Pondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this: *Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill...
View full commentPondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this:
*Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill or several.
*Skills can vary with type of game - DRIVE, for instance isn't necessarily a useful skill for a fantasy game where most vehicles are animal powered. Handle Animal you say? As would I, but, should Handle Animal be generalized to all animals? Can a horse trainer equally be a lion tamer? I say no. But, If we generalize Handle Animal and produce sub-skills therein (Horses, Lions, Dogs, etc.), we can say that a skill an be flexible contingent on another factor. What might that be? See below.
*Advancement - Should a character that makes little use of a certain skill advance the same as one who makes greater use? IMO, no. How do we progress then? This is where we are with our playtesting.
SUMMERY:
*Skills should be an optional, but in the basic package.
*The list should include general/specific skills (under different game types - fantasy, sci-fy, dark age, etc.) The ability score to represent should be flexible depending on the group (i.e. - Climb might be Str or Dex based or average of both).
*A skill that can be broken down into sub-skills can be adjudicated by ability score modifiers. Handle Animal (potentially based out of Cha) might cover one or more animal types based on modifier.
*Base Modifier - IMO the Skill Die works.
*Advancement - Feat based. All start with their (four?) skills (which may have subs, broadening variety) and beginning level Skill Die (d8?). Buy Skill advancement with feats - die increase, specialist, etc.)
I don't think creature types should have much if any mechanical consequence. I'd rather label creatures with keywords, so special effects can work on them. Hide from Undead needs the game to notate what is an undead creature, and an Amulet of Protection from Vegetables needs you to define what is a plant. But I don't want dragons inherently having different stats than bears. The complexity of 3e-era monster creation was WAY too high. 4e monster design suffered from divorcing mechanics from...
View full commentI don't think creature types should have much if any mechanical consequence. I'd rather label creatures with keywords, so special effects can work on them. Hide from Undead needs the game to notate what is an undead creature, and an Amulet of Protection from Vegetables needs you to define what is a plant.
But I don't want dragons inherently having different stats than bears. The complexity of 3e-era monster creation was WAY too high. 4e monster design suffered from divorcing mechanics from narrative a bit too often, but I did very much appreciate that you could decide how challenging you want a monster to be, and then simply fiat the stats to be in the right place. Keep that ideology, albeit with a mild requirement of some justification for stats (sure, the monster is supposed to be a challenge for a 10th level party, but why is its AC 20? is it slow and armored, or fast but vulnerable to being grappled?). Then add monster types as keywords only.
Much preferred the Origin, Type (Subtype) system from 4E than this. I understand that, without the core assumptions that 4E had, there would be problems in labeling something as having a Fey origin in a setting without a Feywild, I think this is one thing that the previous edition just plain got right. Although, when it comes to 5E monsters, I'd be happy just to see the Level and XP value at the TOP of the write-up
View full commentMuch preferred the Origin, Type (Subtype) system from 4E than this.
I understand that, without the core assumptions that 4E had, there would be problems in labeling something as having a Fey origin in a setting without a Feywild, I think this is one thing that the previous edition just plain got right.
Although, when it comes to 5E monsters, I'd be happy just to see the Level and XP value at the TOP of the write-up
...halflings should return to their origins -hobbits- if we want that the power-of-the-genre-archetypes concept which D&D is based upon since it came to life spread its magic; it seems they do so and I'm very happy!
The problem with satyrs being male only is it is not really grounded in any sort of history. Satyrs weren't originally half-goat half men, fauns were and they could be female as well. There was a god and goddess that were fauns. Additionally, though it is more modern (by the 16th century), female satyrs or satyress' became prevalent. If you want to split the genders, include fauns (the O.G. satyr) as the female version, but to not have a classic female version against the role of history and...
View full commentThe problem with satyrs being male only is it is not really grounded in any sort of history. Satyrs weren't originally half-goat half men, fauns were and they could be female as well. There was a god and goddess that were fauns. Additionally, though it is more modern (by the 16th century), female satyrs or satyress' became prevalent. If you want to split the genders, include fauns (the O.G. satyr) as the female version, but to not have a classic female version against the role of history and popular modern art of this century I think is a bad call.
I don't mind the idea of female satyrs (precedent in Fauns, from Roman myth, they were uncommon, but existed), male harpies (just makes sense to me, unless harpies come into being some other way, curse, god-spawn, etc), inccubi (male succubi, precedent in Medieval myth, tho they did have different abilities), maedars (male Medusa, but with different characteristics and slightly different powers), but I am hesitant about male nymphs/dryads. In legend, dryads where just one kind of nymph, and the...
View full commentI don't mind the idea of female satyrs (precedent in Fauns, from Roman myth, they were uncommon, but existed), male harpies (just makes sense to me, unless harpies come into being some other way, curse, god-spawn, etc), inccubi (male succubi, precedent in Medieval myth, tho they did have different abilities), maedars (male Medusa, but with different characteristics and slightly different powers), but I am hesitant about male nymphs/dryads. In legend, dryads where just one kind of nymph, and the word nymph came from a Greek word that meant "marriageable young woman," or "virgin," depending on the translation (I've seen it both ways). To that end, I think those should stay as they are, but my opinion is biased, and if they were included to have male versions, I would probably simply exclude them from my game. BUT, if they are included, I think they should be sort of like the maedar. There should be notable differences between the genders (females are lithe and graceful, males are strong and powerfully built? They are supposed to be the "ideal" of beauty, but also defenders of nature), and a difference in abilities. I'm also in favor of a variety of nymphs, however, like the Greek legends. Without male nymphs, you should explain how new, full blooded nymphs come into being. Is a nymph's daughter also a nymph, regardless of father (leaving room for inherited templates)?
