Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6272782" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think  [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has identified the difficulty facing these options for a wide part of the D&D audience - namely, that they do not like the changes to resolution mechanics that are required to make these viable.For instance, resolving a teleport spell at the table - even one with classic D&D dangers - takes a couple of minutes. Resolving overland travel using traditional D&D mechanics can easily take more than a couple of minutes per day of travel.Similarly, if having a fighter search a village house-to-house requires the player of the fighter to actually resolve that on a granular level, plotting his/her PC's movements on the town map and resolving the interaction with each inhabitant, it is going to take forever to play out even if in purely probabilistic terms it is equally efficient, and even if, in terms of ingame time, the fighter's search only takes a few hours while we give Discern Location a casting time of 1 day.To make non-magical versatility in exploration viable at the table, mechanical traditions have to be departed from.The attempt to balance fighters in combat along these lines turns out to have not been so popular. It may not be any more popular, for the D&D audience, if adapted to out-of-combat versatility.</blockquote>