|
For a game to be good for new players it must be three things. 1) Easily learned entirely on it's own with no veteran player looking over your shoulder. 2) A cool gimmick that grabs new players and makes them want to give a poo poo in the first place. 3) Advertised in media outside of the pre-existing demographics. Next fails literally all of those. Which isn't surprising, because for all it's claims of being the COOL SIMPLE D&D FOR ANYONE NO RULES ONLY GMs, it was still written mostly for old players who sneer at games being for "the WoW generation." You're not going to entice new players with a game who's target audience is people who read articles about THE ME GENERATION and nod on their blogs about those drat players and their filthy anti-GM entitlement.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
SmellOfPetroleum posted:Didn't one of the playtest packets include a segment of the Keep on the Borderlands / Caves of Chaos? Considering the number of times Temple of Elemental Evil gets repurposed for current editions, it would be nice if good old B/X era stuff ever came around again. Thinking back I suspect I forgot to include the characters' proficiency bonuses in their rolls, but since I didn't use the kobolds' Pack Tactics either it probably balanced out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Yes, and when I tested it (by creating four level 1 characters and sending them into the kobold caves), I had a TPK at the pit right inside the entrance when the Wizard flubbed his DEX roll and fell in, alerting the kobolds on guard (who took out two of the other characters in one round) and the 30 rats from the next room, who demolished the survivors 1HP at a time. Ha ha fun. I wasn't sure if that was intended for the playtest or just my friend wanting to run it. If I remember correctly we took out most of the warren with a sleep spell which was obscenely overpowered in that playtest and use of bottlenecking/caltrops in the corridors. Then we nearly tpk'd from the boss kobold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
That was probably my least favorite playtest packet that I DMed. My players didn't fall into any pits but everyone died to a room that had like 20 kobolds or goblins or some other bland-rear end poo poo. I think it was also that packet where the wizard PC used ray of frost to solo-kite an ogre to death, which was the single most WoW-like thing I've ever seen actually happen in a tabletop game. Also I remember one PC throwing rocks instead of using their ranged weapon because it worked out better that way, but gently caress if I remember exactly why. I recall the one after that being mechanically better, but not as memorable. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
I am literally the only human being I have ever met who learned D&D without a veteran player in the post-Basic era, and the first game I played was STILL DM'd by an old grognard because I didn't understand the game well enough to explain it to others. I would say that AD&D and its successors, in general, on the whole, are unlearnable without a veteran player. Hell, Wizards of the Coast agrees with me: http://angrydm.com/2014/09/dear-wotc-why-do-you-suck-at-selling-games/ quote:Mearls and Noonan hosted the Official D&D Podcast together until right around the release of D&D 4E. And in one episode, they were discussing marketing D&D. And David Noonan explained what he called “the older cousin” sales model. That article details the fact that Wizards of the Coast does not have a plan for marketing D&D to anyone who isn't learning from an existing customer. This is a thing that they recognize but for some reason don't have the self-awareness to address. The simple fact about the recent history of D&D's accessibility is that 4th had the beginnings of some very accessible language. Examples have been posted in this thread, several of them. That language has been copied, pasted, and then amended to make it less accessible in 5th. I'm kind of bugged by all the people saying "Well yeah D&D's just hard to learn, 5th didn't make that happen." You're right, but it did reverse a trajectory that was headed toward making that NOT the case. Just little things like the section talking about the core mechanic has been made less accessible in a manner I can only conclude was intentional. The bullshit you have to deal with to learn to play D&D up until 5th edition was incompetence, now it's more like malpractice. One of the reasons Essentials infuriates me is that if it had been a continuation of 4th's trajectory, removing some combat options (especially the standard ones where like, if you announce you're going to grapple someone in D&D everyone groans as the DM whips out the rulebook, and there are a few moves like that), etc. it could have been a worthy successor to Basic that could actually introduce people to the hobby. Hell, if Essentials had included the PHB1 basic classes and races with reduced options that ramped up to level 5 and then transitioned you to the core books BECMI style, it would have been brilliant. But instead, Essentials was used as an opportunity to reintroduce 3rd edition ideas into 4th. You had a whole product built around accessibility and the language's accessibility was REDUCED, it's insane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I am literally the only human being I have ever met who learned D&D without a veteran player in the post-Basic era, and the first game I played was STILL DM'd by an old grognard because I didn't understand the game well enough to explain it to others. Hey! I'm not the only self-taught one!  I didn't have an old grognard to DM, so me and my two best friends slogged through the first few games before learning the ropes and loving it.That said, one of my players really wants me to get a game of this going, I basically only run homebrew campaigns, so is there a list of monsters by CR anywhere? I didn't remember seeing one as I glanced through the MM.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Jade Mage posted:That said, one of my players really wants me to get a game of this going, I basically only run homebrew campaigns, so is there a list of monsters by CR anywhere? I didn't remember seeing one as I glanced through the MM. You can find it here on their website. http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop-games/rpg-products/monster-manual For some reason they decided not to include it in the book itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
