D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Zaukrie]

No, that is not the obvious fix. They tried that with some monsters in 4e and I've tried it in 5e. To much work IME. The legendary monsters work better. Now, prehaps having two turns might work, but more than that was a hassle IME.

We just disagree. I'm ok with that. Nimble? Solos act after every player.....and it is great. DH? Just use Fear after ever player (or whatever, go when you want)......

 

[Scribe]

Funnily enough, with the exception of 1e to 2e, every edition has been extremely different from the previous one.

People should be more willing to throw things out and try new stuff for this hypothetical edition.

I was thinking about this with 40K. I dont think they really threw everything out and started over, until...10th? From 3rd to 9th it was mostly the same? I'd have to go back, but that is certainly true from 3rd to 5th, and likely 3rd to 7th.

 

[CreamCloud0]

why not use a shortbow instead? I’d much rather say your sword-guy also is good with the bow instead…

Have your spinning attack for AoE, heck even a ground-stomp, but a sword that takes double duty as a ranged weapon, why?

-melee characters often don't/can't spec for both dex and strength so are worse when forced into using ranged weapons.
-melee weapons deal more damage than thrown weapons.
-melee characters often have specced their character build into their melee weapon so will likely have synergies built up with it unlike their ranged weapon.

 

[Scribe]

-melee characters often don't/can't spec for both dex and strength so are worse when forced into using ranged weapons.
-melee weapons deal more damage than thrown weapons.
-melee characters often have specced their character build into their melee weapon so will likely have synergies built up with it unlike their ranged weapon.

All of which is true, correct, and fine.

A swing of a sword should never cut a galleon in half...from range.

 

[CreamCloud0]

All of which is true, correct, and fine.

A swing of a sword should never cut a galleon in half...from range.

i'd would debate the 'never' on that but before we get to that discussion i'd at least like the capability to be able to cut a galleon in half from melee.

 

[ECMO3]

Given nearly every game has gotten rid of them, it's not hard at all.

I don't play other games, my question is how do those other games randomly generate those scores. Is it like I said 1d6 -3?

People here are complaining about balance, well this guarantees wide imbalance between players in any substantial size group, even if they make exactly the same build choices.

 

[ECMO3]

That is not what they are suggesting. They are say use the modifiers only (it is in the part you quoted) like PF2. So instead of a strength "18" you have a strength "+3."

Well 18 is a plus 4, that is fine, but how do you get that +3 or +4 to start with?

Most players put the "+4" in the big box on the character sheet anyway and the "18" is just a reference that is never used in play, so I don't see what this changes from the current system other than eliminating what is a generally a good way to statistically determine starting abilities.

 

[Scribe]

i'd would debate the 'never' on that but before we get to that discussion i'd at least like the capability to be able to cut a galleon in half from melee.

I really just cannot get on board with that, even if we are talking Planar level campaign. It's just beyond nonsensical to me but thats a personal issue I guess.

 

[ECMO3]

I don't think that's possible.

I can't imagine any system that would (for example) run adventures in Middle Earth, Westros, Faerun, Night City, Gotham and Tattooine. If it did, they would have to be so plain and generic as to be "let's pretend, but with a resolution mechanic". Something like the Cypher system rather than D&D.

I think it is possible, you just need a much less rules-intensive mathematical model for the system. Have more things decided by feel, quality and judgement instead of rules and numbers.

 

[Zaukrie]

Well 18 is a plus 4, that is fine, but how do you get to the +3 or +4?

Most players put the "+4" in the big box on the character sheet anyway and the "18" is just a reference that is never used in play, so I don't see what this changes from the current system.

If it isn't used, but takes up space on a sheet, that's bad, imo. The less clutter for things that aren't used, the better. I'm not trying to convince anyone, btw. This thread asks what we want......I want simple, yet interesting (Nimble is very close).