a new setting to check is always welcome
TheGreatDarkness
joined 1 year ago
Basically people who complain you cannot make a gritty dark fantasy in style of Berserk or Game of Thrones in 5e be it because it turns PCs into op superheroes who cannot die or because there is abundance of easy and safe magic or (if they're covered bigots) because of the push for diversity in game's aesthetics and moving away from humanocentrism and always evil races...all these people would be happier if they dropped D&D and played Warhammer Fantasy.
Paladin leveled up enough to get Spirit Guardians. I like this approach to roleplaying learning new spells, I may need to think how to utilize it in my game
So what I get from this is that Tyr is a bro and Volo sucks.
Fun fact about druids - in their tradition pretty much every break from the norm, like writing things down or cutting herbs wrong, was punishable by being clubbed to death.
Fun fact two: In France Druids were exterminated by Romans with help of Bards. Bards were basically a competting sect of the same faith with Druids and they sided with Romans to save their own skins and eliminate their rivals.
Downloaded, I always welcome new games to try.
Considering I've been running 5e since the Plague Year, I wouldn't call myself a hater. I did notice, however, this very pattern whenever I voice concerns about anything with the rules - first people assume whatever flaw or exploit I point out, has been used in my group and then their solution is always to leave the group or kick someone out of it, and if it didn't happen in my group, then it means it doesn't ever happen. It's a catch-22 debating with these people.
I really hate whenever I try to explain how some bad rules can be abused and immediatelly get someone say shit like "If this happens in your group, change it" as if that would solve the problem. And whenever it is not soemthing you witnessed personally, then it means it never happens and could never happen.
One of my favorite things about this page is that it can be read as intended, let to right, or can be read right to left like a manga, and it still tells an internally coherent, but entierly opposite story.
You should consider that Forgotten Realms wasn't really the default setting before 5e.
In 4e it was Points of Laght/Dawn World/Netir Vale which was designed from bottom up to be easy to put in anything you want and it is credited for codifying on paper worldbuilding principles that are as wold as fantasy itsel (the poitns of light-style world). In 3e era it was Generic Setting, which was just Greyhawk without any words that would make them have to pay Gygax royalties. In TSR there was no default setting, they all just coexisted.
WotC turned Realms into a default setting by pretending any unique stuff doesn't exist or trying to make it "the default" - look at Gnolls. The "hyenas turned into half-demons from eating Yeenoghu's blood" thing could work for Realms (it's a new lore invented for this edition), but WotC just HAD to try to force it on ever other world they own, goig so far to retcon two Gnoll bodyguards in Sinsiter Secret of Saltmarsh into Hobgoblins, just to keep the illusion Realms have nothing unique going for it.
Ed Greenwood's YT channel did more for me to appreciate Forgotten Realms as a setting than any book WotC put out, and he constantly revisits areas WotC has no interest in, like Sembia or Cormyr or Daelands.
For me it's playing Warhammer Fantasy. Where you roll a peasant and die of cholera.
Wait, is that person in the last panel, by any chance, the Paladin lady from Neverwinter Nights?
No I cannot afford it, I had surprise financial emergency this month.
But seriously, either make the whole thing free or paid, don't get my hopes up only to dash them like that.
Explanation: I'm the only person who runs D&D in my friends groups, so I get to play in other games under other Game Masters, but have a LOT of D&D character ideas I will never get to try.
And they didn't even get full 3-actions economy.
3.5 was edition I played the most. It was a reason why I quit RPGs for nearly a decade because I hated it so much.
Every time I see another meme about how amazing 3.5 Tarrasque is, I remmember how amogn actual 3.5 players Tarrasque was the biggest joke. It was always brought up as definite proof designers have no idea how to make good monster. It was laughably easy to beat. A wizard could casually solo it, the same abilities people now miss in 3.5 amounted to ribbons. It was a laughingstock, forums had 100+ pages discussions how to fix it and general consensus was it';s beyond saving. It was first proof in 3.5 if you cannot use magic you're only good to roll over and die.
I honestly don't know if everyone claiming 3.5 Tarrasque is such a horrifying monster are trying to rewrite history or unintentionally proving what a broken, unplayable pile of garbage 3.5 was, if it's biggest punching bag is actually dangerous in a different, better designed game.
Every time people lament changes to the lore that amount to "not every member of species X is irredeemably evil" and claim the game is removing villains from it, I think how villains of so-caleld evil species fall into two cathegories: a) bland and boring and b)have something else, unrelated to their species going on for them, that makes them interesting.
I'm not complaining, more new games the better, and some of them are very interesting.
Also, at least some of these youtubers turned devs have tried Pathfinder and that wasn't it, so spare the "why won't they just play Pathfinder?" comments
view more: next ›
If I turn out to have more time at my new job, I plan to start thrid campaign (alongside 5e and Blades in the Dark campaigns I'm running now), and make it WFRP for two people who ran it to me + maybe one other person