum threshold...but I've never seen anyone even consider a non-rolling option. It is as intrinsic to D&D as having Levels or resolving rolls with a d20.

 

[payn]

Honestly, I've never seen it as much of an issue in D&D. Now, I only started with 3E, so "cheating" has always probavly been built in with 4d6 drop lowest and guidelines to let a PC reroll if it doesn't match the minimum threshold...but I've never seen anyone even consider a non-rolling option. It is as intrinsic to D&D as having Levels or resolving rolls with a d20.

I mean, with all the fail safe rolling methods you might as well be using an array at that point. Rolling in my groups stopped being a thing 25 years ago. I usually only see it in OSR games. Though, I can tell some folks like to harken back, even with their failsafe fake out methods.

 

[TiQuinn]

I mean, with all the fail safe rolling methods you might as well be using an array at that point. Rolling in my groups stopped being a thing 25 years ago. I usually only see it in OSR games. Though, I can tell some folks like to harken back, even with their failsafe fake out methods.

Yeah, even back in the day, we'd roll 4d6 drop lowest multiple times until we got the character we wanted with scores that everyone just nodded "we're acceptable" - as if they passed some communal smell test. Point buy or standard array just gets rid of all that nonsense.

 

[Faolyn]

I would have accepted that if the wizard and cleric spells weren't full to the brim with combat magic. But they are. You want to fighter to shine? Get rid of magic missile, fireball, flame strike, spiritual hammer, hold person, etc. Make THEM stand around doing nothing most of the combat too. (The cleric can heal afterwards, the wizard can't do something like grease once per combat.)

The fighter can tell us when he's done with combat.

I'd say keep the damage-dealing cantrips, even letting them scale with level, but anything higher that directly deals damage can either be removed or limited to use with magic items. So you can keep wall of fire, but not fireball.

The cantrips are because it works well in a lot fantasy fiction for casters to be able to do at least minor amounts of damage ("Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?"), and because going pew pew is fun. Plus, not everyone wants to be relegated to mere support; some people just want to see the targets burn.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'd say keep the damage-dealing cantrips, even letting them scale with level, but anything higher that directly deals damage can either be removed or limited to use with magic items. So you can keep wall of fire, but not fireball.

The cantrips are because it works well in a lot fantasy fiction for casters to be able to do at least minor amounts of damage ("Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?"), and because going pew pew is fun. Plus, not everyone wants to be relegated to mere support; some people just want to see the targets burn.

There's really nothing minor about combat cantrips though; each of them is equivalent to a ranged weapon strike, more or less, plus typed damage and usually a rider. Having them in a setting changes that setting in a huge way IMO, and largely not for the better.

 

[Faolyn]

I really dislike milestone. I do it under duress.

Whereas I'd rather not get XP from killing things.