There's one in the DM guide. For some reason that made sense to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Just DM'd a second session of Next. It took us three hours to do two combats and some plot, even with everyone's characters already created before starting. And this was at level 1 and I could tell the Druid was getting bored because she didn't have shifting yet. That's as far as I'll go with this system, I think. I've run B/X and its TAAC retroclone and Microlite20 and none of them felt this draggy and rules-heavy. It just took forever to figure out how to do something. I have Dungeon World, HeroQuest 2.0, RuneQuest and maybe even GURPS on my "to try" list.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
I think I'm just gonna GURPS Lite off a tablet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
If you want to know how to introduce someone to the hobby without having an older player hold their hand through it, get a copy of the original Basic red box at some point and read through the first section. It's basically brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:If you want to know how to introduce someone to the hobby without having an older player hold their hand through it, get a copy of the original Basic red box at some point and read through the first section. It's basically brilliant. I've never gotten a chance to read that one (was before my time), but I've heard lots of good things about it. How does it go about introducing people to the game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Bob Quixote posted:How does it go about introducing people to the game? It's got a Choose your own Adventure bit as an intro dungeon, and slowly introduces the basic mechanics to the player over the course of it and does so in a clear, concise manner; it assumes that you have no idea what an RPG is, and instructs accordingly. For how old it is, it's really well-done as an intro experience, and can get a player up and running with how this whole "pretend I'm an elf" business works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
So it's not that I think any of the criticisms being leveled are wrong exactly, but they might be over selling the issues. It'd be like if someone came into a music thread and said, "My friends and I have never listened to this 'music' thing before and we thought we'd start by listening to this Katty Perry lady," only to be told that she's too derivative, and her albums don't form into any sort of cohesive whole, and to try Miles Davis instead. Those criticisms might be true, but they are also only something you'd care about if you and your friends had listened to music before. Yeah a new player is going to get a lot of rules wrong if they play next, but its not like anyone is going to be around to call them on it. So long as the DM is willing to adjust if people seem to become bored, it's really not an issue. Though, for what its worth, I wish more games made a bigger deal about telling DMs how to run a game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
There's only so much adjusting any DM can do. Why not nip it in the bud and help people find games where they won't have to? also 5e is not Katy Perry. 5e is Mike Mearls trying to sing Katy Perry songs on stage while wearing her tiny outfits and maybe he changes a couple words here and there. Hwurmp fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Anyone read and tried the beginners box set FFG puts out for their new star wars games? I've gone through them as a GM but already had a bunch of pre-knowledge on the game so I would be interested to hear how people going in blind used it to help learn the system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
The true mark of a quality game is that it's expected that you and your friends will stumble around blindly getting everything wrong, but it's okay because the GM will step in to make things fun regardless somehow. Coming soon from Wizards of the Coast, the Good GM Expansion Pack containing one good GM to enhance your D&D Next experience along with a full set of polyhedral dice and a GM's screen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:There's only so much adjusting any DM can do. Why not nip it in the bud and help people find games where they won't have to? Well, what I'm saying is that I would buy $150 worth of core books to see Mike Mearls prance around in a size 0 rubber minidress. Don't get me wrong! I'm not saying Next is great or anything, only that 80% of an RPG's fun comes from pretending to be an elf with your friends. And that you need a little bit of actual game play experience to tell what exactly is missing to fill in the remaining 20%. wallawallawingwang fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
wallawallawingwang posted:Well, what I'm saying is that I would buy $150 worth of core books to see Mike Mearls prance around in a size 0 rubber minidress. The issue is that in this analogy, Katy Perry's music is free, and Miles Davis's costs maybe $10 or $20.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
