niedziela, 29 stycznia 2012

Seminarium "Skills and Abilities"

No i ostatnie seminarium z D&D XP, tym razem poświęcone roli umiejętnoci i cech w grze, oraz temu, jak się zmieniały i jak mają wyglądać. Jak zwykle, zapis poniżej:


11:59
Welcome to our final seminar of D&D XP 2012!
11:59
Trevor Kidd is on hand at the D&D XP Seminar, to help transcribe the speakers' presentation.
12:00
Comments in these chats are moderated (meaning, they are approved before being published) so as not to overwhelm the transcription. As such, we unfortunately cannot publish every comment/question.
12:00
But please do comment and ask questions; we keep a record of questions raised in these chats (published and unpublished) that we'll bring back to R&D, to let them know what's on your mind.
12:20
We're getting close to starting things off here...
12:21
Comment From Guest
will it be possible to play with only the abilities? no skills (or feats for that matter).

12:21
Comment From kozaim
oh cool, i'm not late. You know the fuse...

12:21
Comment From Style75
The "Cover it Live" feature is nice, thanks for letting us participate.

12:22
Comment From Style75
How will ability scores interact with skills?

12:22
Comment From Happymoney
Will the ability scores remain the same, or will there be more/less, or just different names for them?

12:22
Comment From Damian
could we have a D&D system that has a system for combat skills and a different system for non-combat skills?

12:22
Comment From Duskreign
Does the reimagining of skill and ability scores closely relate to one of the existing versions of d&d with some minor tweaking or is this a brand new concept?

12:23
Comment From kozaim
There will be more and reiterative ability like 3.5 or less and general ability like pathfinder?

12:23
Comment From Wyzard
Are we going to get away from the "dumb fighter?"

12:23
Comment From Style75
Point buy, rolling dice, or array?

12:23
Comment From DebbieHunton
Hope to see D&D return to the stat-based system it originally was instead of the skill-based system the designers thought everyone wanted... nothing wrong with skills, it just seemed like the stats were ignored

12:25
Comment From dr-strangelove
Have you ever considered changing the way the ability modifier currently works? For instance, giving a bonus with every point above ten instead of every two points?

12:25
Comment From Osgood
Will ability score still improve as the character levels?

12:25
Comment From Style75
How will race interact with ability scores?

12:25
Comment From Lumi
In AD&D 2e, you could easily be a fighter with 9 strength because ability scores in relation to combat from 8-14 had pretty much the same effects. I'm hoping we can move away from "you have to have 16 in strength or the combat math kicks your ass."

12:25
Comment From kozaim
Will there be less or more variety bonus based on situations? I hope less. More there are, more confusing is the game. General bonuses would do the trick

12:25
Comment From Armisael
Taking out the link between skills and stats would be ideal. The idea of skills to guide actions and resolutions is fine, but as Wyzard said...the dumb fighter sucks.

12:26
Comment From Style75
I have a goliath barbarian who can't pass an intimidate check. Will D&D Next fix this?

12:27
Comment From kozaim
A stats game would also be more fast and resolutive than an ability points game

12:27
Comment From DebbieHunton
@Armisael The dumb fighter is just FUN roleplay fodder... don't forget there's more to the game than winning combats...

12:28
Comment From Duskreign
I look forward to the day when class no longer determines the number of skill you have. It can define it to some degree but having a social fighter should be an option.

12:28
Comment From Aoirorentsu
What does DnDNext assume about your starting ability scores? A comment: in 4e, 18s don't really feel special any more - when I played 2e as a kid, getting an 18 was a big freaking deal. Thanks for taking questions!

12:28
Comment From Alzer
I hope the relation between skills and ability scores is stronger in the next edition. Since many skills are rather reliant on such things (I've got some decent knowledge skills, but less so than someone with a higher IQ than I have)

12:28
Comment From Osgood
Assuming the base game uses ability check instead of skills, will there be a rule module with a 3E/4E style skill system?

12:29
Comment From Duskreign
Is there any options for social combat?

12:29
Comment From Armisael
No, it is not. Why can't I play a master tactician without being a Warlord? Every D&D system past 2e punishes INT fighters. Maybe I don't want to lead to have high Int and be martial...so why not enable it? It's not like it's broken.

12:29
Comment From Lumi
I would love to go back to 2e style non-weapon proficiencies. Diplomacy? Alright, having that NWP gives you +1 to your Charisma check.

12:29
Just a reminder, as we're about to start. Trevor Kidd is on hand at the D&D XP Seminar, to help transcribe the speakers' presentation. Comments in these chats are moderated (meaning, they are approved before being published) so as not to overwhelm the transcription. But please do comment and ask questions; we keep a record of questions raised in these chats (published and unpublished) that we'll bring back to R&D, to let them know what's on your mind.

12:30
Comment From dr-strangelove
Aoirorentsu makes an interesting point, is there an assumed minimum value for a character's primary attribute (e.g 16)?

12:30
Trevor: Alright all, we're about to start things up here. Thanks much for joining us! Remember your questions won't show up in the room unless we push it live.

12:30
Comment From kozaim
What if races and only races determines the skill you have and you are proficient with? What would happen to the game?

12:30
Comment From Aoirorentsu
How are social skills broken down in DnDNext?

12:31
Comment From DebbieHunton
@Armisael You're right, there should be options. But the dumb fighter shouldn't be ignored, either.

12:31
Comment From D&DForever
Will there be age modifiers for ability scores?

12:32
Comment From Armisael
Awesome! Echoing the question about minimum needed stats: will they be present? And if so, could they be spelled out very clearly? Lots of players don't realize that a minimum 18 is nigh-mandatory in 4e, for instance.

12:32
Comment From Style75
Is there a way to make skill use during combat more viable?

12:32
Greg: You've talked about the importance of ability scores in D&D in the recent past. What kind of things are you planning for ability scores for the next iteration of D&D?

12:32
Comment From Thalion
If there is going to be stat improvement, will it be capped at some point in time (racial maximums, for example) or not?

12:32
Comment From Armisael
@DebbieHunton: Acknowledged. It should be possible, for sure. Just...not mandatory, IMO. A STR/CON fighter should be as feasible as a STR/INT one (or hell, maybe WIS/INT for weirdness?)

12:33
Comment From Quindia
I'd like to see a return to rolled stats as core with the option to use point-buy - can the panel address this?

12:33
Comment From Justin
Will we see ability boosting items again?

