Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dragonhelm" data-source="post: 2368737" data-attributes="member: 3867">I like some things about D&D and other things about C&C, so I'm trying to find a good middle ground between the two.  I've already revised feats to make them simpler.  I might revise skills next to be simpler and to retain a bit more "old school" flavor.This is one point of 3e that I really disagree with.  People don't pick out weapons solely on how much damage they do or for game mechanics reasons.A swashbuckler isn't likely to wield a longsword or a greatsword because it's mechanically better.  A swashbuckler is going to grab that rapier because it fits the swashbuckler style.  Likewise, I don't feel that we should have small and medium size categories for weapons.  Let's face it, a small longsword (there's an oxymoron) is essentially a shortsword.  It makes more sense to me to say that smaller characters wield smaller weapons.I can't say I'm too big of a fan of the critical threat system in general.  I know that it's there to provide game balance, but to me, it takes away from the joy of a natural 20.  Now every game has a different critical hit system, but the way I've always done it, a natural 20 equals double damage (or a roll on the Good Hits and Bad Misses chart).  Likewise, a natural 1 is always a fumble.  If you roll a natural 20, but it has a chance of only doing regular damage, that takes away from the fun.That's not to say that the 3e system is a bad one.  It just isn't for me.</blockquote>

Verification