Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tav_Behemoth" data-source="post: 4988407" data-attributes="member: 18017">I agree with the OP that the concept of attacks vs. different defenses are a simple and intuitive way to resolve conflict. It's easy for everyone to agree that a fear spell or a sanity-blasting apparition is an attack vs. Will, while a poison or a stinking cloud spell is an attack vs. Fort.I like DMG p. 42; it's great to see explicit guidelines for "how do you resolve things on the fly?"I like the way that the math of magic items has been simplified from 3E and made easier to strip out so that you could run a low-magic game (or one in which magic items are common but dangerous and unpredictable, like many early-edition games). Previous editions hid this away - 3E's Vow of Poverty rules or the distribution of magic items as treasure in the random charts of TSR editions - and thus made this design element harder to examine and change.</blockquote>