12:34
Comment From Style75
Will there be primary and secondary abilities, or just primary?

12:34
Comment From Glowface
What is important to me is that ability scores should not be essential, necessary parts of character efficiency on a level that I have only one optimal ability score allotment for a class or sub-class.

12:34
Monte: Looking at all the editions of the game, you can easily see that ability scores are really important. Often times, people will use ability scores to help them define their character, or they'll have an idea for a character and then look at the scores first to make them fit that idea.

A couple of days ago I talked a little bit about how we want the core mechanic of the game to be the interaction between the DM and the player. And one of the great tools for that is the ability score. So what we want is to empower DMs and players so that if you want to attempt to do something "I want to open the door" then the DM doesn' thave to even have you roll, he can just look, see you have a 17 strength and says "Yeah, you burst through that door"

We want to get past some of the mundane rolls and not tie up a lot of table time with that and move on to the more interesting stuff and the table narative.

12:36
Comment From Lord of 13
@Armisael: classes are defined in part by what stats they use; the Wizard is the INT caster while the Sorceror is the CHA caster (3.5); or the Warlord is the CHA leader while the Cleric is the WIS leader (4.0).

12:36
Comment From kozaim
@D&DForever yeah, i hope that the link between a skill like "Perception" and the fact that i'm an 90 years old man will not mean anymore that i can see the world like an eagle would thanks to the +3 wisdom bonus. It's just ridicolous.

12:36
Comment From Armisael
Ooooh, neat. What constitutes a mundane roll, then? Shoelace tying checks? Climbing? Pirouetting from one building to the next?

12:36
Comment From D&DForever
From my past characters, I've had ability scores a low as 7-8. I believe having negative modifiers help define some characters, like Raistlin with a very low CON score. I like the idea of point buying for dropping an ability or two below the norm and i hope that it will be part of D&D Next.

12:36
Comment From Style75
Wow, no ability rolls? That's very minimal.

12:37
Comment From Jordy
That makes it easier for sure. Recently had a player try to break through a door, took 3 rounds of combat.. lol!!

12:37
Comment From Glowface
Makes sense. Avoids funny situations when an STR 10 wizard rolls good and breaks through the foor, while the STR 20 Barbarian bounces back due to bad roll.

12:37
Bruce: An example I saw yesterday was a rogue going into a room and looking for traps. You can describe what you're doing and roleplay what you're doing. If he says I look in the jar and I know there's a gem in the jar, I'm not going to have him roll. However, if something is more hidden, like a secret compartment on the shelf I would look at their intelligence and see if he can just automatically find it or if he's looking in the exact right place. However, if he's doing that check in the middle of some other stressor like fighting, then I'd have him roll.

Rob: Earlier this week I had some players fighting some kobolds in the room. One of the guys wanted to jump over a pit, he had a 15 strength so I let him just do it - it wasn't that big of a jump and it sped up combat. It's very liberating to be able to do that kind of thing and just keep the flow going.

12:37
Comment From Mindflayer
@Armisael I think he means any roll where there isn't any dramatic signifigance

12:38
Comment From Manny
one thing that I've missed from 3E & 4E D&D is the way that you can ignore your Attributes once you are done creating your character. I hope that D&DNext allows us to put more importance on Attributes again. Thank you for your time.

12:38
Comment From dr-strangelove
Will there be some system to help a DM judge just how good a certain score is? E.g. the way 22 was described as "Fire Giant Strength" in previous editions?

12:38
Comment From BayonetPriest
I must say I like the sound of cutting out the mundane rolls using that method. It seems like a further simplified version of passive perception and such. Passive Perception was something I very much liked seeing in 4e.

12:39
Comment From Glowface
It would be useful to have clearly defined abilities for such an approach, with lots of examples on which ability plays when.

12:39
Greg: Another thing we've been talking about recently is saving throws and what you guys think about them and the future of D&D?

Monte: Making a saving throw against something has become something that's really a part of D&D. So again, what we've done is tie those into the ability scores. For example you'll make a strength saving throw or wisdom saving throw against a certain effect and so far it's become a big part of some effects and abilities.

12:40
Comment From Eindrachen
Could we possibly see an evolution of the old "take 10" and "take 20" mechanics? For example, perhaps there are "passive" uses of ability (certain types of raw movement, fairly simplistic actions taking little or no physical/mental effort) and "active" uses?

12:40
Comment From Lord of 13
That system reminds me a lot of AD&D 2.0 in the sense that you only roll for important stuff.

12:40
Comment From Lord of 13
So this means that there will no longer be static "Will Defense"? Or will the saving throws be a layer on top of that?

12:40
Rob: For example the big monster is grappling you you might use dexterity to save and get out. But you can also have some other ways of getting out that grapple. Maybe there's a gem on that creature's head and you can an intelligence saving throw to realize that if you mess with it, the creature would die and let you go.

12:41
Comment From Style75
Return of saving through defenses? Does this mean Fort, Ref, and Will are gone?

12:41
Comment From Glowface
So... we are back to actively rolling defense (spells) against effects. Can work either way.

12:41
Comment From dr-strangelove
Does this mean we'll be seeing a return of saving throws as a roll instead of static defense?

12:41
Comment From D1gital-ZER0
When it comes to saving throws, I was a fan of the 3.5 "roll to see if you're okay" idea, not the 4e Willpower AC and the like. In the heat of battle, no one is going to have a static willpower or reflexes.

12:42
Comment From Osgood
Actually sounds less like a Saving Throw and more like and Opposed Check to me...

12:42
Comment From Style75
If saving throws move back to be defensive in nature, how will we measure effect duration? I hated tracking rounds of effects.

12:42
Comment From Jeff Steege
I like the idea of saying " You jump across the pit", but on the other hand some of the most memorable moments in gaming are the failures, mundane and epic.

12:43
Comment From Alzer
I hope that there is a return to players rolling resistance. I always felt a bit helpless in 4ed since the ability to resist was taken out of my hands past the static defense.

12:43
Comment From Rune-Lutz
a defense roll has advantages, but it slows combat if every character is rolling dice every time they get attacked

12:43
Comment From Lanethan
My hope here is that we still have the passive defenses from 4e with Saving Throws for ongoing effects, but the saving throws are no longer just "roll higher than 10".

12:44
Comment From Mark
But having passive defenses on an enemy lets all the players get in on the fun of Critical Hits instead of "hope your enemy fails", and I hope that we don't lose that. You could make the players roll defenses and offenses, but that can take time.

