D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[ECMO3]

Except that if I do not buy a ticket, I am not losing anything but the possibility of winning the lottery. If I do not fight, I am losing the fight. Buying the ticket is gambling, fighting when someone is going to punch you no matter what is not

Not true. You can always kill the enemy on a later turn, or your allies can kill him or numerous other things can happen. The only way this is true is if there is no option that does not involve chance.

You make the choice to attack every turn. When you make that choice you typically give up a sure thing and gamble that the result of that attack on that specific turn will be better then if you did something else.

IF you choose to attack and miss that turn will be worse than if you did something else. IF you miss every single turn (admitedly unlikely) the fight will turn out worse for you then if you did something else every single turn.

It is a gamble. It just is. The odds long term may be in your favor, but that does not change the fact it is a gamble.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think Gnomes are increasingly less popular, and so putting in the effort to really give them a place feels off.

They are always at the bottom of my list, and my current poll shows the same.

Ugh, "popularity" again. It just seems like to narrow the game to exclude options the current in crowd doesn't prefer.

My players love gnomes!

 

[Scribe]

Ugh, "popularity" again. It just seems like to narrow the game to exclude options the current in crowd doesn't prefer.

My players love gnomes!

I'm not suggesting to narrow the game, but time is finite, book space is finite, in a hypothetical where I write 6e, why would I give Gnomes, the same attention as Humans, or Dwarves or Elves?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not suggesting to narrow the game, but time is finite, book space is finite, in a hypothetical where I write 6e, why would I give Gnomes, the same attention as Humans, or Dwarves or Elves?

Because people want to be able to play gnomes in this game you're hypothetically publishing for everyone to play?

 

[Scribe]

Because people want to be able to play gnomes in this game you're hypothetically publishing for everyone to play?

Yeah, I not saying delete them. They do just seem to struggle to find a niche, at least in my experience.

 

[mamba]

Not true. You can always kill the enemy on a later turn, or your allies can kill him or numerous other things can happen.

yeah, killing on a later turn means I eventually have to do something other than avoid getting hit, in which case I might as well do so now already.

Relying on others to solve the problem for me works as long as there are others and they do not follow the same failing strategy of avoiding getting hit at the price of landing hits.

The latter might be a strategy when you are close to death, but if this is your plan going in, you are just dead weight for the party

You make the choice to attack every turn. When you make that choice you typically give up a sure thing and gamble that the result of that attack on that specific turn will be better then if you did something else.

the sure thing being standing around and not doing anything to help…

You can argue that choosing how to attack is a gamble if there is no clearly superior option, but that still does not make it gambling. Not everything where the outcome is uncertain is gambling.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, I not saying delete them. They do just seem to struggle to find a niche, at least in my experience.

I was always fond of tinker gnomes, but my players seem to enjoy the fey kind as well.

 

[Reynard]

I am reminded: the most important 6E improvement is NO GNOMES. Except perhaps as as a lore official food source for gnolls.

 

[Chaltab]

Gnomes, like monks, will be pried out of my cold dead hands.

Huh.. I've never played a gnome monk before.

 

[Zardnaar]

Maybe they should power creep Gnomes to hell and back.

Nice change from Elfitis. I wouldn't cut them but theyre pointless. Tinker Gnomes suck but magitech Gnomes at least are a niche.