|
Nihilarian posted:Who is Zak S? A man with opinions so foul and beliefs so moronic and offensive that the combination of him and Tarnowski being credited makes this game worse than all the lovely wizard-supremacy and bad game design ever could.
|
# ¿ Jul 3, 2014 23:12 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 06:04 |
|
Quoted from the chat thread:neongrey posted:Man, so I really didn't like the 'sex' paragraphs in the new D&D-- some choices of language I was not happy with at all (like hermaphroditic, or the dwarf misgendering joke, or 'man trapped in a female body'). Frankly, I think that, though admirable, they could have done a hell of a lot better with the paragraph.
|
# ¿ Jul 4, 2014 02:16 |
|
Jack the Lad posted:The neat, concise presentation of 4e rules - especially powers - was often held against it by people who felt that everything being presented the same way meant that everything was the same. Seriously, though, RPGs would be better off if they took a page from 4e's book re: clarity of rules. I mean, it certainly wasn't perfect (though they tightened the wording up every book release), but just having clearly denoted rules blocks (the layout of powers is unmatched in RPGs) and unambiguous statements, as well as removing intrusive fluff (there is no goddamn reason to use feet to measure distance if you only measure it in 5 ft. increments and mandate a grid), put it leagues ahead of any other RPG.
|
# ¿ Jul 8, 2014 00:31 |
|
treeboy posted:reverse engineered I think that would require there to be engineering in the first place. From what we've seen, all monster abilities seem to be assigned based on ~verisimilitude~.
|
# ¿ Jul 13, 2014 18:15 |
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Who gives a poo poo about about a formula. Pretty much no one will give a poo poo about a formula. People who make monsters?
|
# ¿ Jul 21, 2014 01:53 |
|
Perhaps D&D should get like... actual mechanics for non-combat gameplay. Then it might be reasonable to have feats be shared between combat and non-combat benefits instead of the current divide, which is 'fixed mechanical benefit' and 'fluff bullshit that doesn't do jack poo poo concretely'.
|
# ¿ Jul 21, 2014 21:37 |
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Edit: Also who gave me my new title. Also I don't think I was stupid our views on how this stuff should work is just different. No, actually, what you said was pretty drat stupid. Though a user title's a bit much; I thought that the thread title change was funny enough.
|
# ¿ Jul 22, 2014 01:56 |
|
Something like one of the Mage Wars binders?
|
# ¿ Jul 25, 2014 00:07 |
|
Ferrinus posted:I want a D&D where you play "lands" except instead of Island and Mountain they're stuff like Mana and Stamina and you need to tap 1 Mana, 1 Stamina, and 1 power point of any "color" to execute an Eldritch Slash or whatever. I agree, an adaptation of Vlaada Chvatil's Mage Knight board game to an RPG would own.
|
# ¿ Jul 25, 2014 21:22 |
|
Another problem with damage bonuses is psychological - if I have to choose between the thing that will give me a slight bonus 100% of the time (a +1 to hit and damage, which affects a hell of a lot of atomic actions in the system) and something with a bigger, more flavorful effect that I can't guarantee will come into play, I'm gonna choose the constant thing.
|
# ¿ Jul 25, 2014 23:08 |
|
Basic/Expert/Companion/Masters/Immortal, which is the version of Basic D&D collected in the Rules Cyclopedia.
|
# ¿ Jul 29, 2014 04:27 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 06:04 |
|
Except that that analogy has no relation whatsoever to the way that 4e balances combat math. Like, at all.
|
# ¿ Sep 24, 2014 23:00 |