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="jrowland" data-source="post: 5957117" data-attributes="member: 94389">I agree. I like that style of play too.But what if someone decides they REALLY want to play a combat with a BBEG with much more granularity (accounting)? To say "accounting" is bad is not helpful. Its an opinion, certainly, but in the sense of the this threads discussion, it is far from helpful. No one here is saying a "point-based" action economy as the OP or I suggested should be core. Nor are we saying it needs to exclude the simpler economy as presented in the core.What I am saying (and the OP I think is saying) is:1) Core action economy is simple as is.2) There is a desire (from the op e.g.) for more granularity in a module.3) Here is a suggested module option for more granularity via "points" accounting4) Is there anything with the proposed option that might not work? What are the pitfalls?I am not a fan of tons of accounting either. I dislike the 3E keyword bonus accounting. But I can see where someone CAN like it, and a game that appeals to the Pinot Grigio drinkers and the slide-rule lovers would be pretty cool.So how would that work? How do you design an action economy that has a dial from LOW accounting to MEDIUM accounting to HIGH accounting?Check my proposal in this thread. If you don't like the accounting, use the playtest core, If you don't mind some, but not a lot, use AEDU, if you like a lot, use the 6 point economy. There, we can all be happy. So what is the problem?</blockquote>

Verification