Search results

I know I'm the outlier, but nostalgia is largely bad, so call me bored with all this.

Good luck! Hope we still get the patreon posts, I'm learning a lot from them.

As frustrating as the tone and some of the comments are in this thread, it is quite instructive to someone that dabbles in selling DnD PDFs! I'm learning a lot here....

Must be where the idea for Rebel Moon came from.....

agreed!

I'm more of a DM, so I've read the monster book more....and I'm a fan. Not overly complex, but more interesting.....

this is helpful for my brain, thanks!

I don't get how a hammer is like being bear hugged.....or squeezed by a snake....

For me, not all of you....if an owlbear is holding someone in its arms, it should squeeze them!

4e adventures were quite easy from a layout perspective, but IIRC, people hated the presentation of adventures. (I'm hoping this doesn't start another edition war).

I read grappled, and I wonder things: 1. Why don't monsters that have creatures grappled actually use that in any way? They don't squeeze for damage, they don't get an extra bite or anything? 2. Why can a grappled creature take opportunity attacks? Like, it seems grappled should do a lot more...

I like that all dragons, of any level, as far as I can tell, get lair actions.....I'd prefer younger dragons get legendary actions (or somesuch thing), but I can live w/o that. I'm now using a variant of Daggerheart initiative for solo boss fights where the boss gets to act much more often...

Outside pages of 2e fluff, on a per word basis, people have shown 4e had more than 5e....

I really don't get this. You could use 4e monsters any way you want, just like 5e. Let's also be realistic, even in 5e,90 percent of the rules are about combat. Ime people decided 4e was only about combat, even though it still had all the same classes and monsters. Even though there were...

Like the real world? Odd. I don't get how this is a hawt take.

Monsters were literally at their best in 4e. I have no idea what you mean at all here.

to be clear, I agree with payn, leaving the FR alone would not have been enough to overcome all the mistakes of 4e (which is, btw, my favorite edition) made in presentation and technology to make it "successful" enough.

I think blowing up FR was a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE mistake. So much change. Good luck with this thread not turning into "4e sucked vs 4e was great"....

I almost exclusively run modules at this point. So much time saved. I often alter them some, but not a TON.

I can't recall the last time one of my players used a mount, so it makes sense. :) since my campaign is surely how everyone plays....