As for the centaurs, only thing that bugged me was the exeption to them using their hooves as weapons. Charging centaur, dual wielding lances, with improved overrun. THAT is scary.
As for minotaurs, anything was playable in 3E, you just had to work around over inflated LA. The DM's I know worked with players wanting to play exotic characters. But I do like the two versions. Could we differentiate them with a new name, sub-race, etc? Feral Minotaurs (different from Savage Species)?
RE Hydra: You want to cut off hydra heads because: - you get a respite from its attacks - it's much easier to do than attacking the body - the body is much harder to hit, has lots of HP, usually hidden (in a swamp, in the sand, etc), and attacking it might expose the attacker to devastating attacks. - the heads are coming right at you, so they are easier to hit (and perhaps intentionally not cutting them makes it easier for them to hit or something?). But I...
View full commentRE Hydra:
You want to cut off hydra heads because:
- you get a respite from its attacks
- it's much easier to do than attacking the body
- the body is much harder to hit, has lots of HP, usually hidden (in a swamp, in the sand, etc), and attacking it might expose the attacker to devastating attacks.
- the heads are coming right at you, so they are easier to hit (and perhaps intentionally not cutting them makes it easier for them to hit or something?).
But I wouldn't say you HAVE to cut all of the heads, or that the body is immune to all damage, as that is a bit contrived. Give the party a chance to strategize. Maybe they'll find a better way of killing the creature, given the specific context (surroundings, resources, classes in the party, etc), and then cutting the heads would be something to avoid.
D&D is too various to be associated with only a few colors, however the most impressive and essential for me is the GREEN palette (including blue and yellow shades) and the spectrum of GREY (including pitch black and pure white). I believe that a greater participation of natural, cooler and sober hues convey better (more authentic) atmosphere and immersion into the fantasy world, while too many bright and loud colors on a page, like in the 4E books, is rather tawdry and kitschy. ...
View full commentD&D is too various to be associated with only a few colors, however the most impressive and essential for me is the GREEN palette (including blue and yellow shades) and the spectrum of GREY (including pitch black and pure white).
I believe that a greater participation of natural, cooler and sober hues convey better (more authentic) atmosphere and immersion into the fantasy world, while too many bright and loud colors on a page, like in the 4E books, is rather tawdry and kitschy.
For me a key concepts of D&D are especially "adventure", "exploration" and "mysteries" - thereupon first of all I imagine: "caverns", "dungeons" and "wilderness"...
I really like the idea of the "cursed (or blessed) cultist". However, I do not like the idea of these things banding together. One minotaur would be the leader of a rag-tag band of lesser followers (goblins?). A minotaur should be a ferocious beast that commands attention.
Pretty good—I like the story here, but I would tweak it in specific ways. (Comments!) yikaria, introduced in the Al-Qadim setting in 2nd Edition. Also called yak-men (or, unfortunately, yak-folk) they even enslaved the Dao Genies... we want them to be seperated from minutarous also we need more fact about the enslavement of the Daos and how many years have it gone sence the contract began ... i mean the contract says that daos are slaves of Yikaria in 1001 years.... and will it be a...
View full commentPretty good—I like the story here, but I would tweak it in specific ways. (Comments!)
yikaria, introduced in the Al-Qadim setting in 2nd Edition. Also called yak-men (or, unfortunately, yak-folk) they even enslaved the Dao Genies...
we want them to be seperated from minutarous also we need more fact about the enslavement of the Daos and how many years have it gone sence the contract began ... i mean the contract says that daos are slaves of Yikaria in 1001 years.... and will it be a total war between Yak-men and Daos?
Yikaria has a very deep story that shouldnt be mashed up with minotaurs.. maybe they have a race war against the minotaurs (Like the githyanki and githzerai race war)
I know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these...
View full commentI know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these bonuses better making them feel special to your character, like they have crossed some important milestone in their adventuring career. Taking the place of the attack bonus bumps is damage. Now your damage goes up with level, representing a higher competence in regards to the placement of your sword in the troll's back, or the dragon's exposed underbelly. A orc raiding party facing a first level party would be an almost insurmountable task at 1st level in past editions. Whereas at 20th level, that raiding party is a cake walk. Bounded accuracy now says that that at 20th level, these orcs should still be a tangible threat without having to artificially inflate their statistics. Instead, just throw more of them at the party.
Thanks for the input on this, PrestonSnow. Now it makes sense. And you nailed something I do to this day in 4E - "level-up" creatures so they are a challenge to the party.
My pick, as well. Not the easiest rooms and corridors in the world to describe to players, but such an incredibly enjoyable experience. I really enjoyed this adventure, as well as the fact that there were numerous paths to reach the central chamber. These elements, combined with the deadly inhabitants and sheer variety of dungeon challenges (a raging river, an illusionary harem, and magical puzzles and riddles just to name a few), make this adventure a true classic.
*Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill...
View full comment