Recent content by Hussar

But have any of your players told you that? Have you ever had players revolt en masse from your table? If no, then, you're probably okay. "You are a bad GM" online is more "I would never do it that way and I wouldn't enjoy it, but, I'm not at your table, so, my opinion probably doesn't...

There's a flipside of this as well though. Gamers are cheap. They are. Think about it, your DM (if you have a DM) spends 3-4 hours running a game for you. On top of that the GM probably wrangles scheduling and make sure everyone shows up. Add to that actually preparing for the session...

Going back to the idea that "square 1=humanocentric settings" we do need to explore why those settings were humanocentric? I mean, the argument is that a setting which doesn't put humans at the pinacle will automatically put them at the bottom, so, why are humans the go to race in Greyhawk...

But, how many tried gaming and then bounced off/quit after a fairly short time? IME, LOTS. Of the gamers I played with into high school, I'm the only one who stayed in the hobby. I don't know anyone in person that I gamed with who is still gaming. None of my friend/acquaintances from back...

Time pressure. Back in the eighties and nineties, you had tons of unsupervised time. No one has that now. You have to schedule “play dates” with adult supervision. You have endless hours of classes and group activities that are scheduled for you. On and on. There is just so much more...

Dunno if this is RAW or not but when I made a bunch of npc troopies for my current campaign, I just did what they did in 2014 and added species abilities to the base humanoid stat blocks. So my goblin scouts are a bit different than standard scouts and my Dragonborn veterans have a minor breath...

... I'm not following. I'm sorry, but, honestly I have no idea what this means.

Of course, this rolls right back around to the origins of this thread. The OP does not want to recycle FR or Greyhawk. He wants a new setting where you don't have to handicap species in order to make a setting work because the setting was written half a century ago and couldn't possibly...

Never minding people who voluntarily join the army/navy. Can we please put this idea to bed?

CAST? What's that?

You are, of course, right.

Right. The California gold rush is a perfect example of that. The death rate for those pan handlers was absolutely shocking. I've seen estimates around 1 in 12. :boggle: That's INSANELY risky.

I love dungeons. Yes I do. :D Probably the biggest addition you can make to dungeon design is verticality. So many dungeon maps are flat. It doesn't take much to make a dungeon so much more interesting when you add a bit some verticality. One of the best examples of this is from Lost...

((As a total aside, I'm getting replied to by people I cannot see. @Bill91 is not on my ignore list, but, despite him quoting me, I cannot see his posts. Is this a bug?))