12:44
Comment From kozaim
Better rolling than statically defending

12:44
Greg: How the the different ability scores matter for different characters or classes?

Monte: Different ability scores will still be important to different classes, but there's also plenty of room to focus on all the ability scores. For example if you want to be a charismatic fighter, there's definitely room for that.

Rob: What we want to do when looking at how we handling ability scores in D&D Next is to make sure that the ability scores have their own area carved out. It should make sense to the players why the ability scores are linked to the things they are and make sense in the world.

Monte: Another thing that we're trying out is not only having races give you ability scores changes, but the classes also give you bonuses. It makes sense that if you're a cleric that you would get that bonus to wisdom - you've had training or experience that help you out there.

Bruce: I also see it as kind of puzzle pieces or guiding. I can pick the half orc and lets say that gives you a +1 strength. I can then look at the classes and see that fighter gives me a +1 strength and see the synergy there.

12:45
Comment From Eindrachen
How would you, as designers, determine which rolls are made by the attacker, and which by the defender? For example, let's say a wizard tosses a fireball into a crowd of enemies. Are they making a check to hit them? Or are all the enemies checking to defend?

12:45
Comment From Alzer
Alternate functions for how abilities function sounds like a fantastic idea. Really lets each character type be heroic in their own way. I.e. the fighter brute-strengthing out of the grapple, the rogue being flexible and shifty, and the wizard finding something clever to do.

12:46
Comment From Osgood
Will racial ability penalties return?

12:46
Greg: Speaking of ability scores, how are you guys planning on ability scores generation?

Rob: Looking at all the iteration of D&D, the classic way of doing ability skills is rolling. So the very basic we're working from are 4d6 drop the lowest for each stat. But since we're also looking at the modularity, those core books will also have options for other ability score generation which might be point buy, point arrays and other things.

Monte: Or you can just buy your DM a pizza and get all 18s.

12:46
Comment From Guest
stats by pizza is obviously the best way imaginable

12:47
Comment From IndigoMoonscar
In the earlier Editions, magic was more broad, magic items encompassed more effects... are you saying that the saving throw would change to take that into account if you move the game to a less linear magic system?

12:47
Greg: Talking about ability scores leads easily into skills. What are you guys tossing around for skills and their uses?

Bruce: Looking at the playtest characters here, you might have noticed that a class or a theme might have given you a bonus to skill, but you didn't have a skill list. Normally if you were to call for a check, you would just call for the ability score - like a dexterity check for sneaking up. But if you have a class or character feature that gives you a bonus to sneak, you would add that in.


12:47
Comment From DebbieHunton
Just as a note - truly classic D&D your rolls went in the order you rolled them, assigning your stats where you wanted them is later in D&D... and optional, to boot.

12:48
Greg: Could you talk about some of the challenges you faced while building the current skill system idea?

12:48
Comment From Guest
Point buy is obviously for the more advanced and power gamer. Those who like to min/max everything which is how I felt about 3rd ed. In random rolls like we did in all my 2nd ed it had a touch of real life to it.

12:49
Comment From Mark
The problem with ability score rolling is that if ability scores are *vital* to your character's capabilities, rolling poorly across the board means you're going to be doing poorly for your entire career, and that's atrocious. You don't roll for something as character-defining as class or race, would you?

12:49
Bruce: What we started with was actually a lot like what we've come to now, but it didn't reflect your ability scores directly, it was a bit more derived. It was accomplishing its goals but it didn't necessarily look or feel like the heart and soul of D&D, which is one of the challenges we always bring ourselves back to. So we changed it and we're running with this idea now.

12:50
Comment From Justin
So skills are being used as specializations on abilities?

12:50
Comment From Style75
Nice! Keeping most checks as ability checks and skill bonuses as extras means you can have a huge list of potential skills. Very flexible.

12:50
Comment From Alzer
Mark: Actually I occasionally roll race or class for fun just because I don't know what I feel like doing.

12:50
Comment From TheActionPoint
Hello again from Afghanistan!! Even if 4d6 drop lowest is the default for home campaigns, point buy in some iteration has been the satatus quo for ORganized Play. Will this stay the same in D&D Next?

12:50
Monte: With skills it hasn't necessarily been easy to pick how skills have iconicly worked in D&D, because each edition has changed the way those kinds of abilities work. So we really keep going back to how do we make this feel like the most D&D that we can. We're really looking forward to feedback on this one so we can see if people agree or if they feel something else has a better D&D feel.

12:51
Comment From nothingxs
Here's an interesting take on ability scores: run your character idea by the DM, then the DM can help you assign scores that seem valid for your character concept (as long as it's a good character concept). Not everything has to be "by the book" and, in fact, most players should actually be encouraged to experiment with the system. And the system should be able to accommodate that.

12:51
Comment From Carda
That actually makes the ability scores less of an abstract array of numbers, which I think works better than the current system of "roll up these numbers that you'll never care about again".

12:52
Comment From Glowface
Doesn't this raise the classic, AD&D non-weapon proficiency danger, that a 1st-level character with decent ability scores will almost always be better than a highly 'trained', 10th level character?

12:52
Comment From Juion
How would the new skill system account for specialized knowledge? Afterall, a wizard would know more about magic than someone with a equally high intelligence score, wouldn't they?

12:52
Comment From Style75
Is there a way to recieve training in a skill to create more interesting characters?

12:52
Comment From Wyzard
How do character abilities/skills scale? Is it going to be like 4E, where gaining levels makes you inherently better at everything?

12:52
To The Action Point - we're not really at the point where we can talk about what will and won't be in the organized play support for the game. It's likely though that organized play would pick a standard set of options (point buy might be one of those) as the rules used for all organized play, or for specific OP campaigns.

12:53
Comment From carldot34
Is Aid Another kept in? However it is done, it let other players feel like they weren't just watching the wizard or rogue roll dice.

12:53
Comment From Rune-Lutz
i think the simplified skill list from 4e, took something away from the game. A larger skill list like the one found in 3.5 gave more depth to non-combat parts of the game

12:54
Greg: So some players want to be able to use a bluff skill to say convince the ogre to join the party, roll and then bluff it. other players want to come up with an elaborate story about workign with the hobgoblins and acting as their emissary. What are you doing to cater to both of those different play styles?

