Search results

Fighter is obvious: all straight up warrior types fit here. Cleric: well, they are the divine representatives on whatever world we’re talking about in the first place. Thief: stealthy, cunning, resourceful, roguish sorts go here, obviously. Magic-users: wielders of arcane power, naturally.

Definitely not, in my opinion. It’s one part of the dumbing down / railroading of D&D rules that I wouldn’t ever want to see return.

Because they cover basically all the ground that I can see needs covering, is why they’re my own preference. Which is all I was stating, btw. And fyi, I’m not “shackled to the classics” in any way whatsoever - I played and ran 3e for years, just for a start, and that should tell you something...

Fighter, Cleric, Thief, Magic-User. Personally, I like some variation on those too: Ranger & Paladin, Druid, -, and Warlock perhaps. So, whether that’s 4 or 7-8, is yeah, open to interpretation. But I see it as fundamentally 4.

Four, with subclasses.

That doesn’t bode well for Chaosium. I’ll leave it at that, out of respect for all involved and of course this forum.

I disagree entirely with the quoted claim. 4e’s system was its biggest turnoff by a mile for the vast majority of those who took issue with that edition at all (which, yes, was many) - like, in most cases, the only significant turnoff. Such a radical overhaul on nearly every level, but also in...

It should have been: A mid- to low-crunch mix of the best parts of B/X and 5e (in particular), but refined on both counts, further emphasising backgrounds, while shedding such chaff as skills and feats altogether. Oh, and with an open license for just about everything, a la 3e, to better allow...

I think those two things would be enough, so long as the right rules “bloat” (subjective, I know) was cut, of course. “Right” according to my own tastes, naturally. But either way, as far as I’m concerned, 5e HP totals go way too high, and pretty fast at that, in some cases. Like, if they were -...

My preferred approach starts with fixing Fighters and other “martial” classes (i.e., by making them more capable, in specific ways). But yes, in addition to that, I would also like to see: no cantrips, or at least not infinite cantrips; lower HP; broadly interruptible casting; having to learn...

The GM’s. Oh, as for how and why, that varies by player, group, system, campaign. But probably GM as well.

Yes, particularly monsters, but also spells, magic items, and even a few mechanics at times.

Either the deities that come with a published setting, or my own, for homebrew settings. Currently running some Realms (in the pre-4e mode), so Realms deities it is.

Can be down to innate tendencies, circumstances, past or present interactions, or indeed, some kind of reaction roll, basically. And yes, morale can play a part once battle is underway, but won’t always. Overall, “it depends” would be the case, but that wasn’t an option, so I simply didn’t vote.

Almost always average.

1/5, if that. I lost faith in WotC some time ago.

The 14 in the OP plus a good gish.

Half plus roll the other half (e.g., d4+4 instead of d8) is my personal favourite.

More emphasis on bloodlines, right from 1st level onwards. Points. See #1. No. No. Cha. Yes, and definitely should be. Considerably more so. No, not “need”. But ideally, that would be the case.

What would I do? Make 6e, 7e, or whatever we’d be up to at this stage, the overall most amazing edition of D&D. Open everything up, license-wise. Release PDFs of every book from every edition, including the current one. But then, I’m not beholden to that whole corporate life thing, nor would I...