Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Juomari Veren" data-source="post: 7672302" data-attributes="member: 87428">Both, honestly. I don't mind variant rules, I loved most of the ones in the DMG (Especially proficiency dice, just like the old playtests), but these ones change things that either don't need to be changed or change them in a way that doesn't do anything, less alone their intended use. Variant alignments I get, but I find it unnecessary to replace because, simply put, it works in this system. Alignment is always overcomplicated in discussions and arguments because people think it's hard and fast, but it really isn't, and should never be interpreted as such except in extreme cases(where things are unflinchingly so because it's what they are, like angels and devils). The need to make it so incredibly specific is half the reason the alignment axis exists; because it's simply saying this person is generally this or that, and not so intensely specific on what the character's moral code is that character sheets require whole sections to talk about it.Vitality is probably the best thought out system, but I've never actually seen or heard anybody complain about hit points in the ways that warrant this variant. That said I'm sure there's kinks to iron out in it, namely that I'd rather a system that eliminates hit points and replaces it with something else over this. But Players Make All Rolls is what really angers me. Player agency is a big deal in games, and heaven forbid you'd never want to play under a DM who essentially tells you a story about a bunch of random people that you guys meet with little involvement from you, but I don't see how this is in any way supposed to expedite gameplay - the same number of rolls are being made and there's no new way of making a roll(a defense roll is essentially an AC saving throw), so it cuts nothing out and just turns the bookkeeping around on the players instead of the DM. Half of the fun of DMing is also in one's agency to make rolls for all of the monsters. It might be 1 vs. many but I think it slows things down and feels lifeless to have the players do all the important rolling.And, of course, the worst offense is that they released this as part of a monthly column that, while being all about options, is always more in-depth than three pages and has a lot more stuff to it. I'd even be happier if they simply had another 2 pages of variants for stuff, but a 3-page article of useless rules that probably took mere days if not hours to complete is hardly satisfactory work on their part. I would hope that they realize that this is a pretty poor package and release something extra later in the month for us(or make july's stuff just as good), because this is a pretty big failure to deliver in my opinion.</blockquote>

Verification