12:54
Comment From Jordy
I like the static perception checks.. ..and I am a firm believer that skills make the character. The jump from 2nd ed to 3rd ed was significant in how skills were handled... ...though definitely for the better. Complex skill checks were an interesting addition, will you be adding that as part of the core rules? I'd like to see more broad categories of skills with specializations on them (like a feat-tree only for skills)

12:55
Comment From Graham
Back in 3e, spellcasting caused a lot of confusion for some of my new players, who had trouble remembering when they needed to roll vs when the opponent needed to roll a save. (It also ended up disappointing them to a certain degree when they didn't get to roll for any of their spells.) Do casters roll for their magic attacks like they do in 4e? Will this at least be standardized to one or the other across spells to avoid the confusion of switching back and forth?

12:55
Comment From azmire
i kind of hope wizards go back closer to 3.0 or 3.5 on allot of the skills a general knowlage is just a bad idea example in 3.5 a fighter wouldnt be very good at a knowlage arcana check

12:56
Comment From Gary
Do you still add half your level to ability and skill rolls? That was a really elegant solution to the problem of every ability you didn't spend resources on not scaling with level.

12:56
Monte: on the one hand you want to reward the guy who's done the RP to support his actions. But on the other hand, we don't want to train players to know how to use swords to attack in the game. In other words, you want to reward behavior but you don't want to penalize people for not playing a certain way.

What we've done now is we have this thing called advantage that a DM can hand out if the players set themselves up with a good description.

12:56
Comment From Happymoney
Have you thought about having a generic skill list, like the one in 4e, and then also the ability to specialize in certain specific skills? For example, a fighter might train in Athletics and be generally good at climbing, jumping, and swimming, but a rogue might train in climbing, and not be as good at jumping or swimming, but would be much better at climbing. This would allow specialization or general training.

12:57
Bruce: The DMG will also most likely say that if the player gives you a great story, and you and your players want to roleplay, then you can choose to ignore rolling for things like that. You will have the ability and power as the DM to make that score without looking at the ability score at all. Does it fit the situation? Does it fit the character? Do you like the roleplay - then just roleplay and don't worry about the dice for that interaction.

12:57
Comment From Ben
I think that skils should be diverse, because it makes for more individualism among characters. However, roleplaying should be a factor as well, perhaps giving a modifier to the check - positive OR negative.

12:58
Comment From KRGDark
On the topic of skills, what are the plans around Skill Challenges? (Apologies if this has already been addressed). My players and I find the current Challenge system cumbersome in that it seems to be more an exercise in dice rolling.

12:58
Comment From Rune-Lutz
for the question about the bluff check, i would make the skill check easier for the player that came up with the elaborate story. So the player is rewarded for RPing, but the check still matters.

12:58
Comment From Style75
"Set themselves up with a good description" might penalize the quiet reserved player who's not so good at roleplaying.

12:58
Monte: Yeah, the DM rules would focus on a few things. First you would look at the character and the situation and if it all fits, you don't have to look at teh ability score or the dice. If it's not clear at that point though, then the next step would be looking at the appropriate stat and comparing it to the DC.

12:58
Greg: So what's the current difference between feats and skills?

12:59
Comment From Alzer
Skill bonuses for RP is something that we've done ocassionally at my table, and having a strong in-system support for it is very welcome.

12:59
Comment From kozaim
The "skill cap" would be very elegant: You can have 34 point in knowledge if your INT is 24. The same with all the other ability.

12:59
Comment From Dispaminite
I usually use roleplaying for skill challenges to hand out bonuses, while letting the "quiet" players just make a straight roll.

12:59
Comment From Jordy
You could make feats and skills the same thing...?

1:00
Rob: A skill would be something that's a reflection of a stat or a specific feature of a stat. A feat is more like a feature that is beyond that, more unique and not inherent to an ability score.

1:00
Comment From Robert M
A feat should be accomplished with the use of a skill.

1:00
Bruce: Adding to that, a feat might provide a bonus that is always on, or a power/ability.

1:00
Comment From SarahDarkmagic
Not rewarding the player who set up a nice scene also hurts that play experience though. DM just would have to be fair and helpful.

1:00
Comment From Aaron
Will Arcana be keep as a skill? It was a pretty good mechanic, and a good way to handle detect magic.

1:00
Rob: Feats also cover stuff that would be like your at-will powers. For example if you saw the javelin of fire at-will, that was from a magic feat.

1:01
Comment From Gary
I don't like the idea of Math Tax feats. They led to a lot of 'system mastery' in 4th edition that really has no place in Dungeons and Dragons.

1:01
Comment From Eindrachen
Shouldn't a power/ability be more aligned with class training, though? What's the difference between a feat and a class feature?

1:01
Comment From IndigoMoonscar
I definately think more specialized Skill use should come back. For example, I don't mind that "anyone" can attempt a stealth or thievery check, but I really think the Rogue should be able to define and specialize in these things, like pick pockets, or pick lock. Are you working on something like that? Anyone has a chance, but the class who is supposed to be REALLY good at it gets more optioins in the skill?

1:01
Comment From aufrank
"Always-on" feats seem to be the ones that risk becoming almost-mandatory (e.g., expertise feats). How are designers avoiding "feat taxes"?

1:02
Comment From TheActionPoint
I find it interesting that there will apparently be "rules"-- i.e. explanation in the DMG-- about how the GM doesn't need to use the rules at all times.

1:02
Comment From Sunsword
If my Ability score is less than the DC, can I still roll to accomplish a task or do I fail?

1:02
Comment From Armisael
@IndigoMoonscar: They've said as much. You can gain specialization bonuses to skills.

1:02
Comment From D&DForever
So... to extrapolate from "magic feats", there would be feat categories?

1:02
Comment From Excalainen
Do you separate combat and non-combat options so that they don't have to compete for the same character resrources?

1:02
Greg: How do you envision building a character going?

Monte: What we're working with now is that you pick you stats, class, race and then you also have a theme. So you might be a commoner, a noble, a knight, aprentice, etc. These themes would offer you skills. As you go up in level you could expand on that and express the story of your background and character by picking more optoins that support your theme.

But if you want to get into a more complex character development system (modular option), then you could pick other features and things to basically build your own theme.

1:03
Comment From Eindrachen
The reason they need "Rule Zero" in the first place is that in all editions, we tend to get players who only want to go by the book. If that's the case, the DM has no flexibility to create a more dynamic game, and thus it gets boring.

1:04
Comment From Robert M
If you used s point by system for abilities whats to say 95% of all Warriors wouldn't have a maximum Strength?

