on May 21, 2013 at 07:32:39 AM
The Glaring Issue
If they won't fix it, I will.
[spoiler=It's broken] The glaring issue with the action system in Next and other editions is that it's broken. No really: some basic
actions give you free
actions. And as a result, D&D Next (like other editions) has an action economy that is easily exploited and inherently flawed. This is not a new problem or anything, but I've seen no moves to fix the underlying issues with the combat action system. Instead, I have seen it be buried under aesthetics like feats.
If they won't fix it, I will
; at least at my own table. Here is one way I plan to fix Next's action system. If it becomes too difficult to implement with Next, I will write a whole game myself that will support a simple Two Action system. For now it seems...
on May 17, 2013 at 11:33:13 PM
I need a place to gather a couple of essays I wrote in the Homebrew Fighter
thread, which for a time sort of acted like Ironblue General on the DDN forum. Not only was it a dumping ground for every brain I was storming around with at the time, it lead to several not insignificant trains of thought and game design conclusions that I need to analyze further and whip into a reasonable semblance of shape.
Am I even kidding myself that anybody is reading this and cares? Haha, nope. Pro bono, biatches! I'm just doing this for me.
Okay, here's the stuff:
[spoiler=Ability Frequencies]At-will abilities are roughly 1x the power of a basic attack. Cantrips are meant to be the equivalent of weapons, and with a little less damage and a little more utility they succeed quite...
on May 4, 2013 at 04:00:28 PM
Under the bounded accuracy system, an attack roll, a skill check, an ability check or whatever else has got three possible modifying points:
-Ability Modifier: from +1 to +5
-Class Bonus: from +1 to +5
-Proficiency Bonus: Anything from +1d6 to +1d12, or in my dream +2 to +5 (prof. bonus from 4e weapons but more range to account for more diversity)
Now, each of those modifying points has its own idiosyncracies, but the very first important take away is this:
The bounded accuracy system can only handle TWO of those three at any time. For ease of comprehension, they ought to be the same two.
Now, some points of interest about each:
Ability Modifier is the one the designer has far less control over. Especially if those terrifying ability score bump feats get implemented, but lets...
on May 2, 2013 at 10:49:53 PM
[spoiler=Hit Points]Each creature has a hit point maximum, which is the total of its Hit Die rolls (or the average of those rolls), its Constitution modifier, and any other modifiers.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Actions in Combat]Block:
When you wield a weapon you are proficient with, you can use your reaction to block an incoming melee attack. Roll your skill die and subtract its result from the damage against you. If the damage drops to 0 or lower, you are still subject to any other effects of the attack. When you wield a shield you are proficient with, you can use block against ranged attacks as well.
You can move up to half your speed and make a single melee attack. This movement does not provoke opportunity attacks.
As an action, you can initiate...
on Apr 24, 2013 at 09:29:01 PM
Welcome to Boston D&D! The group for fellow Dungeoneers in the boston area (and surrounding towns too.
This group was created because, although there are other D&D groups in boston, they are all invite only. This is a great place to talk with other locals who enjoy the game, as well as discuss the latest happenings and look for a party to join (or create.)
on Apr 16, 2013 at 09:27:20 PM
If a traditional party of 4 (Cleric, Fighter, MU, Thief) were to kill their way to 2nd level, preying upon only that weakest of traditional D&D monsters, the lowly Kobold, how many deaths would they have on their collective conscience by the time they all hit 2nd level? The answer in 5e, is 100, even (cool, huh?), but I wondered how that compared to other eds:
So, I know I'm a notorious 4venger and all, but this one is just out of curiousity, and it led to some surprises.
For one thing, I couldn't find the 0D&D 'collector set' I received as a gift in 1989 - big surprise there, but if anyone wants to do the same for that, it might be fun.
For another, going through the numbers for 1e, I was forced to consider treasure types, because 1e gave exp for collecting money, 1 per...
on Apr 15, 2013 at 11:38:28 AM
D&D Next: A Model for Feats and Other Build Options
Legends & Lore discussed new options for acquiring Feats today
. Neither those options nor the current D&D Next packet meet the goals I have for character generation
- Personality: Character generation should help me create a PC that feels like an individual. At the conclusion of the process, I should have a feel for who they are.
- Foster Imagination: The choices I make should foster imaginative play at the table.
- Fast: A new player should be able to create a level 5 PC in 10-15 minutes.
- Robust: An experienced player should find enough robust options to spend hours on character creation, if they so desire.
- Balanced: Options should be balanced, such that new DMs do not have to struggle with overly powerful or overly weak PCs.
on Apr 11, 2013 at 09:29:54 AM
Over a month ago, I ran a poll
designed to see what the community felt was an appropriate rate of progression for players in three areas: attack bonuses, skill checks, and saving throws. More than a hundred of you responded and now I am going to examine the responses. You can discuss my evaluation in the comments below or in the related discussion thread
. ATTACK BONUSES
More than a third of the respondents felt that attack bonuses should not appreciably scale. However, an equal number felt there should be some scaling. Of these, there was broad variation, but the median scaling appeared to be about +1 every 3 levels. That would translate to level-based attack bonuses tapping out at +6 over a 20-level career, which is a slower progression than the slowest class-based...
on Apr 9, 2013 at 11:46:37 AM
Something I've been meaning to talk about for a while that should lay the groundwork for a more elaborate reworking of class designs (as I intend to do).
There is a larger debate on the size and utility of discrete units of character design as they appear in the current packet, and how exactly balanced are feats in comparison to class abilities, and so on and so so. I'm not really going to open any of that up for discussion. Suffice that I have my solution to the problem, and these are the assumptions I will be working off here:
-Ability checks, a general list of possible actions springing from the six ability scores, improvised actions, and contests are the CORE of the game.
-A feat is roughly analogous to a major trait from race or background, and those are all benefits that...
on Apr 7, 2013 at 08:54:37 PM
So after playing BECMI and 1ed since the 80's, I have decided to leap into this decade. I just got the playtest kit for the Next edition and will see what it is like. Any thoughts on skipping from RC to Next without any other editions in between?