Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="turkeygiant" data-source="post: 7672230" data-attributes="member: 6787083">The "player only rolls" rules just feel clunky to me, yes they would cut down on the rolling the DM has to do and boost the players involvement, but it just adds too many steps to mathematically resolving attacks and defenses. This seems like a mechanic that would be totally viable, but only if it was hard baked into the monster stat blocks right from the beginning. At the very least I would probably need a chart on my DM screen to attempt use this rule.The "vitality" rules really appeal to me, I would characterize attacks that just deal HP to be ones that don't actually hurt your character but put them on the defensive, the attacks that deal HP and Vitality would be the ones that actually connect and inflict an injury. I think I will try this mechanic out in the next D&D campaign I run.I don't have any problems with the "alignment" suggestions, they don't do any harm, but I also don't think they really add anything to the game. Most of the hypothetical "alignments" they describe would probably be better represented in your characters traits, ideals, and flaws, or even by what faction they belong to in that world. What I would really like to see are sliding alignments where your characters choices and actions can incrementally bump them along a good/evil, lawful/chaotic alignment track.</blockquote>