1:04
Comment From Cryn
Themes were the best addition to the heroic tier.

1:04
Comment From Anias
Are non-combat abilities balanced against combat, if so, why? It would be nice if a given character could be functional regardless of which table it sat down at.

1:04
Comment From Aurion
With my group, we prefer the realistic attribute of in the skill and ability system to the basic flatlined one of 4e. In what ways are you bringing the complexity back to the system without OVERdoing it?

1:05
Comment From TheActionPoint
So what you're saying is that you could have a "noble fighter", an "apprentice ranger" a commoner wizard"... OR someone who picked and chose what they wanted for theme. Basically, themes will be pre-packaged sets of abilities that end up evoking a particular flavor during play?

1:05
Comment From Happymoney
Is there any plan to split feats into different categories for in-combat or out of combat scenes. If a player puts all there feats into skills, then they won't be able to contribute much when it comes to combat. Are there any plans to address this? Maybe at one level I get a skill feat, and another a combat feat?

1:05
Comment From Alzer
So something sortof along the lines of backgrounds from d20 modern? That would be great to see an inclusion of and really help players (new and old) get a reward for having a solid backstory, or help develop a backstory for their charachter.

1:06
Greg: Are there any themes you really liked or things from themes you've really enjoyed?

Monte: We're doing a lot of really cool things with themes. For example, you could have a planetouched theme that would give you some extraplanar stuff.

Bruce: This is on the edge of what we're thinking of, but maybe something like being a deva would actually be a theme instead of a race. There's a more basic one that I really enjoy is the pubcrawler. You're that guy when you walk into the bar everybody knows your name, and it has some other flavor like that. It doesn't really speak to the combat or some other character areas, but it really helps inform who that guy is.

Rob: I like the idea of possibly taking what might have been classes in other editions and making them themes. For example, I love avengers, but an avenger themed Paladin is really cool too. It opens up the space for working with a class from a previous edition that there might not be space for as it's own class, but still has some great flavor.

1:06
Greg: It sounds like this is something that could be one of the options a DM could apply or not apply based on the way the DM wants to run it?

Monte: Yeah, as I was saying earlier if you wanted to play the most basic version of the game you could ignore themes completely.

1:07
Comment From Gary
I'm really glad to see themes being made a bigger part of the game. I still question the idea of buying your At-Wills with feats. Stuff like that should be a basic part of the class.

1:07
Comment From kozaim
What about and age cap for ability point? (

1:07
Comment From Armisael
Rob, aren't classes kind of too big for a theme, though? An Avenger was pretty much a polar opposite ot a paladin - solitary, no plate, no poise.

1:07
Comment From Cryn
I found the werewolf theme to be amazing. Deva as a theme makes great sense do to their rarity.

1:08
Comment From Eindrachen
Instead of ignoring themes, you also might change them in-house for your game's needs. If every PC were a noble, for example, perhaps the themes change to the type of higher-class person they are.

1:08
Comment From Wyzard
Vampire: Class or theme? :)

1:08
Greg: Is there anything in particular that you've seen in previous editions that you want to really try to bring forward in this new iteration?

Bruce: I really like the warlock, that there are several different pacts that you can choose right out of the gate. The customization is a bit more complex, but being able to choose from a strong number of pacts is very important to me and I hope that as it exists in our current playtest, we can move forward with that.

Rob: I want to bring back the great wheel of cosmology. That would be awesome to have back.

Monte: There really are a lot of things. I want the ritual system to be expressed in some way. I love the idea of magic existing in a lot of different forms in some way. Part of D&D is those really classic magic items that we all know, the flame tongue, the holy avenger, the wand of wonder. All of that has to be in the game for it to really feel like D&D to me.

1:09
You've talked about a scale of running a game with a lot of magic items or no magic items. Since we're talking about ability scores today, how do you see magic items affecting/not affecting ability scores?

1:09
Comment From Guest
Having themes for classes is an alright idea, if we can also play the classes. I was somewhat disappointed when the samurai theme came out recently in 4e, knowing that there probably wouldn't be a samurai class.

1:09
Comment From Style75
What about alignment? Will that be a major part of class/race/theme selection?

1:10
Comment From Dispaminite
Revenant as a theme would be cool.

1:10
Comment From kozaim
@Armisael I think in this case "Theme" is a word for "personality trait", so that an avenger theme would mean that you became a paladin thanks to that event in the past that changed your world

1:10
Monte: I think there's definitely room for a things like the gauntlets of ogre power and have items that could affect stats, but we're looking at having caps on what those items could raise your stats to.

1:11
Comment From Cryn
I would prefer ability scores be kept seperate from magic items. I prefer magic items to only have properties and effects.

1:11
Comment From Markelhay
What if there was a limit to who could use what magic items? Like maybe you need intelligence 17 to use a Wand of Wonder

1:11
Greg: How will mundane equipment be in the game - more the standard? How will that affect the game and what else goes along with that?

1:11
Comment From Guest
I'd be fine with magic items that affect ability scores if ability scores didn't affect combat.

1:12
Comment From Excalainen
Please, make magic items as bonus instead of assumed part of character mathematics.

1:12
Comment From Glowface
Having (capped) ability score increasing items could lead to a scene where the characters HAVE to possess the items for their primary ability in order to funcion as optimal.

1:12
Comment From TheActionPoint
4E pretty much got rid of the idea of ability score damage; 3E had it all over the place, resulting in lots of math at the table when the ability score damage or magic spell that increased scroes occurred. Which side of this line will Next come down on?

1:13
Comment From D&DForever
Perhaps the Gauntlets of Ogre Power could give you a bonus to breaking or lifting objects and a bonus to damage rolls.

1:13
Monte: Mundane equipment is important and we're trying some different things there. For example, at this point nobody starts with the ability to have plate armor.

Bruce: one of the things we're doing is moving things more to a silver standard instead of a gold standard. We also have mundane implements for some caster classes that are their equivalent of a fighters sword or their slightly better armor. This opens up space for some interesting magic items that help you in rituals. but if you have a magic item, maybe it's a totem that has a little creature in it that is summoned to help you and do other cool things.

1:14
Comment From Kev in Aus
I'd like to see magic weapons only affect damage and not accuracy. So a mundane sword and a magic sword have the same chance of hitting but the magic does more damage.

1:14
Comment From Armisael
@D&DForever: If it gives a bonus to combat it's a mandatory item. We saw this with the Iron Armbands of Power in 4E, and it was depressing that your Arms Slot was basically automatically taken there.

