LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
TLDR: It's good, very gamist, but if that's what you're looking for you'll be pretty happy with it.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 137 replies.
Non-combat conflict is a joke, though, and they know it, or they wouldn’t be giving 1st level characters the ability to fucking teleport at will. They put a lot more power in the players hands when it comes to combat, which, given their target audience and desing goals, is a very good thing. Where’s the social influence powers? Where’s the social conflict rules? Where’s the proper investigation mechanics? All three of those things are handled by one roll each. Wanna convince the guard to let you past? One diplomacy roll. Wanna convince the king to send any army into the Northern Wastes? Also one Diplomacy roll
How many rolls do you make in a fight compared to in an argument? Hmmm? Like I said, this is all well and good, if the conflicts of your story are based mostly around fighting.
If you want to see how a RPG system works where the mechanics are actually designed around the STORY instead of the COMBAT, go check out Burning Wheel or Burning Empire (fantasy and sci fi, respectively), specifically the “duel of wits” argument mechanics. Then come back and tell me D&D is well suited for a full range of conflicts. It’s not. It’s well suited for combat. Period.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.