Search results

Nor I. Don't really see any value in it.

Is the Raven Queen even in 5.5?

Which is why I don't like the downplay and removal of real world mythology from D&D. Interest will not be sparked. I know my life would be less interesting if I wasn't inspired by that stuff through D&D.

I have played and run DCC, and for me the fun parts are the weird visuals and creatures, the dangerous magic system, and yes the high risk. I have zero problem losing a PC, and I love the funnel. You have to be ok with losing characters u til one sticks, or you're not going to enjoy the funnel IMO.

Is that supposed to mean it's a good thing or a bad thing?

Exploitation potential and mechanical balance are less important to me than setting logic. If the player comes up with a way to use their ability that in my opinion make logical sense in the setting I will allow them to try it. If might be difficult to pull off, particularly if the ask is...

Yeah, the Power Stunt! Good stuff, and one of my favorite mechanics from MSH. Would be fascinating trying to adapt that to another game. For me it would very much depend on the in-narrative nature of the ability being experimented with.

Depends on what you mean by filler I guess, and how much you value the worldbuilding and supporting character development I referenced. TNG for example never has a series or even season-long plot, so it can be hard to even say what counts as filler.

I feel that sometimes filler is a good thing. It allows for worldbuilding and character development, particularly of supporting characters, so that the entire series isn't 100% about serving a single plot. In short, there are many times I want my TV to be more of a sandbox, but lately all...

This is why I asked much earlier in the thread what the OP's definition of "D&D" was.

I am familiar with those games to some extent. None of them really fit my gaming interests. If @pemerton is on this thread (he blocked me), he can tell you.

In no way is that helpful.

What kinds of games are all of those? I've only heard of Torchbearer, and from what I know about it, it sounds like you don't play D&D because you don't really like D&D, and perhaps also other traditional TTRPGs.

Like I said, it's unlikely. But there are several examples of mysteries where the idea is the answer is whatever you want it to be, or even no answer at all. A couple examples from D&D include the true nature of Ravenloft's Dark Powers and what really happened to Cyre in Eberron. And of course...

Besides, how could I give them a definitive answer without stepping outside the action in play?

But there is an answer, so they're either right or they aren't. And in practice, I bet most people who come to a conclusion end up with the right answer. See, you're looking at this from the perspective of the players, while I'm seeing it as what happens in the setting. Again, satisfying...

Nah, I don't run mysteries as a specific thing. But if I did, and the PCs fingered an innocent, I wouldn't stop the game to correct them.

That's definitely how I saw what Pondsmith intended, based on what he wrote and has said. But you're right that, at least in my experience, that social conscience usually took a back seat to cool gear and kickin' butt.

But the PCs in BB aren't finding out who did anything. They're coming up with their best educated guess and then using a game mechanic including a randomizing element that determines if they are right. It's literally Schrodinger's Mystery.

I wouldn't say that "authored" is synonymous with "intended to be solvable". Authored just means created by someone. Your statement assumes a primacy of narrative that mine does not. Of course, most authored mysteries will be potentially solvable, but I suspect most real life mysteries are...