1:15
Comment From Sparta
I would love to see a book similar to Arms and Equipment from 3rd Edition for mundane and/or magical equipment. It's one of my favorites, brings a lot to the table.

1:15
Comment From countingku
Ability score damage is the kind of complexity that is bad, imo. Things that have you have to constantly recalulate base values only confuse and delay encounters.

1:15
Comment From Eindrachen
Perhaps magic items can go back to flat ability scores. In 2E, gauntlets of ogre power gave you a specific, flat Strength score. If you somehow had higher natural Strength, you didn't need them.

1:16
Comment From D1gital-ZER0
I think, on the side of "mundane" equipment, mundane is a bad word to describe non magical gear. I have a character in my current campaign that uses a "splitting axe". It's a battle axe that splits down the middle, revealing a chain and lock, and it can become a two-bladed axe or a pair of nunchuku-axes. Not magic, but not mundane

1:16
Comment From Jordy
Rather than having a cap, each item should only add a bonus to one thing, multiple items shouldn't stack. For example you could have gauntlets of ogre strength, but you couldn't get the bonuses from also wearing a girdle of strength...

1:16
Greg: To what degree do you see weapons playing a roll in D&D? Should you have to change weapons for fighting different foes - how do you see weapons playing out in the next interation?

Monte: Something I'd like to see is characters that are good with weapons become more broad with a number of different weapons or maybe any weapon he comes across. We're defining weapons not by specific names, but but their categories. So you wouldn't say I'm really good with a battle axe, you'd say I'm really good with axes. So you could be good with axes, swords, and bows for example.

If a fighter is good with swords, and they find a really good axe in a dragon's horde for example, I'd love for him to be able to just pick that axe up and be good with it - not have to worry about ignoring it because you didn't make the choice to be an axe guy.

1:17
Comment From Glowface
I even have a wild dream: a sword just being 'magic', without actual bonuses. So that a magic sword remains useful throughout your whole career.

1:17
Comment From SarahDarkmagic
Yeah, I'm not a fan of ability score damage. I prefer conditions instead.

1:17
Comment From brennon
What's the rationale behind not starting with Plate? AC is incredibly important, and it sounds as if classes such as Paladin or Fighter would need to expend resources just to fufill their role well.

1:17
Comment From BenbenCorm
I definately love having to switch to my warhammer to fight a skeleton and my axe for a zombie, it was one of the things I liked on melee chracters

1:17
Comment From aufrank
So, specializing helps, not-specializing doesn't hurt?

1:18
Comment From Style75
Magic items should feel special, not just part of an expected math progression.

1:18
Comment From Robert M
Depending on the magic system and the quantity of magic in it, ability's and skills could be greatly different. How much magic is going to be involved in the average game?

1:18
Comment From Armisael
So...instead of different stats for a longsword, polearm, glaive, and glaive-guisarme, you'd just have Light Bladekind and Heavy Reach weapons, for instance? That sounds nice. What about characters who have signature weapons, though? Christmas tree item finding forces them to fight the system to stick to their concept.

1:18
Greg: What kind of transparency are you looking for when it comes to Monsters and abilities. Should players know what they're facing when they see something, or is some of the information hidden?

Monte: We were just talking about throwing in some extra abilities to monsters. So you might have a normal orc, or you might decide to make him a vicious orc that would add an attack that to a nearby creature when the monster dies. That kind of thing could be added in by a DM on the fly because it doesn't really change the challenge too much or make you rewrite anything. It might give you a little bit of an experience bonus if/when you defeat it too.

1:18
Greg: Alright, we're opening the floor up to questions.

1:19
Comment From TheActionPoint
@SarahDarkmagic-- agreed. Back in 3E, any combat-related ability damage (STR and CON especially) was horrifically time-sucking.

1:19
Question: What is going to be the differentiation between weapons. In previous editions it could have been keen, two handed, damage die, etc.

1:19
Comment From Chuck
Is anyone going to reconcile D&D economics? Platemail cost more than a village in renaissance times. For that price, buy a company of mercenaries.

1:19
Comment From Draco
Someone ask about racial traits, please. :)

1:19
Comment From Armisael
Question: Signature Item characters, like Arthur with Caliburn/Excalibur. Will they be feasible?

1:20
Comment From Nicolas
Please consider not including "trap" feats or options, and please make character creation as simple as possible in the core

1:20
Comment From D1gital-ZER0
I'm on the fence about weapon proficiencies... I love broad proficiencies, but fighters shouldn't be able to pick up any weapon and go: "Oh yeah, I used a Scythe in boot camp, did you know that the Scythe is the most unused weapon in the world? Lucky me!"

1:20
Rob: We're looking at accuracy and damage expression right now. In addition to the damage type, we're also looking at damage types like slahing, piercing, etc. In adition the plan right now is that we're going to have some weapon specialization benefits. So if you're specialized in a certain weapon type, it opens up all sorts of neat little benefits, some of which are the at-will kind of attacks we've seen in 4E.

1:21
Comment From Sparta
Yesterday you talked about bringing some chaos back to the game, any thoughts on bringing Vorpal back to it's glory days?

1:21
Comment From Jack
How would your proposed "vicious orc" system be any different to the various types of orc (and other monster) currently in 4e?

1:21
Comment From BrentNewhall
Thanks for opening this up! Question: Exactly how modular do you see D&D Next being? How far are you trying to push that?

1:22
Comment From Gnome of Zilargo
Will feats be part of a module or included in the core?

1:22
Q: A couple days ago you were talking about having different itterations of the cleric - with the cleric being a class that is melee and casts some healing, but having the priest be more of a guy channeling holy magic and being a cloth wearer. Do you have any plans to have a magic class that caters more to people who don't like the vancian wizard - maybe some other arcane casting option?

Monte: Yes, definitely. We're interested in magic classes that handle their abilities or magic differently than the vancian style wizard.

1:23
Comment From D&DForever
Question: What feat categories have been discussed?

1:23
Comment From Mark
How high will ability scores scale? Are we peaking at 25 like 2e? Unlimited like 3e? 30 like 4e?

1:23
Comment From DebbieHunton
I'd love to see the sorcerer move back to the original 3rd edition playtest - they had DIFFERENT spells, they were based on the fact that the sorcerer had dragon blood. Made it not so much a lazy-man's-wizard, but an entirely different type of magic user.