So I've recently taken up DnD, I play once a week with some friends down a pub. I suspect they have all played plenty before but I also get the impression they play quite casually, to the extent that I don't think they've ever bothered to read the rulebook fully. That said I wanted to share my thoughts and feelings, despite the fact you never asked for it. Some background to me though, I saw my friends roleplaying at this gaming club we went to and I thought it looked kinda cool. I took part as like cameo style roles in a few games, I don't think any of them were DnD I can't really remember. After that I got fed up of people doing stupid poo poo while DMing and sessions seeming hit and miss, so I decided to GM a campaign of my own. I GM'd a Rogue Trader WH40K campaign despite never having played it before straight off the bat with a group of like 8 (!) people and the campaign lasted for about 8 months. Generally now my friends tell me it was the best campaign they had taken part in, so maybe I'm a natural or lucky as poo poo or something when it comes to pen and paper RPGs. That said, I joined this DnD group and joined them like 4 sessions in I think. For accuracy's sake, I created my character using the quick build to assign stats, and I picked a hill dwarf rogue charlatan, mainly because I liked the Varric-esque vibe it had going and I had just finished playing DA:I. The first session was a bit confusing, but I had also not bothered reading the rulebook so had to be sort of guided through it. I got conflicting advice about what the proficiency bonus does etc. I got that the D20 was like the go-to dice for most things, but then other times you had all this other crazy poo poo going on. Stats in the 40K RPGs sort of set the benchmark for most actions, and then the GM simply adjusted them (e.g. a ballistic skill of 35 means you need to roll under 35 to hit someone when shooting, but based on various factors you can modify this). In this it was totally weird seeing my stats as something that just modified my roll slightly, and the GM was basically setting the difficulty of everything I do in secret. By the third session I downloaded the (full) rulebook from a friend. I was surprised to find it basically was 3 books each of which are quite expensive when you compare it to any of the 40K RPGs I had played, where the core rulebook was about £40 but that's all you needed. That said I don't see where this "inaccessible" thing is coming from that some people have said. I mean I don't think my group are actually using most/all of the rules we should be, and we're not playing the game on a grid, but it seems relatively straight forward, and in some respects too straight forward. In the 40K RPGs you had all sorts of attacks that did different things, whereas it seems my Rogue gets to attack..... and that's about it. I know I may be missing more to the system, maybe I missed it in the rulebook, but that's how it comes across to me. It seems like it's quite easy to basically get a game going and play it even though it's sort of not entirely right, but if you "get" why the game has a GM/DM, then you should get that their job is to make the game run smoothly, even if it means letting people do poo poo they normally wouldn't be allowed to do. Yeah technically you need tests to jump across those slippery stones on a lake, which you all passed the first time, but if you cross them, then cross them again as you're going back and forth it's a pain in the arse, so the DM goes "OK well you've done this a few times now so you're pretty used to it on these specific stones" and you all avoid watching the cleric fall into the lake and nearly drown again. I mean I genuinely enjoy playing with the group of players, but that's probably because I like the players. I think DnD is "OK" but I prefer the percentile system from 40K RPGs (and others I assume). I think if you've literally never heard of pen and paper RPGs ever before in your life and never even seen one being played yeah it would be difficult to get this right first time, but most the board games I own are like that as well (I'm looking at you twilight struggle). The biggest problem I have is the combat does seem like everyone is just basic attacking things or throwing spells around, I know the rogue gets all these sneak attack things as you level up, but I don't see how I ever make an attack other than "I stab it". Please enlighten me though if I'm horribly wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
wallawallawingwang posted:So it's not that I think any of the criticisms being leveled are wrong exactly, but they might be over selling the issues. It'd be like if someone came into a music thread and said, "My friends and I have never listened to this 'music' thing before and we thought we'd start by listening to this Katty Perry lady," only to be told that she's too derivative, and her albums don't form into any sort of cohesive whole, and to try Miles Davis instead. Those criticisms might be true, but they are also only something you'd care about if you and your friends had listened to music before. If you go into a discussion thread and talk about how you're thinking about doing something, you presumably want some second opinions on what you're about to do. And if you're going to promptly ignore all those opinions and the alternative recommendations, why did you even bother to post in the first place? These threads don't exist for the sole purpose of validating your decisions. wallawallawingwang posted:Yeah a new player is going to get a lot of rules wrong if they play next, but its not like anyone is going to be around to call them on it. So long as the DM is willing to adjust if people seem to become bored, it's really not an issue. Though, for what its worth, I wish more games made a bigger deal about telling DMs how to run a game. Almost all the design issues in D&D stem from 'adjustments' made to the early editions without properly understanding why the early editions were designed in such a fashion. Which in turn leads to more adjustments to patch over the cracks and rough edges, repeat as necessary until you have a frankenstein of a game that doesn't really know what it's trying to do. And all that could have been avoided if they had a design goal that was more than 'does this feel like D&D?', when the feeling of what D&D is has been poisoned by years of frankenstein play. wallawallawingwang posted:Don't get me wrong! I'm not saying Next is great or anything, only that 80% of an RPG's fun comes from pretending to be an elf with your friends. And that you need a little bit of actual game play experience to tell what exactly is missing to fill in the remaining 20%. Which begs the question: why are you playing D&D? Why not any of the other RPGs that let you pretend to be an elf with your friends?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
