Valky
Arcane
I hope Larian goes balls deep with their wacky non serious writing to completely genocide all storyfags that would threaten to compromise gameplay.
Haven't read the thread otherwise and I'm not going to get into an argument about it but consider the opposing viewpoint: that instead of movement being penalized in some way and requiring the 'mover' to pay in health, skill points or action points that the movement should be 'free' and that it should be up to the opponents, who want to hamper/stop the movement to spend their action economy to do so - e.g. using a disable/debuff.That's cute. You guys call your friends to fight your battles for you. Usually you just parrot what they say instead.
I think this is the best method for real-time and turn based with split action and movement point pools and AoO is ok in turn-based where movement and non-movement action 'points' use the same action point pool, and in D&D technically they do.
- two weeks agoThe fact that aoes exist like that is nice though because it works both ways. Sometimes it's worth the risk to take the extra aoes to get rid of a mage.
Secondly, there's been around a dozen D&D 5E-centric tabletop Kickstarters that collected upwards of 1 million USD each, which equals about a quarter of your "total RPG market share" figure, which as you can see is complete bullshit.
I hope Prime Junta comes back soon because it's like ultra fierce that the game he (in a small way) helped ZAUM make is now responsible for influencing such a big rpg and I totally would love to see him react to this news!!!
Don't be jealous that ZAUM and Prime Junta took it mainstream sis.
Wait, I remember that conversation. That's the conversation where I made an innocent mistake; I misspelled an acronym. It's also the conversation where you went on a rant about how nobody even tried to understand you, cried, threatened to put me in your ignore list, then decided you were going to stalk my page and rate every single post I've made ever since as retarded. And people rate me as butthurt...Haven't read the thread otherwise and I'm not going to get into an argument about it but consider the opposing viewpoint: that instead of movement being penalized in some way and requiring the 'mover' to pay in health, skill points or action points that the movement should be 'free' and that it should be up to the opponents, who want to hamper/stop the movement to spend their action economy to do so - e.g. using a disable/debuff.That's cute. You guys call your friends to fight your battles for you. Usually you just parrot what they say instead.
I think this is the best method for real-time and turn based with split action and movement point pools and AoO is ok in turn-based where movement and non-movement action 'points' use the same action point pool, and in D&D technically they do.
Don't bother. Ontopoly will understand exactly nothing of what you just typed. You're talking to a guy that only as recently as two weeks ago thought that attack of opportunity is shortened to aoe.
- two weeks agoThe fact that aoes exist like that is nice though because it works both ways. Sometimes it's worth the risk to take the extra aoes to get rid of a mage.
Incomprehensible and utterly retarded response will nevertheless be incoming.
The attention is too sweet, and you're all here doing a disservice to his condition by feeding him.
Wait, I remember that conversation. That's the conversation where I made an innocent mistake; I misspelled an acronym. It's also the conversation where you went on a rant about how nobody even tried to understand you, cried, threatened to put me in your ignore list, then decided you were going to stalk my page and rate every single post I've made ever since as retarded. And people rate me as butthurt...
(Not specifically referring to DnD) split action and movement points with some actions taking both seems like reasonable solution for AP-based system.Haven't read the thread otherwise and I'm not going to get into an argument about it but consider the opposing viewpoint: that instead of movement being penalized in some way and requiring the 'mover' to pay in health, skill points or action points that the movement should be 'free' and that it should be up to the opponents, who want to hamper/stop the movement to spend their action economy to do so - e.g. using a disable/debuff.
I think this is the best method for real-time and turn based with split action and movement point pools and AoO is ok in turn-based where movement and non-movement action 'points' use the same action point pool, and in D&D technically they do.
Fascinating. Close to 3/4 of the people answering have pronouns on their bios.
You may not like it, but this is what peak D&D fan looks like:
So a hobby consisting of slashing through monstrosities to earn gold & fame and ultimately rise above the average peasant -who proved too weak to do so-, has now been taken over by monstrosities who despise this very ambition in life (or usually do so). Ironic.
So a hobby consisting of slashing through monstrosities to earn gold & fame and ultimately rise above the average peasant -who proved too weak to do so-, has now been taken over by monstrosities who despise this very ambition in life (or usually do so). Ironic.
So, it's not actually a successor at all, then. WotC simply hope that it will be a financial successor to DOS2.It's a successor because WotC is tired of releasing dumpsterfire video games so they licensed their IP to a breakout RPG company that recently developed a very well received/high selling RPG to make a game under the same brand as the last D&D game that wasn't shit.your opinion on anything is shitHe didn't even dare add that Baldur's Gate has specifically RTwP combat - because, of course, Larian's "BG3" doesn't.
It's not my opinion that Walgrave described Larian's D&D game as a successor to the BG series because "It's still a party-based game, you still need to do combat, you will recognise a lot of D&D rules". If all it takes to be a successor to another game is to have something as vague as "you stil need to do combat", then most games are successors to most previously-released games of any title. It would make more sense for Walgrave to have touted that their D&D RPG is a successor because it will have the same type of combat as the BG series. But, of course, he couldn't make that claim.
WoTC hopes they'll finally establish a D&D video game after all these years, since Sword Coast Legends didn't go.
And for those of us that aren't autistic there's absolutely nothing wrong with this.So, it's not actually a successor at all, then. WotC simply hope that it will be a financial successor to DOS2.It's a successor because WotC is tired of releasing dumpsterfire video games so they licensed their IP to a breakout RPG company that recently developed a very well received/high selling RPG to make a game under the same brand as the last D&D game that wasn't shit.your opinion on anything is shitHe didn't even dare add that Baldur's Gate has specifically RTwP combat - because, of course, Larian's "BG3" doesn't.
It's not my opinion that Walgrave described Larian's D&D game as a successor to the BG series because "It's still a party-based game, you still need to do combat, you will recognise a lot of D&D rules". If all it takes to be a successor to another game is to have something as vague as "you stil need to do combat", then most games are successors to most previously-released games of any title. It would make more sense for Walgrave to have touted that their D&D RPG is a successor because it will have the same type of combat as the BG series. But, of course, he couldn't make that claim.
And for those of us that aren't autistic there's absolutely nothing wrong with this.
Bethesda turned an isometric, turn-based rpg that tried to emulate p&p rpgs into a shitty shooter with meaningless rpg elements, not to mention the lore, themes etc.And for those of us that aren't autistic there's absolutely nothing wrong with this.
Correct. I think bethesda did the same with fallout. and all the cool non autists found that supercool.
RPGcodex, the forum where you can learn that BG 1 & 2 and Fallout 2 sucked.
Stick around and maybe you'll learn something.RPGcodex, the forum where you can learn that BG 1 & 2 and Fallout 2 sucked.