Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 4042046" data-attributes="member: 22424">I disagree. IMO, a single freeform system is going to be easier to memorise than a hundred special cases, all with slightly different unique mechanics.In any case, to deal with this you do two things:1) Produce a "D&D Basic Set", that includes the basic combat rules, but doesn't include the freeform system for stunts. That way, new players learn the rules in an easy-to-digest form, without having to worry about either special cases or a stunt system, and then they get to graduate to the 'real' game and find that the knowledge they have acquired is still valid because the systems are 100% compatible - the 'real' game just does more.2) In the first chapter of the PHB and the DMG, insert advice on how best to learn the game. Include things like "Read the basic rules, and then play a few sessions. Then read the advanced rules, and gradually add them". That done, clearly mark the stunt system as "Advanced Rule".They shouldn't be powers, and the previous systems were better in this regard. It is simply absurd that a 30th level Paladin cannot even attempt to disarm Random Orc #3, simply because Disarm is a power reserved for Fighters.The necessity of niche protection is vastly overrated. Beyond extremely low level, you will never see the Wizard attempt a Disarm, Chandelier Swing, or other martial stunt, because the character is so bad at these things as to make it pointless to even try. The niches are better protected just fine by specialisation.Yes, they're examples. Along with all the other examples I provided, they're meant to show the range of things that should not be powers, but rather should fall under the aegis of the freeform stunt system.He did it once, safe in the knowledge that if he missed, it was no big deal. Can he do it every time? Would he even take the (head) shot if he was using real bullets?</blockquote>

Verification