mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "Of the following two dice tricks, which would you prefer as part of a core mechanic of the game (choose one)?".
mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "I prefer dice tricks over static modifiers.".
mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "Dice tricks are fun for occasional use (a specific spell, feat, and so on), but should remain out of the core game.".
Koga305
voted in the poll, "Dice tricks should be a part of D&D. ".
mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "Warrior characters shouldn't automatically have multiple attacks but should instead have increasing damage, with the option to spread that damage around through feats or features?".
mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "Should warrior characters be able to make extra attacks as they gain higher levels and at a diminishing penalty to the attack roll (3rd Edition)?".
mhbjarkistef
voted in the poll, "Should warrior characters be able to make extra attacks as they gain higher levels and at no penalty to the attack roll (1st Edition)?".
I really like the idea proposed by Kayal. Alternate names in stat blocks allow the best of both worlds with the added bonus of providing additional inspiration for roleplaying
I find this an absolutely brilliant idea. It keeps the history of the game while presenting options that doesn't exactly fit. One might even go as far to say that several versions of the same spell exist in a world, but the manifestation remains different with each variation (Example: Bigby's Crushing Hand may appear different in some way than Zarumon's Crushing Hand). I don't propose the difference to be enough to actually matter mechanically, but visual cues and flavor could differ that...
View full commentI find this an absolutely brilliant idea. It keeps the history of the game while presenting options that doesn't exactly fit. One might even go as far to say that several versions of the same spell exist in a world, but the manifestation remains different with each variation (Example: Bigby's Crushing Hand may appear different in some way than Zarumon's Crushing Hand). I don't propose the difference to be enough to actually matter mechanically, but visual cues and flavor could differ that could enhance a character's background (Perhaps they were taught by Bigby's ace pupil) if one should allow.
In my groups, giving flavor to your characters and breathing life into them was almost as entertaining as the game itself - I once had a player who strayed off the path and created a rather glutenous sorcerer - all of his spells looked like food of some sort (He fired glowing doughnuts as his magic missile, for crying out loud!).
I'm not saying high flavor and customization is for everyone, which is why listing alternate names for 'named' spells is ideal - it allows people to take a generic approach to the game if that's what they want.
Well, I do similar for my settings. This is how I handle the issue. Powers of the Light, Darkness and Energies. Holy: This ability hails from the oldest of relics and most powerful of items. It is neither good or evil but it is of a divine nature, weapons of this property typically have divine symbols appropriate for the god/goddess in question on them and can be of any alignment within one step of the chosen deity. Damage from these weapons is treated as Bane vs chosen opposing...
View full commentWell, I do similar for my settings. This is how I handle the issue.
Powers of the Light, Darkness and Energies.
Holy: This ability hails from the oldest of relics and most powerful of items. It is neither good or evil but it is of a divine nature, weapons of this property typically have divine symbols appropriate for the god/goddess in question on them and can be of any alignment within one step of the chosen deity. Damage from these weapons is treated as Bane vs chosen opposing alignment(s) for every + the weapon has (from +2 to +10) the weapon is effective against one additional alignment. Weapons of this type do 1 point less per dice vs those who share their alignment. Weapons of this nature also typically have a divine purpose or intent of some kind which may or may not be inscribed upon the weapon in some manner overall. In this case 'Holy' is a conduit for the will of the deity in question and 'Holy' to someone who is LG will -not- be the same as 'Holy' to someone who is CE.
Radiant: Divine in the common sense, weapons of this ability always glow and are usually created when mortals do acts of great good, or great evil in the name of a clause or purpose. In light of this many old weapons will glow with a light color of some sort or another, effect wise these types of weapon typically do 1d6 untyped damage per +2 bonus (Max 4d6). Anything from a staff used by a local monk for years to a great weapon of war can be made radiant. Radiant weapons can suppress the aura at any time as per a will check dc 18.
As long as the distinctions do not become a source of debate over "what happens when...", then having more flavor thorugh damage types is fine by me. I don't find it complicated enough to feel strongly about. I just think that when resistences start to show up, the problem you run into is that smart players QUICKLY figure out that there really isn't anyone immune to sonic damage, so they take the energy substitution feat, make all their damage sonic an voila. You've become an incredibly...
View full commentAs long as the distinctions do not become a source of debate over "what happens when...", then having more flavor thorugh damage types is fine by me. I don't find it complicated enough to feel strongly about. I just think that when resistences start to show up, the problem you run into is that smart players QUICKLY figure out that there really isn't anyone immune to sonic damage, so they take the energy substitution feat, make all their damage sonic an voila. You've become an incredibly influential caster. So players will figure out which damage type they most want to pump out like this player did and it wont be necessarily for fluff reasons. So just keep that possibility in mind when you go with more types of damage.
View full comment