Can you just say it? There is no book/release that going to come to life and kill you or keep you from playing....and those of us who aren't up to date on your personal opinions would know what the heck you are talking about (I'm assuming Tasha's, but heck do I know you could be talking about the DM's guide)
Heh. I didn't come by the 'Forum Loudmouth' thing by being a soft-spoken conversational doormat.
I do find it amusing that you're giving me a lecture on keeping my tone civil and agreeable after the very first post that started this whole mess could easily be summarized as "Every single person who rolls stats instead of using SA or PB is a powergaming butthead, here is my incontrovertible Facebook proof, and I will brook no argument." Nor is that 'exaggeration' on my part - that's a perfectly legitimate summary of Vince's starting post here and we all know it. I'm a little confused as to why I get the lectures on civility and milquetoastness while other folks just as bombastic and incendiary as I am (and, in my ever-so-humble opinion, without any of my color or charm) get a free pass?
Heh. I didn't come by the 'Forum Loudmouth' thing by being a soft-spoken conversational doormat.
I do find it amusing that you're giving me a lecture on keeping my tone civil and agreeable after the very first post that started this whole mess could easily be summarized as "Every single person who rolls stats instead of using SA or PB is a powergaming butthead, here is my incontrovertible Facebook proof, and I will brook no argument." Nor is that 'exaggeration' on my part - that's a perfectly legitimate summary of Vince's starting post here and we all know it. I'm a little confused as to why I get the lectures on civility and milquetoastness while other folks just as bombastic and incendiary as I am (and, in my ever-so-humble opinion, without any of my color or charm) get a free pass?
Do they though? Vince has certainly gotten a handful of comments in this very thread.
Heh. I didn't come by the 'Forum Loudmouth' thing by being a soft-spoken conversational doormat.
I do find it amusing that you're giving me a lecture on keeping my tone civil and agreeable after the very first post that started this whole mess could easily be summarized as "Every single person who rolls stats instead of using SA or PB is a powergaming butthead, here is my incontrovertible Facebook proof, and I will brook no argument." Nor is that 'exaggeration' on my part - that's a perfectly legitimate summary of Vince's starting post here and we all know it. I'm a little confused as to why I get the lectures on civility and milquetoastness while other folks just as bombastic and incendiary as I am (and, in my ever-so-humble opinion, without any of my color or charm) get a free pass?
The signature line that basically says “DONT @ ME BRO” is why.
Its worth pointing out that if you come to a D&D forum to discuss a house rule or really whatever, you should expect a certain amount of feedback, some of which will be criticism of whatever it is you have created. That is how discussion forums work. If I say 5e X mechanic is crap and here is how I fixed it... someone will come along and disagree with you.
The very act of creating a house rule and posting it online and saying "hey I fixed it" is effectively asking for a debate, I mean.. its a house rule. Why do you need feedback from complete strangers? The obvious answer is that you want the validation but you may not get it if people disagree with you. Its just how it is when you bring your house game to discuss it in a public place.
Which is fine, and expected. Whenever I post a homebrew fix down south in the Homebrew forum, I'm primarily looking for two things.
A.) to share the fix for someone having a similar issue to mine, but who may not have had the time or creative drive to effect repairs on their own, or B.) to gather feedback on the fix and see if I'm in the right headspace for it.
I've actually abandoned a few fixes in the past that didn't pan out well - still haven't figured out a good solution for making Counterspell and Dispel Magic suck less, but man. The last time I tried I dun got told, and a number of people had valid points. But one thing people forget when they tell me "I have a right to criticize your work!" is the corollary that I have a right to engage with the criticism and defend my work. Not hostilely, but in the manner of a scientist or philosopher defending their findings. I can point out things the critiquer may not have thought of, or pose them questions on what their suggested alterations might affect that they weren't aware of. I love it when people give me intelligent, well-reasoned feedback on homebrew rules and system fixes and are willing to engage with intelligent and well-reasoned critiques of their critique.
Intelligent and well-reasoned are key, however - the Usual Suspects telling me "YOUR SHIT SUCKS JUST PLAY RAW" because they personally hate me is not feedback, it's just pointless vitriol.
Fully understand but you have to admit you have a tendency to be quite aggressive and use exaggerations almost exclusively as a form of argument, your doing so even in this very conversation. I'm 100% sure no one ever told you "Your shit sucks, just play raw". Its comments like that which are not meant to induce reasonable dialogue, but rather instigate a brawl as you are not debating with that comment but rather directly attacking people by both misquoting them and making assumptions about "what they meant". I know because I have been on the receiving of your assumptions and insults on a number of occasions.
While I do understand that some people do and will troll you, weeding out the good conversations and feedback and ignoring trolls is the only way you are going to get what you want, aka, interesting debates and intelligent conversation. Its possible, we have them on this forum all the time. Believe me, at least half the people on this forum 100% disagree with everything I say, but we are still capable of having opinions without all the insults, assumptions, misquoting etc.. That kind of thing leads nowhere.
Yuriel and I have actually a lot in common. We both live in the land of hyperbole. The difference is that Yuriel wants to tear down every structure, every theme, the very soul of D&D, and transform it into something utterly different. I, on the other hand, fight tooth and nail to save the soul of the game from a bunch of kids who have no clue what the game was about 40 years ago.
The game was always about having tons of rules to put guardrails on players, because when imaginations have no guardrails, there is no longer any common ground for a game, at least one like D&D. I fight to maintain those guardrails because I have the experience of witnessing the chaos of the "Rule of Cool" in a game, or super crazy starting stats, or Monty Haul magic item placement in games.
I have never mentioned that in one 2e game, a couple bright sparks figured out that by Enlarging an 18+ Str Dwarf to Giant Size, they figured the char had a 54 strength. The entire concept was asinine, but the DM loved watching this 16 foot tall Dwarf with some flying hammer plow through everything the DM placed in his way, and he let it go. I also DM'ed a game where I created a tableau for the players trudging through the Underdark. They came over a ridge and witnessed something few players ever do. 20 Githyanki were fighting 20 Mindflayers.The Gith had 3 Ancient Red Dragons as air support, as Gith are wont to do. None of these creatures saw the group of 9th level chars, as there were over a quarter mile away. This was merely something awe-inspiring and equally terrifying for the players to see. The players watched this, talked amongst themselves, turned to me, and said "We attack." I said, "Wait, what are you attacking?" They responded "We are attacking EVERYTHING." I spent 15 minutes rolling up stats, then had my one and only TPK. The players hated me.
That kind of thing, 35 years later, still drives me nuts. Same with "I roll 4d6 because it gives me variation that I crave, and not because it gives me better stats."
Hueh. Fair enough I suppose, Spidey. There's a story behind the Loudmouth Club thing that's either hilarious or infuriating depending on how you look at it, but that's for another time (also I'm actively forbidden to discuss the reasoning behind it so don't ask).
Nevertheless.
I'm sorry you feel that way, BL. I'll admit - you in particular tweak me off something fierce for reasons irrelevant to this thread, but I like to think anyone who gives me intelligence and reason in their posts gets it back. Most of the time, at any rate. I will also freely admit that I have an incendiary temper and imperfect control of it, I apologize for burns you may have suffered in the past.
It was this last Christmas, when I received this particular book as a gift, that I also realized the futility of using a 4d6 generation method for determining attributes. Admittedly, the method has a long history and certainly serves some players well at many gaming tables. Alas, those poor souls who happened to get less than a score of 12 for their Constitution scores, did not fair very well at my dining table... Poor bastards.
As for the tables that I serve as DM (versus chef), I personally tend to favor a [modified] standard array or point buy system to help ensure there's no major divergencies between player characters. Makes it easier to ensure that everybody starts out on mostly the same footing versus letting luck favor (or hinder) somebody too much.
And for those that wonder if I put my money where my mouth is, the following is a comment I made about a new game I am setting with a super-small table with Covid retreating a bit. This is my response to the question of "roll, Standard Array, or 27 Point Buy?"
"Let's go with the 27 point buy.
Standard Array is pretty much the same, but you have a tad more flexibility with 27 points. I am not a fan of rolling, especially in a small party, with the potential of differences that really matter between players, especially at low levels"
Wow. This thread blew up quickly. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though. As soon as Vince, Lyxen or Yurei makes a thread (or a comment on a thread), everyone dogpiles on top of it.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Wow. This thread blew up quickly. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though. As soon as Vince, Lyxen or Yurei makes a thread (or a comment on a thread), everyone dogpiles on top of it.
Yeah, but that’s only because any two of them are bound to be wrong about whatever it is they’re yammering on about at any given time. 😜 You know, whichever ones disagree with me on that subject.
And here you go again, calling it a fix, as if the game was broken. It's not. There's been an entire thread devoted to that, and the conclusion was that nothing is broken in the game design, it is in line with its stated intent. You might not agree with the intent, but it's clearly stated and it satisfies millions of players around the world.
Meh. If it's a problem for my table, I'll solve it for my table. That makes it a fix, even if only for my table. Posting it on homebrew serves two main purposes: getting feedback on if I could solve that problem better, and potentially getting feedback that might make me change my mind about the problem. Others maybe getting some use out of it might be purpose n° 3, but wouldn't really be the reason for posting.
Being in line with stated intent means the product is good enough overal, not that it's perfect. Just looking at Xanathar's and Tasha's shows a pretty clear design (intent) evolution, as does the statement in the Gothic Lineages UA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Wow. This thread blew up quickly. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though. As soon as Vince, Lyxen or Yurei makes a thread (or a comment on a thread), everyone dogpiles on top of it.
They don't, it's that each person posts while three-five people are having an argument, and then a point from that specific post(SOMETIMES with context, for extra spice level) gets used to continue said argument, and it just repeats.
There is no problem with 4D6 drop the lowest six. There's no problem with point buy. There's no problem with standard array. There's no problem with 3d6 rolling in order. There's no problem with 3d6, assigning the numbers to the stats you want. There's no problem with 24d6 dropping the lowest six and assigning the dice wherever you want. There's no problem with draft/reverse draft(except for how bloody mathy it becomes). There's no problem with alternate ability arrays. There's no problem with the playing card method to generate.
It just doesn't matter what others do in their games.
I think the next game I play I'm just gonna let everyone have 30 stats IN SPITE of this thread, and see how it plays out. I'll also give the players three artifacts each with epic boons attached and let everyone have innate flying.
I'll also let Wizards use arcane recovery EVERY short rest. I'll let sorcerers get sorc points back on a short rest up to proficiency modifier times per day based on level scaling since they're the ONLY class who don't get ANYTHING back on short rests with the exception of Divine Soul level 1 feature, Storm Level 18 feature and base Sorcerer level 20 feature. I'll give Warlocks the ability to have bonus spells actually added to their spell lists automatically instead of just letting them choose possible additional spells.
1) Then call it a fix for your table, not a fix for "the game".
2) ...just a factor of visibility to the general public.
1) it was called a fix. Just that. No need to infer more about its intended scope. That said, to me the very term "homebrew" or "houserule" is rather suggestive of it being limited to that group's table anyway.
2) your mileage may vary, but to me optics are a meaningful part of design. Aesthetics do inform gameplay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1) Then call it a fix for your table, not a fix for "the game".
1) it was called a fix. Just that. No need to infer more about its intended scope.
And I don't usually react when it's a fix, I react when some people widely claim that they are going to fix the game in general, you know which thread I'm referring to.
I'm referring to this thread. This thread in which you inferred the use of the term "fix" implied "to the game".
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So the remark was how the person replying assumed they thought it was about the game itself when it was actually about the personal games of those misunderstanding your post.
And this is why I showed you the page on this site, the aesthetics have not officially changed one bit, you just have options if you are concerned about specific topics.
As an aside, the floating racial bonuses have been implemented in the character generator. I'd say that means the aesthetics have been changed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Roughly 5% of players pick ranger which ties it for last with druid. Granted the next few classes are sitting at 6%....but I would hardly call that the "popular" choice.
People are playing them though....and not just the new subclasses (Hunter and Beastmaster are in the top 3 for subclasses).
Also to Lizard's point the survey on class and class features put ranger very much in last for both. So players did vote that both the class and its features needed attention....which they gave in droves. They have had several potential iterations of ranger since that survey so they obviously thought it needed a "fix".
And this is why I showed you the page on this site, the aesthetics have not officially changed one bit, you just have options if you are concerned about specific topics.
As an aside, the floating racial bonuses have been implemented in the character generator. I'd say that means the aesthetics have been changed.
As an option, exactly like rolling using a standard array or a 27-points buy. And there are so many options on this game, ever since the publication of 5e that to harp specifically on this one is actually a bit sad.
What now, options don't count? That seems odd, since they're official rules that have presumably been playtested and then deliberately released as part of the general ruleset. All of which is technically optional anyway.
And the reason this one gets brought up more than others is that WotC have announced they'll be proceeding with it as standard practice from now on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
LOL..Nicely done.
Heh. I didn't come by the 'Forum Loudmouth' thing by being a soft-spoken conversational doormat.
I do find it amusing that you're giving me a lecture on keeping my tone civil and agreeable after the very first post that started this whole mess could easily be summarized as "Every single person who rolls stats instead of using SA or PB is a powergaming butthead, here is my incontrovertible Facebook proof, and I will brook no argument." Nor is that 'exaggeration' on my part - that's a perfectly legitimate summary of Vince's starting post here and we all know it. I'm a little confused as to why I get the lectures on civility and milquetoastness while other folks just as bombastic and incendiary as I am (and, in my ever-so-humble opinion, without any of my color or charm) get a free pass?
Please do not contact or message me.
Do they though? Vince has certainly gotten a handful of comments in this very thread.
The signature line that basically says “DONT @ ME BRO” is why.
Yuriel and I have actually a lot in common. We both live in the land of hyperbole. The difference is that Yuriel wants to tear down every structure, every theme, the very soul of D&D, and transform it into something utterly different. I, on the other hand, fight tooth and nail to save the soul of the game from a bunch of kids who have no clue what the game was about 40 years ago.
The game was always about having tons of rules to put guardrails on players, because when imaginations have no guardrails, there is no longer any common ground for a game, at least one like D&D. I fight to maintain those guardrails because I have the experience of witnessing the chaos of the "Rule of Cool" in a game, or super crazy starting stats, or Monty Haul magic item placement in games.
I have never mentioned that in one 2e game, a couple bright sparks figured out that by Enlarging an 18+ Str Dwarf to Giant Size, they figured the char had a 54 strength. The entire concept was asinine, but the DM loved watching this 16 foot tall Dwarf with some flying hammer plow through everything the DM placed in his way, and he let it go. I also DM'ed a game where I created a tableau for the players trudging through the Underdark. They came over a ridge and witnessed something few players ever do. 20 Githyanki were fighting 20 Mindflayers.The Gith had 3 Ancient Red Dragons as air support, as Gith are wont to do. None of these creatures saw the group of 9th level chars, as there were over a quarter mile away. This was merely something awe-inspiring and equally terrifying for the players to see. The players watched this, talked amongst themselves, turned to me, and said "We attack." I said, "Wait, what are you attacking?" They responded "We are attacking EVERYTHING." I spent 15 minutes rolling up stats, then had my one and only TPK. The players hated me.
That kind of thing, 35 years later, still drives me nuts. Same with "I roll 4d6 because it gives me variation that I crave, and not because it gives me better stats."
Hueh. Fair enough I suppose, Spidey. There's a story behind the Loudmouth Club thing that's either hilarious or infuriating depending on how you look at it, but that's for another time (also I'm actively forbidden to discuss the reasoning behind it so don't ask).
Nevertheless.
I'm sorry you feel that way, BL. I'll admit - you in particular tweak me off something fierce for reasons irrelevant to this thread, but I like to think anyone who gives me intelligence and reason in their posts gets it back. Most of the time, at any rate. I will also freely admit that I have an incendiary temper and imperfect control of it, I apologize for burns you may have suffered in the past.
Please do not contact or message me.
It was this last Christmas, when I received this particular book as a gift, that I also realized the futility of using a 4d6 generation method for determining attributes. Admittedly, the method has a long history and certainly serves some players well at many gaming tables. Alas, those poor souls who happened to get less than a score of 12 for their Constitution scores, did not fair very well at my dining table... Poor bastards.
As for the tables that I serve as DM (versus chef), I personally tend to favor a [modified] standard array or point buy system to help ensure there's no major divergencies between player characters. Makes it easier to ensure that everybody starts out on mostly the same footing versus letting luck favor (or hinder) somebody too much.
I love the cookbook myself as well.
And for those that wonder if I put my money where my mouth is, the following is a comment I made about a new game I am setting with a super-small table with Covid retreating a bit. This is my response to the question of "roll, Standard Array, or 27 Point Buy?"
"Let's go with the 27 point buy.
Standard Array is pretty much the same, but you have a tad more flexibility with 27 points. I am not a fan of rolling, especially in a small party, with the potential of differences that really matter between players, especially at low levels"
Wow. This thread blew up quickly. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though. As soon as Vince, Lyxen or Yurei makes a thread (or a comment on a thread), everyone dogpiles on top of it.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Super late to answer, but any order.And even with that, I'm still worried about killing my players too often.
Yeah, but that’s only because any two of them are bound to be wrong about whatever it is they’re yammering on about at any given time. 😜 You know, whichever ones disagree with me on that subject.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Meh. If it's a problem for my table, I'll solve it for my table. That makes it a fix, even if only for my table. Posting it on homebrew serves two main purposes: getting feedback on if I could solve that problem better, and potentially getting feedback that might make me change my mind about the problem. Others maybe getting some use out of it might be purpose n° 3, but wouldn't really be the reason for posting.
Being in line with stated intent means the product is good enough overal, not that it's perfect. Just looking at Xanathar's and Tasha's shows a pretty clear design (intent) evolution, as does the statement in the Gothic Lineages UA.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
They don't, it's that each person posts while three-five people are having an argument, and then a point from that specific post(SOMETIMES with context, for extra spice level) gets used to continue said argument, and it just repeats.
There is no problem with 4D6 drop the lowest six. There's no problem with point buy. There's no problem with standard array. There's no problem with 3d6 rolling in order. There's no problem with 3d6, assigning the numbers to the stats you want. There's no problem with 24d6 dropping the lowest six and assigning the dice wherever you want. There's no problem with draft/reverse draft(except for how bloody mathy it becomes). There's no problem with alternate ability arrays. There's no problem with the playing card method to generate.
It just doesn't matter what others do in their games.
I think the next game I play I'm just gonna let everyone have 30 stats IN SPITE of this thread, and see how it plays out. I'll also give the players three artifacts each with epic boons attached and let everyone have innate flying.
I'll also let Wizards use arcane recovery EVERY short rest. I'll let sorcerers get sorc points back on a short rest up to proficiency modifier times per day based on level scaling since they're the ONLY class who don't get ANYTHING back on short rests with the exception of Divine Soul level 1 feature, Storm Level 18 feature and base Sorcerer level 20 feature. I'll give Warlocks the ability to have bonus spells actually added to their spell lists automatically instead of just letting them choose possible additional spells.
1) it was called a fix. Just that. No need to infer more about its intended scope. That said, to me the very term "homebrew" or "houserule" is rather suggestive of it being limited to that group's table anyway.
2) your mileage may vary, but to me optics are a meaningful part of design. Aesthetics do inform gameplay.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I'm referring to this thread. This thread in which you inferred the use of the term "fix" implied "to the game".
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So the remark was how the person replying assumed they thought it was about the game itself when it was actually about the personal games of those misunderstanding your post.
As an aside, the floating racial bonuses have been implemented in the character generator. I'd say that means the aesthetics have been changed.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
If by "Popular" you mean "one of the lowest percentage played classes by DnD Beyond's Data"
https://imgur.com/a/K5MFcp1
Roughly 5% of players pick ranger which ties it for last with druid. Granted the next few classes are sitting at 6%....but I would hardly call that the "popular" choice.
People are playing them though....and not just the new subclasses (Hunter and Beastmaster are in the top 3 for subclasses).
Also to Lizard's point the survey on class and class features put ranger very much in last for both. So players did vote that both the class and its features needed attention....which they gave in droves. They have had several potential iterations of ranger since that survey so they obviously thought it needed a "fix".
What now, options don't count? That seems odd, since they're official rules that have presumably been playtested and then deliberately released as part of the general ruleset. All of which is technically optional anyway.
And the reason this one gets brought up more than others is that WotC have announced they'll be proceeding with it as standard practice from now on.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].