wallawallawingwang posted:Well, what I'm saying is that I would buy $150 worth of core books to see Mike Mearls prance around in a size 0 rubber minidress. Assuming I agree with this breakdown, which I don't, that doesn't speak very highly of RPGs as a pastime when they're only accountable for 20% of a given hobby hour's enjoyability. Why not just stick with the 80% that's actually fun then? You don't need to pay $100+ to pretend to be an elf with your friends if that's what you're into.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:That said I wanted to share my thoughts and feelings, despite the fact you never asked for it. That's great, and I'm glad you are having fun, so please don't take this next part as a personal attack or something. Kitchner posted:The first session was a bit confusing, but I had also not bothered reading the rulebook so had to be sort of guided through it. I got conflicting advice about what the proficiency bonus does etc. This is what people mean by "not accessible". A group of people have been playing for 4 sessions, and they can't teach a newcomer what the proficiency bonus does, without giving conflicting advice. This is not an edge case optional rule in a specific situation, this is one of the core concepts of the game. Kitchner posted:That said I don't see where this "inaccessible" thing is coming from that some people have said. I mean I don't think my group are actually using most/all of the rules... "It's not inaccessible if you ignore enough of the rules" isn't really the same thing as "it's accessible". Kitchner posted:The biggest problem I have is the combat does seem like everyone is just basic attacking things or throwing spells around, I know the rogue gets all these sneak attack things as you level up, but I don't see how I ever make an attack other than "I stab it". Please enlighten me though if I'm horribly wrong. You're not wrong. Your attack options will always amount to slightly better versions of "stab them", unless you choose Arcane Trickster, in which case you can also be a poo poo version of the wizard while you stab them. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
5e is fine and playable, albeit not good. Except for fighters being rear end, most of the glaring bad stuff is all the burden of the DM so most playgroups won't notice or just blame their DMs rather than the game. This looks and feels like the D&D most people know and they are loving it and playing it over better games because of that. Pee pee doo doo it is a bad game but not bad enough that anyone cares aside from the people in this forum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
A major design goal of 5e appears to have been to make the rules as ignorable as possible from a player (not DM) perspective. Is this a worthy goal, and to what extent did they succeed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:A major design goal of 5e appears to have been to make the rules as ignorable as possible from a player (not DM) perspective. Is this a worthy goal, and to what extent did they succeed? Remembering the way my crew played 2nd edition way back when, it isn't even the best at that. I'm pretty sure we ignored almost all the rules and still managed to play a game that could be called dungeons and dragons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
The fact that there are so many rules in the first place made that feel difficult to do. Everyone has "what's the rule for this? am I allowed to do that?" going in the back of their mind the whole time. I tried to do my best to keep things moving by making up rulings on the spot (and conferring Advantage/Disadvantage can make circumstantial bonuses easy to apply) but I don't feel that Next was particularly helpful otherwise. EDIT: I guess some of it was that the group used the roll20 Next character sheet like as close to RAW as they could, so that whenever I asked them for a check they'd have to fiddle around and look for which page or which macro or which button triggered that check. It wants to be a fast-playing system, but when all I'm asking for is a STR check to break down a door and the player has to think about STR modifier, and then proficiency bonus, and then do I have expertise? It's still slower than a game where the character explicitly has a "door breaking" ability. The first session of Next that I did went much faster than this one because I didn't even ask for a character sheet - the players just had theirs in a Notepad on their end and would type out "roll d20+4" or whatever. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
5e honestly wasn't designed for rules to be ignorable. They just added "...And you can avoid the rules!" as a get out of jail free card to making bad rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:That's great, and I'm glad you are having fun, so please don't take this next part as a personal attack or something. Unless you're going to call me a cock sucker or something I'm not going to take people pointing stuff out or discussing things as an attack. Besides, there's no photo evidence I've ever sucked a sock anyway, because I always delete the evidence. AlphaDog posted:This is what people mean by "not accessible". A group of people have been playing for 4 sessions, and they can't teach a newcomer what the proficiency bonus does, without giving conflicting advice. This is not an edge case optional rule in a specific situation, this is one of the core concepts of the game. I do kinda get what you mean, but I will say that most the group aren't very good at RPGs in general. I had some really good players when I ran my RT campaign, and I'm not talking good as in they can min/max the character and kill everything, I mean they really got what it means to create a character and act as they would act and, importantly, not gently caress up the game while doing so. So I think we could have been playing almost any RPG format and they would have struggled to explain properly. I do kinda get what you mean because some of the rules aren't being used (like no-one is watching encumbrance for example) but I feel as it's not a boardgame you can be flexible with the