Search results

Why they don't have reach property then?

That would make perfect sense for a game like D&D that doesn't have just one bespoke setting. Instead of having fixed "canonical" dragons, give us different ideas of what dragons might look like in your setting.

Overall I like these designs well enough, though the wing design on the black looks really goofy.

Not really. But see my post above yours.

Certainly. I’d still like to be able to visualise how it happens.

Which is what the blue dragon’s habitat should be.

But you still need to represent it on the map somehow. How does that help with the inability to reach the vital organs as the creature’s hide is as thick as your sharp magic stick is long?

Now calculate how many squares a dragon like that would occupy on a battlemap. Also, seems it would be literally impossible to kill such a thing with a sword, as you couldn’t reach anything vital.

Well if people read ”particular” to mean ”any” I don’t think it’s anymore an issue with the language being vague…

Right. So you admit the background forces assumptions about the world? And that part is just a half of it, it also assumes commoners who grovel before the nobles to avoid their displeasure.

You say that like it's a bad thing! But yeah, seriously, I don't think we really need to differentiate between Bohemian earspoon and glaive-guisarme. Hell, I'd be fine with combining some of the current weapons. But I think there should be some meaningful choices that would make different...

Read the noble feature for example. You don't think that doesn't make pretty drastic assumptions about the nature of nobility and how the nobles are viewed in the setting?

But in practice it means they only use those weapons they're better at. You're pigeonholed. I want the fighters to switch between two-hander and shield plus one hander depending on whether they want more offence or defence in a given situation. With fighting styles this doesn't happen, as you...

I feel the wizard spells should be divided to common (which you can learn as you level) and rare (which you need to find as a treasure.)

I already dislike how fighters get pigeonholed to specific weapons by fighting styles and would like to get rid of that. I definitely wouldn't want to make this pigeonholing even worse. I want the fighter to be a master of weapons that can grab any weapon and be effective and switch loadouts...

As that's all I had to go by. But more houserules you add to avoid the problems I mention, the closer to "rewriting the game" I said was needed to make this to work you get.

It doesn't matter that great weapon is per hit just as effective than dual wielded daggers, but the latter can hit twice? It doesn't matter that sneak attack literally does nothing or that rage doesn't improve barbarian's damage? It totally changes the game, it renders some build choices...

I think at least one of the Wizard's two free spells should be tied to their subclass.

So do I understand it correctly? It doesn't matter if your attack does five or thirty five points of damage?

Without totally redesigning the game it will utterly destroy balance and render several things meaningless.