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="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5518940" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I don't mind you asking me any question. Glad to answer them <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />My game is based off of 3.5. It has many of the same rules, though many have changed, or been added. We love the game, we love the structure it provides, we love the reliability it brings to our table.I agree with you about lighter systems being better to incorporate those types of rulings into most of the time. Like I said, I don't do this approach. Instead, I've made an in-depth "Hit Chart" for combat, and the effects are simulated that way. As far as the high ground giving a bonus at 1.5 feet, or whether it doesn't, that's a decision every GM you runs 3.x has to make, as to my knowledge, no specific height is given to qualify for that bonus. I totally agree. As I said, I'm pretty against the narrative style of play. It's not about creating a story for me, and more about seeing what story unfolds. I think we're in complete agreement here. Since I don't use arbitrary rulings in combat, and all in-combat effects are mechanical (with the Hit Chart), I don't need to do anything of that sort when we play. I can just sit back, and wait for the right combination of Hit Chart and NPCs mixing with the characters to make an amazingly memorable fight. They don't happen as often as if I'd arbitrarily rule on things, but when they do, since we all roll in the open, it's pretty amazing for all of us to witness.Other than the GM and players working together, I completely agree (for my group, at least). I try to be as impartial as possible, whether it be to PC or NPC. I'm there to see what the players do, not to help them do it. To that end, I sometimes make unpopular rulings. But we're all old friends (10+ years each), so it's no big deal in the end to us. They know it's not personal when I rule against them, and they know it's not personal when I rule for them.I completely agree about everyone having fun, though. If my style of running a game isn't best for my group's enjoyment, we should probably have someone else run things. Because, play what you like and all that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yep, and that's perfectly okay. I think each group is different, and that's fine. I was just saying, there's nothing wrong with the OP's style of play. He didn't say it was better than anyone else's objectively. He said what he did, why he liked it, and asked if anyone else does anything similar. And, too predictably, people that disagreed railed against it to some small degree, rather than simply saying that they didn't play that way, and why.We're in disagreement on some things (though maybe not as many as you thought!) and that's fine. I'm sure you and your group have a blast, and you should. Because, every group should be having fun. I say don't blast other people for voicing how they have their fun. Just my two cents <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification