Search results

I finally had a chance to play the demo for Superhero Simulator. I was really hoping that game would be the "Super Skyrim" I want so badly, but alas it ran so poorly and was so boring I don't think it will be something I buy.

As I stated in the OP, one of the intents in creating this thread was to generalize the specific question of Daggerheart's steps. I think we are doing a disservice to the subject broadly by focusing on Daggerheart vs 5E.

To be fair, the 2024 DM guidelines at least talk about this. But people are so entrenched in how they run D&D they barely read the DMG.

2024 goblinoids are NOT fey. The ones used as adversaries for the PCs presented in the MM are fey typed because of their proximity to the Feywild or forces from there. Goblins not in those circumstances, including PC goblin options, and one assumes Eberron goblins, are not fey. It isn't monolithic.

While I don't disagree with your assessment of cover, I don't think it is particularly useful to hang on to a pedantic definition of "circumstance modifier" for the purpose of the discussion.

Read. The. F. Manual.

Aaaaaand you're on a list.

Except potential circumstance modifiers based on the target's traits, abilities, etc. Is the target affected by protection from evil? Or has Shield prepared? Etc. What "step" is checking for the myriad potential modifiers from the exception based design?

Go on, then.

What does this have to do with RPGs?

I mean, i don't know what the "rules" are and who decides what categories things go in for the ENNIES. I do know that The Bear definitely creates a lot of anxiety and feels for a "comedy."

No I am not. Those were just examples. In a theoretical system with X steps, there is likely to be Y circumstantial elements regardless of how big X is. That is to say, if we add steps for checking for circumstance modifiers, that number of steps will be the same regardless as long as we are...

I thought Outgunned Adventure was a standalone game?

Ostensibly any of those modifiers would apply to any sequence, so it is a wash. That's why I did not bring it up. It isn't "misleading" it is irrelevent to the question asked.

For me anyway, it doesn't really matter who is resolving any given step. They all need resolving. For the record, I don't think DH is too many. I do recall feeling like old Shadowrun was onerous, but the more recent editions feel about right. I think D&D 5E ability checks by the book are too...

Thanks for the detailed reply. One thing you reminded me of that I had forgotten was resolution systems where you end up with some number of successes, and THEN apply them for different effects. i am thinking of Brave New World here specifically, but I am sure it is far from the only one. I...

Spinning this out of the Daggerheart thread and making it more general. When considering a particular process in play, how many steps is too many. For example, in D&D, the process of attacking is: roll to hit, compare to AC, roll damage, apply damage. In Daggerheart, the process is similar...

A plus thread doesn't mean we can't have a discussion. But, the real reason to take it elsewhere is it was mostly off topic.

::checks clock:: Sounds about right.

We should also remember to say no. Rather than letting the player roll with disadvantage versus a DC 30, just say "No, your character can't do that."