Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LurkAway" data-source="post: 5758130" data-attributes="member: 6685059">Agreed. If I've learned anything on Enworld and Legends and Lore, it's that D&D isn't going back to a crunch-heavy RAW core in the foreseeable future.So under a theoretical 4.5E or 5E "fire" keyword entry, I'd like to see:Core/tactical/tournament play: For simplicity and game balance purposes [this is to be transparently open and honest like Rich Baker on Rule-of-Three about the function of the rules vs fiction], we suggest fire causes damage to creatures only. Fire may affect objects and catch fire as per DM discretion -- if so, players should receive cues in advance that using powers with fire keyword may have unexpected effects [so that the players are privy to what would be obvious to the PCs in-game ("Player: what? the papers are catching fire too? DM: Duh, you're in a library! Player: But fireballs never affected objects before?")].Optional play: [guidelines and suggestions to handle above more systematically, in terms of story and game balance too]Plus when you have slots open for optional gameplay like that, you've opened up a niche market for future supplements and/or 3rd party publishers to add extra layers of complexity.I would also like to see some support for optional gameplay that nods to "realism", and not just adventure design that assumes that everyone is roleplaying the "for tactical game balance, we suggest..." play style.</blockquote>