Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 3383716" data-attributes="member: 32164">It's the "plus a few more things" that's the core of the debate here. Since people were advocating the viability of "disguise yourselves as baby giants" plans, I had assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you and those who share your opinion long for the days when D&D had no skill rules. Back then, almost everything your PC could do was determined by the player's creativity and the DM's ability to handle "out-of-the-box" plans.I didn't say it would. I admit that INT would continue to get points for characters who want skill points, though personally, I never have enough skill points. But that's probably because I insist on putting skill points into bluff, sense motive, and all those other "unnecessary" roleplaying skills.If common sense were common, there'd be no point in a game with rules at all. Everyone would just agree that a particular situation can be resolved X way, and that's that. But what you're talking about is coming up with a rule to cover a situation on the fly. That's game design, whether you believe it or not. And if the rule is used consistently, then congratulations, you've just created a houserule. Personally, I prefer solid skill rules that an experienced DM can choose to alter, once he's familiar enough with the system. So I'm busting your bust. I am a DM who prefers modifying a comprehensive rule system to coming up with new rules on the fly.  Let's see. Consider two statements that one might have seen on a message board or on the letters pages of Dragon magazine:1) "I want my players to ROLEPLAY at the table. I just wish they'd get more involved in the character interactions."2) "All of my players are min-maxers!! They spend all of their points on the stats that benefit them in combat! This whole 'designing' for a 'build' paradigm sucks! The only character in my group with a charisma over 8 is the cleric (for the turn bonus). The fighter is a former mercenary captain, but he has a charisma of 8? What the hell!? Whatever happened to creating a personality?"Would you say that:A. 1 is a statement often made by the "roleplaying over rollplaying" crowd.B. 2 is a statement often made by the "roleplaying over rollplaying" crowd.C. A but not B.D. B but not A.E. A & BF. Neither A nor B.Personally, I think it's E. I think a lot of people would agree with me. And that's where I'm coming from. Do you disagree?</blockquote>

Verification