rules and still play it. Also we're sort of ignoring rules because the DM isn't great. If it was me I'd have digital character sheets so I can change things and calculate encumbrance and all that poo poo dead easy, and I wouldn't use a grid or models but I would write down where the guys were going including room sizes etc. I do get the feeling though that to appreciate DnD combat properly you need to be playing with miniatures and on a grid (or with measurements, whatever). Too many of the mechanics rely on positioning and distance not to I think. AlphaDog posted:You're not wrong. Your attack options will always amount to slightly better versions of "stab them", unless you choose Arcane Trickster, in which case you can also be a poo poo version of the wizard while you stab them. I can't even see any variants on "stab them". Like I've got basic attack and I'm using two weapons to I can make two attack rolls, though the "off hand" doesn't get a bonus to damage. I also have the sneak attack I can use if the moon waxes yellow and it's a Friday or whatever restrictions it's got, but for example I can't see anything that allows you to say "I'm going to shoot the arrow at his head" because the guy isn't wearing a helmet or something like that. I know the combat is sort of abstract because you're rolling against a combination of their ability to avoid damage plus their armour, but there just doesn't seem to be much in the way of options. Maybe that's the point though, the fighter in the party basically just wanders around with the group hitting things and pointing out he's a noble, but all the "interesting" stuff so far has pretty much been done by me or the mage. So maybe their combat is supposed to be more interesting as the rest of the time it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:Maybe that's the point though, the fighter in the party basically just wanders around with the group hitting things and pointing out he's a noble, but all the "interesting" stuff so far has pretty much been done by me or the mage. So maybe their combat is supposed to be more interesting as the rest of the time it isn't. Fighter & Rogue just aren't that great near as I can tell and I've yet to see someone come up with a reason they aren't trash relative to other classes based on their mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Fighter & Rogue just aren't that great near as I can tell and I've yet to see someone come up with a reason they aren't trash relative to other classes based on their mechanics. I think you'll find the answer within the first ten seconds of the following video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRdfX7ut8gw
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Right, I totally get what you're saying too. Playing like that is how AD&D/2e was mostly done, so more power to you. It does sound like you'd be having just as much fun with the free version of the rules (or better yet, with an actual rules-lite game), but eh, whatever. Kitchner posted:I do get the feeling though that to appreciate DnD combat properly you need to be playing with miniatures and on a grid (or with measurements, whatever). Too many of the mechanics rely on positioning and distance not to I think. The grid rules in this version of the game are an absolute clusterfuck. If you're kinda ignoring stuff and playing loose with the rules, you're going to have a terrible time trying to use the grid rules. That's not to say you shouldn't use a grid map and minis and just move them x feet/round or whatever. Just don't try to use the actual grid combat rules from the DMG, because they're goddamned loving awful. Kitchner posted:I can't even see any variants on "stab them". Like I've got basic attack and I'm using two weapons to I can make two attack rolls, though the "off hand" doesn't get a bonus to damage. I also have the sneak attack I can use if the moon waxes yellow and it's a Friday or whatever restrictions it's got, but for example I can't see anything that allows you to say "I'm going to shoot the arrow at his head" because the guy isn't wearing a helmet or something like that. I know the combat is sort of abstract because you're rolling against a combination of their ability to avoid damage plus their armour, but there just doesn't seem to be much in the way of options. Yep, you've understood it. You have "stab" and "stab more accurately" and "stab harder, but you hardly ever get to use it". Fighters don't get a whole lot to do either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Even the casters don't seem to do a lot at low levels, they just use the same cantrips over and over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Early 5E is really boring because anything interesting you can do is 1/day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
One of the things that got me a soured on D&D and Path is Vancian casting. Compared to any mainstream depiction of magic, it seems utterly unintuitive and limiting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
The fact that it's limiting is probably exactly what Jack Vance had in mind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
It's really clunky. There's a "build-a-spell" system somewhere that would work better, but I've not seen a good one yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
I think the problem with Daily spells is that the game isn't really balanced around it (6-8 medium encounters per day?  bullshit) and Hit Dice are gated around Short Rests that basically never happen.Like, if you tried to make 5e be "4e but without Encounter [Anything]" it might work, if you did the math right. But eh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
It would have been really cool if they put multiple non-vancian systems in the PHB, then put the classic wizard in the DMG as a 'variant for higher-powered games'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
Not even other fantasy authors use Vance's depiction of magic. Vancian casting has become an indelible part of True D&D despite having absolutely no cachet whatsoever outside of D&D itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 05:20
|
|