1:23
Comment From Glowface
Which will effect the success of your skills attempts more? Ability scores, level, class/theme, individual training/proficiency/specialisation?

1:24
Comment From carldot34
But you ARE keeping the classic Vancian wizard in in some form?

1:24
Comment From Excalainen
Will you strive to make the DMs job as easy as it is in 4e? In 3e, the DM was required to prepare too much when designing monsters and encounters.

1:24
Comment From Excalainen
Are prestige classes/paragon paths/epic destinies still in?

1:25
Q: What kind of things are going to change or advance in your character as it levels?

Bruce: We think that there's a lot more, if you don't scale things quite so dramatically, there's a lot of room for interesting things to happen. For example, equipment stays interesting for longer, monsters stay interesting and challenging for longer. There's a lot that opens up when you don't boost abilities scores as much through progression.

Monte: Not having ability scores advance as quickly also makes magic items more relevant at higher and lower levels. Because level will mean less dramatically for things like attack bonus, those things will scale a lot less, we can play around with you having other options to improve your ability scores or skills so those choices really matter instead of just having them advance as you level.

1:26
Comment From Jaden
What is the maximum level for a character? 20? 30? unlimited?

1:26
Comment From Josha
At the moment, how important are feats?

1:26
Comment From Tiffany
Will skills (in whatever iteration) be a part of the core? Or is that part of the new modularity?

1:26
Comment From Al
In regards to the ability score poll, I think listing all the options in the books is best, let DM/Players decide which to use and indicate which one is used for Organized play. The Gamma World method was good.

1:26
Comment From Cryn
This would also extend your heroic tier sweet spot. :)

1:27
Comment From Slerotin
Will you change the "base attack bonus" into various "weapon skills"?

1:27
Comment From Väel
So, are you going to reduce the effect that lvling up have in the character, and bring more importance to magic items?

1:28
Comment From The Magus
Q: Will you go back to having interesting Prestige lass type progression, or will you just have slight increases like the Paragon Tiers?

1:28
Comment From Markelhay
Will artifacts make a comeback?

1:28
Comment From Blackbriar
Q: Will the ability score dead spots (i.e. odd numbered ability scores), continue to be meaningless, or are ability score to ability modifiers being changed?

1:29
Comment From Style75
If a DM wants to use narrative combat vs. gridded combat, will the PC's have to be built differently or will each PC function in both systems?

1:29
Comment From IndigoMoonscar
Are you going to give more options to the character at EVERY level they achieve? Or are we sticking with only getting significant advantages/options every x levels like 4e?

1:30
Q: It sounds like your focus is to put a lot of decision making and power on the DM. That sounds great if you have a good DM, but what about if you don't have a good DM? Are you doing things to help new DMs or to help DMs improve?

Monte: We definitely do want to grow and build DMs. I want you to be able to create a monster or encounter in 10 minutes, create a powerful npc in 5-10 minutes. There's a lot of work that has been done for that in 4E, and I really want to focus on that idea that npcs and monster creation don't have to follow the same rules as pcs do, which frees up a lot of time and possibilties for the DM.

Bruce: By giving power to the DM and a very robust rule set we can make it easier for the DM to make a calling and not feel like his lost at see. This will keep the game going and improve things for everyone.

Monte: We're not just giving more power to the DM, we're giving more power to the players. In a way we're giving more power to the players, and not just the characters. We're giving the player the ability to come out with his crazy ideas and say I want to do this. And instead of giving the DM lots of concrete rules, give him rules for making calls and keeping the action and roleplay going. So when a player goes I want to jump up onto this table and kick the magic helmet off the monsters head, the DM will know that he can just let it happen because of the ability score and/or require a roll for some of the things that are going on.

1:31
Comment From Josha
Will we see a return of the "gritty" low levels?

1:31
Comment From Guest
Are skill challenges coming back?

1:31
Comment From Style75
I'm very interested in how race will interact with ability scores. Can this be explained?

1:32
Comment From Cryn
I would prefer to level less often, but have it mean more each time.

1:32
Question: How is xp going to be rewarded?

Rob: We want to provide a bunch of different options for how DMs can reward the players for doing different things. So yeah, we'll have an experience table for the monsters, but we'll also have information for doing things like giving xp for quests, or giving xp for exploring a whole area, or give experience for finding the hidden treasure. There are things we're doing so that you can reward your players for what you or they are trying to accomplish in the game.

1:32
Comment From D&DForever
Question: How are starting hit points addressed, including adjustments for leveling?

1:32
Q: To Style: What we're running with now is that a race might grant something like a +1 bonus to a specific stat. This could change of course.

1:32
Comment From Tiffany
Will skill points be making a return? Or will we be seeing something closer to 4e?

1:33
Comment From Eindrachen
Excellent! I like the idea of suggestions for XP awards other than "beat up monkey, take monkey's lunch money".

1:33
Comment From Cryn
I ingnore xp, I level my players when the story calls for it.

1:33
Comment From Markelhay
Will dragon born and/or tie flings return?

1:33
Comment From Excalainen
Random or fixed hit points?

1:33
Comment From PaladinNicolas
How simple will character creation be?

1:34
To Josha - I've heard a lot of people talking about how at first level they are concerned with their characters dying. Probably not the lethality that original or early D&D had, but surviving at low levels and beyond is something that players will be careful of it they're doing more dangerous tasks.

1:34
Comment From Jaden
Is the skill system going to be like 4e or will we have to deal with cross class stuff again (i hope not)

1:34
Comment From PaladinNicolas
Are gnomes going to be included in the races available in the core books?

1:34
Comment From Style75
Many people felt that 4e combats took too long because monsters and PC's had too many hit points. Was this a consideration in making D&D Next?

1:35
Comment From Robilar
Will there be a skill challenge mechanic?

1:35
Comment From Dispaminite
More of class question - How will multiclassing/hyrid classes be handled?

1:36
Comment From dr-strangelove
Do you intend for character class, race or ability scores to be the most important feature in determining to hit, defenses hit points etc?

1:36
Q: Ritual and magic components - do they have a place in the game?

Bruce: As we're looking at it right now, rituals are the only thing that really have magic components. We think they have a place in the world that's archetypical but rituals might be the best place for that.

1:36
Comment From Eindrachen
Here's a question I'm not sure anyone has asked yet: will we some any classes merged with any others, due to related/redundant themes or abilities? For example, will warlord abilties get folded into fighters as an option, or will they stay an independant class?

