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="Imagicka" data-source="post: 1769148" data-attributes="member: 4621">Greetings...    Well, I have to disagree with you. I think it is the need of every RPG to have a ruleset that does simulate a certain amount of realism accurately. If it doesn't then the players do not have a frame of reference such as the 'real world' to be able to say "This is what would happen if I did this!". Now, D&D and most RPGs simulate a heroic/fantastical setting where combat is cinematic. That one hack of a claymore isn't going to take off someone's arm. That, I think we would all agree, is a little too realist.    But I want a system where I can have a pretty good idea what would happen if I jumped off a 20 foot bridge into a rocky dry river bed, or if I fell off the top of a castle wall. Even if we state: This isn't realism, it's fantasy. I still want to know where the boundries are.  I want to know what I can expect from the 'reality'.       Well, maybe it's time to slaughter some of D&D's sacred cows.       I don't think D&D has worked well for 20+ years. I know countless people who left D&D because they thought it was 'too broken'. My idea of working well is a system where I don't have to houserule it, and you show me any group's game with 2nd Edition that wasn't HEAVILY houseruled. Heck, even show me a game with 3.5 that also isn't houseruled. I don't know of many D&D games nowadays that isn't houseruled as well. Perhaps that D&D as an aire about it, which people feel it's okay to tweak here and there. Or perhaps the idea of houseruling things just stems from the idea that players/DMs want to carry ideas over from 2.0 to 3.0 to 3.5, I don't know their reasons...but I do know a lot of people houserule D&D. Other RPGs, sure you get some houseruling, but not to the extent you see with D&D.    Is it the fact that people say 'what the heck?' and don't bother to houserule the problems that they might find with other RPGs, and just tolerate them? Or is it the fact that they find that they don't need to modify/houserule other RPGs? I would say it's more the latter. I've played lots of other systems and didn't feel I needed to houserule them to patch up glaring holes as I feel I need to do with D&D.         I don't know. AoO are tricky and messy sometimes, but it's all part of having a combat system that allows for physical combat tactics. -- "Combat Tactics Mr. Ryan"      Should combat be a simple series of hit/damage - counter-hit/damage? Should it be a series of tactical moves? I think that answer should be left up to the individual DMs/players. If you don't like AoO, remove it from your game. There's nothing that says that you can't go back to the 2nd Ed. style of combat. But that option should be there. Personally, I like it...I want to know that the fighter who we all know has a horrible Will Save against magick, and is going to be turned into smoldering piles of clothing and burnt meat as soon as that arch-magus casts his spell, is going to have that OoA chance to cut off the magus' head with a swing of his trusty battle-axe, or at least, maybe disrupt his spell.      Ahh...get yourself a little reminder list and paperclip it onto the back of your character sheet. <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" /></blockquote>

Verification