The Gaming Den

Yeah, but the tumble skill could use some weakening. I think the tumble check=AC bit works pretty well. [br][br]I don't know that tumbling should be expressly forbidden in heavy armor, but it should be pretty tough. Using that as an alternate rule, it would be pretty tough, because you not only have...

The former option is no fun [br][br]That's a matter of opinion. I think it's a great deal more fun than characters that scale exponentially.[br][br] It also has the advantage of each level being as significant as the last. [br][br]This is flat out wrong. It has the dis advantage of making each leve...

Not that funny, it'd mean I'd been playing the wrong game for the past 20 years.

Bah. I agree with most of what RC says, most of the time.[br][br]I do disagree in this case, though. I don't see a lot of fighters maxing tumble. What I see a lot of -- what I do a lot of, with melee characters -- is dump the two cross-class points to get a rank of tumble.[br][br]That means roughly ...

Yeah, especially since the magic system and hit points are two of the things I hate most about D&D.

The real problem with psionics is that it's always been an add-on, so it's never gotten the kind of decent workthrough that it needs to be compatible with magic.[br][br]They actually address some of that in the 3.5 XPH. When you have a setting with magic, you need creatures with resistance to that m...

1110536242[/unixtime]] So I guess my thesis, ultimately, is: "The simpler rules of 3.x allow for better rules comprehension, thus greater tendency toward rules lawyering, among players -- and so remove flexibility from the dungeon master's control." [br]So in other words 2nd edition is be...

1110513592[/unixtime]][br]Having said that, it's hard to argue that 3.x hasn't increased the degree of complexity exposed to the player . In 1st edition the player almost didn't need to know the rules at all -- the game mechanic things you got to actually pick for your character amounted to your st...

My point wasn't that 2e or AD&D were balanced. They were probably far, far worse in terms of balance with the RAW. But they were also much less rulebound, or at least that was the feeling.[br][br]In 2e, for example, you might have a 5th level fighter, a 4th level wizard, and a 6th level rogue in...

1110420263[/unixtime]][br]So when I came accross the Intellect Devourers Body Thief ability I thought cool, my mind flayer could shrink inside the skulls of its victims, simultaneously eat their brain and then take over their body for a week sitting inside the skull pulling the levers as it were.[b...

I've had the same experience, RC; my players and I were talking at one point about how we missed the "good old days" of 2nd edition, when everyone wasn't so concerned about number crunching to build the best characters.[br][br]Of course, having gone back and looked at those books, it gave ...

I disallow polymorph completely. Well, almost completely; I allow a version of it that lasts for 1 round/caster level and turns the target into a harmless animal, like the polymorph spell from Warcraft 3.[br][br]I still allow druidic wild shape. That means shapechanging is pretty much the domain of ...

1110176061[/unixtime]]"Gygaxian DM" I know, but what is the "Kirby Perspective"?[br] [br][br]Jack Kirby was an artist who pretty much instrumental in creating modern (Silver Age) comics. Starting from the 1930's, he drew comics for some five or six decades. I'm guessing 'Kirby P...

Me, I think it's because it's only a succubus paladin and not a feral half-succubus anthropomorphic whale. But I voted for you anyway.

I'm debating the ethics of joining under a few new names to vote, but I think that'd probably constitute cheating.

1110168845[/unixtime]]Yeah, I don't think the Dread Pirate is winning on Optimization at all. [br][br]Gee, really? You don't say. [br][br]One of the problems they always had was that it was sort of cliquey. New names tend to have to prove themselves, which is a bit understandable with all of the ne...

Well, thanks, Frank, now I'm going to be paranoid about being ambushed by ninjas every time I walk through an open field with no cover. :p[br][br]@Murtak:[br]Those numbers are way out of whack, though. Using those, the same guy, minus torches and with invisibility would still have to make a DC 50 to...

That is to say: It's easier to say "no, jerk, you can't just hide in plain sight" or "no Polymorphing in this game!" than to actually invent mechanics for it. [br][br]Well, there aren't really any special mechanics for hiding in plain sight beyond the regular hide mechanics. And...

I'm not really convinced people in the real world can do that. I've certainly never seen it. All I have is Essence's word for it and, no disrespect intended to Ess, but I don't know him from Adam and he could be blowing smoke for all I know.[br][br]At any rate, you have to either explicitly say what...

Ess, your ninjitsu stories sound more like what should be the upper end of human ability.

But I would much rather have the rules say you can't do it and the the DM ad hoc allow it, than allow it by default and have the DM tell the player his torch-rogue can't hide despite what the rules say.

The bullshit about "invisihiding while juggling flaming torches" has already been covered elsewhere, and it's over. [br][br]... no, not really. Unless you're conceding that argument, it's still going on. But leave it in its own thread.[br][br]And I will say that your fantasy game is much ...

Oberoni, which of the examples you mentioned did he not address? Because I thought he covered them pretty well.

So, we have the 'rogue turns invisible on rope leash' at one end of the spectrum, and the 'auto-detect ceiling ninjas' at the other, and neither makes sense.[br][br]At what point do we just say D&D Hide mechanics don't work at all? [br][br]edit:[br]Actually, Oberoni, I'd like to direct my earlie...

Actually,[br][br]PHB p. 152,"Concealment encompasses all circumstances where nothing physically blocks a blow or shot but where something interferes with an attacker's accuracy."[br][br]I think concealment covers camoflauge. Which means the 3.5 way works. The DM can just rule that sufficie...

Let me reiterate: I don't have a problem with the level of power, just the believability. If you say anything above DC 25 or 30 is inherently magical, then I'm fine with it, though it should probably be (Su) at that point.[br][br]Oberoni, I do use situational modifiers, but they're not there as writ...

And your readied action is pretty much going to just be throwing a bag of flour on him. [br][br]Unless, of course, the invisible guy sunders or disarms it. Or picks any of the other options you mentioned.[br][br] They have Thermoptic Cloaking in Ghost in the Shell, and people beat use and beat invi...