Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Characters of War up at Wizards
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Runestar" data-source="post: 4447199" data-attributes="member: 72317"><p>MyISPHatesENWorld, your solution is not without its merits, but I ultimately still favour any solution which reduces the incidence of DM fiat to a minimum, or if possible, can do away with it altogether. </p><p></p><p>The issue here is not so much that the DM cannot apply the houserule you have proposed (impose a cap on how high a skill check may go at any 1 level), but that he should not have to. Do bear in mind that there may be people who subscribe to dragon but may not frequent these forums (or the one at Gleemax), and as such remain unaware of any potential problems these background traits may pose. It does not help that the article is prefaced by the designer proclaiming how insignificant these bonuses are, and his comments can be construed as an outright challenge to try and break them. And indeed, some players just might start stacking these bonuses, thinking them harmless as purported.</p><p></p><p>For every astute DM who realizes the implications of allowing these background traits, there are likely many others less experienced who do not. DnD should be designing an internally consistent ruleset which players and DMs alike can readily just pluck out of the book and use as is without having to playtest it first to find out if they are okay or problematic, rather than flooding us with a ton of options containing both useful and crappy material, and putting the onus of sieving out the good from the bad wholly on the DM's shoulders. </p><p></p><p>As such, I advocate nipping the problem in the bud. Likewise, I see no way of justifying to my players why the character who probably doesn't need an intimidate bonus gets one (the one with 10 cha in your example), while the character who would likely appreciate such a boon (ie: the 18cha dragonborn) can't get one.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Runestar, post: 4447199, member: 72317"] MyISPHatesENWorld, your solution is not without its merits, but I ultimately still favour any solution which reduces the incidence of DM fiat to a minimum, or if possible, can do away with it altogether. The issue here is not so much that the DM cannot apply the houserule you have proposed (impose a cap on how high a skill check may go at any 1 level), but that he should not have to. Do bear in mind that there may be people who subscribe to dragon but may not frequent these forums (or the one at Gleemax), and as such remain unaware of any potential problems these background traits may pose. It does not help that the article is prefaced by the designer proclaiming how insignificant these bonuses are, and his comments can be construed as an outright challenge to try and break them. And indeed, some players just might start stacking these bonuses, thinking them harmless as purported. For every astute DM who realizes the implications of allowing these background traits, there are likely many others less experienced who do not. DnD should be designing an internally consistent ruleset which players and DMs alike can readily just pluck out of the book and use as is without having to playtest it first to find out if they are okay or problematic, rather than flooding us with a ton of options containing both useful and crappy material, and putting the onus of sieving out the good from the bad wholly on the DM's shoulders. As such, I advocate nipping the problem in the bud. Likewise, I see no way of justifying to my players why the character who probably doesn't need an intimidate bonus gets one (the one with 10 cha in your example), while the character who would likely appreciate such a boon (ie: the 18cha dragonborn) can't get one.:p [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Characters of War up at Wizards
Top