D&D 5E Companion thread to 5E Survivor: Species

[el-remmen]

Remove Gnomes, and I'll upvote Lizards.

Unfortunately, after lizardfolk, forest gnomes are my next choice. Choose something else and we can talk.

Save the gnomes!!

I got you, brother.

 

[Tonguez]

The goblins. Save the Goblins.
The gnomes are cordwood we almost got rid of last edition.

I like Gobbos almost as much as Gnomes,

So can’t we just all get along and kill the Gith instead?

 

[Scribe]

Unfortunately, after lizardfolk, forest gnomes are my next choice. Choose something else and we can talk.



I got you, brother.

Don't say I didn't try.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Because we shouldnt operate at 'full optimum' all the time.

I'm not asking for that. Why is "you are actually doing the thing that you're about" suddenly equal to "you are absolutely optimal all the time"?

It allows for choice,

It does? Where? What? I am genuinely confused.

it allows for variables in encounters.

Those already exist. They're called creatures, terrain, traps, and environmental effects.

The idea we should always get to 'go off' just leads (all imo of course) to poor design and an increasing 'sameness' every encounter.

Only if your encounters are designed poorly...

Resources, all kinds, should matter more.

...that's not a contradiction of what I said. You can make resources matter AND get to consistently use your core tools. The resources become filigrees, modifications, special extra things.

 

[Scribe]

the does still needs to be altered so you get to experience the core game play you picked not a worse fighter for rageless barbarian.
plus if resources where higher we could afford monsters designed to take them away from you meaning more verity as well as fear of things.
you should get to play the core of your idea as fast as possible so you can determine if it was even worth selecting and build up.

not to say there should not be balance but I should get the core class fantasy from the get-go.

"My core gameplay is casting fireball forever."

The class fantasy, is still there without having full power from the get go.

It does? Where? What? I am genuinely confused.

Do you rage, or not? That's a choice to be made, how is that confusing?

Those already exist. They're called creatures, terrain, traps, and environmental effects.

So, add more. 5e already is stripped down, we don't need even less choice.

You can make resources matter AND get to consistently use your core tools. The resources become filigrees, modifications, special extra things.

But rage IS a special extra thing.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm not asking for that. Why is "you are actually doing the thing that you're about" suddenly equal to "you are absolutely optimal all the time"?

D&D.

The game that says you can do anything is terrified of players actually doing anything before they allow it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

D&D.

The game that says you can do anything is terrified of players actually doing anything before they allow it.

They say the truth hurts. I think this one crit.

 

[CleverNickName]

If the first two rules of Fight Club are "you do not talk about Fight Club,"
the first two rules of D&D are "you can make your own rules."

 

[Vaalingrade]

If the first two rules of Fight Club are "you do not talk about Fight Club,"
the first two rules of D&D are "you can make your own rules."

The third two rules are 'I'm the DM and I don't understand why this is fun for you, so no.'.

 

[CleverNickName]

The third two rules are 'I'm the DM and I don't understand why this is fun for you, so no.'.

I'm not sure I follow. Your DM doesn't understand what you enjoy about the game?

If so, that definitely sucks. But it doesn't sound like a "rules" problem, it sounds more like a "fellow human at the table" problem.