Recent content by DEFCON 1

The thing about "universal" subclasses is that if it's going to be just for your table... chances are possible only one player is going to want to take it. At which time it ceases to be a "universal" subclass and instead just becomes a subclass for the class of the player who ultimately took...

Well, hey... any anniversary party deserves to be catered. ;)

So it turned out my guesstimation made two years before 5E got released was a little off. Okay... how bout we re-write it then... Whether the Revised 5E "reunites" the player base or not... it doesn't matter. 6E will be released in 5 years time regardless. ;)

Heh heh... how long ago was my post you quoted from? I presume I was making a joke saying that 6E was going to come in 5 years from whenever it was I posted it, but couldn't tell you when that was if my life depended on it, LOL.

Yeah, this can definitely be the case where the style of game can allow a selfish player to be selfish, all in the name of "playing the style." That's just like in earlier days where the Thief player would claim to be just "playing their character" when they would pickpocket their fellow party...

I'm fine with getting both. One for the player's actual thoughts on their character, the other for knowing the bits that are truly important to them (and which would be first in line to show up during the campaign.)

Yeah, complaining that a player enjoys the game and their character so much that they want to write a couple pages of information and narrative for them and thus "force" you having to read it seems a bit disingenuous. It kind of belies the complaint of many a DM who get mad that the players...

Depends. Classes that anyone and everyone can design for themselves and/or publish on DMs Guild or Reddit or places like that for people to use? Infinite. Classes that WotC desires to publish themselves in their own books? Basic Rules: 4. Player's Handbook: 12. All WotC material: 13...

Heh heh... yep, but it's still funny to read a module like Tomb of Horrors and see all the house rules Gary created and included in it for module's publication, just so players couldn't teleport or walk through walls to get straight to the end and circumvent the adventure itself.

Well, the rest of us will read Rule Zero a little more charitably where we aren't looking to find reasons to consider Rule Zero completely bad. Your mileage may vary. :)

I always thought "the DM arbitrarily screwing over the players" was Classic style-- using Tomb of Horror-style trap dungeons and stating that X number of spells just don't work for no discernable reason other than it would make it too easy for the players to get through all the DM's Saw-like...

Oh please. We are all intelligent beings. When someone says "People are fickle" for instance... we all know the person doesn't mean every single person across the entire globe is fickle. And we don't need that person to write "Most people are fickle" or "I think a lot of people are fickle"...

Of course. But we all know it gets rather tiring to add all the couching adjectives into everything we write. All the 'almosts' and 'for the most parts' and 'practicallys'. So everyone can feel free to assume I meant those terms should be added to my post, such that things are not 100%, but...

Sure. After all it's only Colville that has said it as far as I have heard, so whatever methodology he is using makes it true as far as he is concerned. Not sure the rest of us care, but if it works for him, then more power to him, LOL.

If I am understanding the definitions of 'Trad' and 'Neo-Trad' correctly... then there seems to be one very easy-to-understand demarcation between the two cultures (that I am using here for my post-- fully acknowledging that perhaps I am completely misunderstanding the definitions.) It seems to...