1:36
Comment From Style75
Will alignment be mandatory? Will alignment have mechanical effects in the game or be used as prerequisits?

1:36
Comment From D&DForever
@Dispaminite - I think they addressed that in the Class Design chat. I believe it will be more like 3e.

1:37
Comment From Excalainen
Will all nine alignments return?

1:37
Comment From The Magus
Q: Will you make rituals have in-combat usage as well? that could be a good way to keep in Vancian Magic without re-crippling Wizards.

1:38
Comment From Jaden
How many classes are there going to be? How many races? I felt that in 4e the only big issue I had was the fact we had 40+ races and classes and only a small percentage received coverage and support.

1:38
Comment From Ainamacar
What are the primary aims of the D&D Next economy? Ideally I think it can serve as a useful measure of power as a game element (for players), as an intra-party element (for characters), and as a setting element (for the campaign), but that is many masters. What tools will it provide the DM to tell different kinds of stories in different kinds of campaigns?

1:38
Monte: One of the great things we can do with a ritual system, is that we can have the components for some crazy ritual to be actually a quest - go find this rare component so that you can use this ritual. It opens it up to be important to .the story

1:39
Comment From PaladinNicolas
Will everyone who has requested to participate in the playtest have the chance to do so, or will you choose only some of them?

1:39
Comment From Robilar
How will basic ability checks be made? Using the ability's modifier + d20 against a set DC or will the old ability check rule from 2e return where you had to roll under your ability score?

1:39
Comment From D&DForever
@Jaden - I believe they covered that in the Class Design chat. I think they sad core will include all character classes from each initial PHB from each edition.

1:40
Comment From Jaden
Will the open playtest be handled only in the local gaming stores or can home groups have the material as well?

1:40
Comment From K-bec
It seems that the use of dice will be less frequent. Will it be the case with combat?

1:40
Comment From Naki
In 4E, the ability scores of creatures rarely mattered and were mostly fluff due to the way creature powers were balanced against PCs. Is it expected to remain this way, or will ability scores directly affect combat statistics such as damage or initiative for monsters?

1:41
Comment From carldot34
I like the idea of Vancian wizards casting little rituals to 'store' their spells for that day, ready for use. Gives a good justification for them, allows spell components to be useful and the wizard only has to deliver the trigger.

1:41
Comment From Sylverdyne
I think that the 4E Ritual system was one of the best innovations that the edition made, and am glad that the design team is pushing it forward, rather then simply abandoning it.

1:41
Comment From mattbaby
It seems from your statements about rituals and the bonus advantages, that you are looking to systemize a lot of the things that a DM would usually just do. Is this part of the streamlining process to help make designing adventures etc. easier? Can you give another example of this?

1:42
Comment From John
Will melee combat for classes like paladins still use the somewhat strange mechanism of basing physical, weapon-based attacks on a score like Charisma rather than Strength?

1:43
Monte: In every edition of the game, the DM has had the ability to play out the the combat in a theater of the mind style, or pull out a grid and miniatures to be more more precise. Nothings changed with that - a DM will still be able to do that. But if you want to make things more tactical, then the DM would choose to apply the tactical rules module. The DM would let his players know that when he's setting up the campaign, and then there are certain options that would or might be flagged as specifically useful in a game using the tactical rules module.

Bruce: Those options would also still be useful in the theater of the mind kind of games as well. While an option might be flagged to make it easy to find and use if your game is using the tactical rules module, it's just as useful in other game styles as well.

Monte: And this tactical rules module that we're envisioning would be covered in the initial book release.
1:44
Sorry - the question for the answers above was how are you going to include tactical combat and class features that care more about tactics than the theater of the mind style games would provide.

1:45
Jaden - (Trevor) We're not really set in stone for how the open playtest would work, but it sounds like it would be available for home play.

1:47
Comment From Dispaminite
How important will magic items in combat for level progression?

1:48
Comment From kozaim
What about stats? What will it mean to be someone with strenght 22? I'd like to think that even someone normal and not an adventurer can reach it

1:48
Comment From Alphadean
So when is playtesting going to begin

1:48
Comment From Josha
Will D&D Next be able to cover fights with dozens of combatants?

1:48
Comment From Dispaminite
will there be a clear division/delineation between skills useful and not useful in combat?

1:49
Comment From Adze
There was a mention of saving throws tied to ability scores. Could you give us an example situation you envisage where one of these saving throws might be called for?

1:52
Q: How do you feel about skill challenges going forward?

Rob:(jokingly)I really want skill challenges to die in a fire. The plan was great for those, but I always felt it subtracted too much from the narrative. I think we can do complex skill checks within the narative and provide a robust amount of information to help the DM just weave them into the story.

Monte: The only thing I would add is that I don't want to take away from the idea of a player saying I want to do this thing. And the DMs response isn't just well make the check and you do it. Instead I want to encourage or empower the DMs and the players to describe what they're doing and what happens in response. You see a lot of interesting story and conversations at the table when someone comes up with a cool way to cross that pit.

Greg: Do you think there's room for that player or players who might not be comfortable with really roleplaying out what they're doing when they do these kind of skill interactions.

Monte: Oh yes, if you want to roll the dice and make your check, you can still do that. But I think that once that player dips his/her toe in that water and starts describing their actions, things will open up and that kind of activity will continue. You see it happen at tables all the time.

1:52
Comment From K-bec
Regarding the tactical combat module will see things like THAC0, fumble and critical hit tables return?

1:52
Comment From Paladin1
Will the playtest be available worldwide?

1:54
Comment From TheGreenKnight0
In regards to ability scores, is there the possibility of seeing penalties or limits related to races to perhaps encourage the feel of how a member of a given race would play as opposed to just a racial "skin" any class can wear?

1:55
Alright all. That ends the coverage of the last of the seminars. The designers are packing up and doing a bit of mingling. Thanks much to all of you for joining our live coverage and putting your questions out there. For those that we didn't get to answer, we are gathering the questions and we will get them in front of R&D to see which ones we can answer in future articles and other areas.

1:55
Stay awesome everybody.

1:56
Comment From Jaden
LONG LIVE D&D! Please keep the Rangers like we have them in 4e!

1:56
Comment From Alzer
Cheers for having us! Being able to read through these is really getting me pumped up for the newest edition.

1:56
Comment From Style75
Thanks a lot, this has been great. It's nice to see the fans at home get a chance to contribute.

1:56
Comment From Al
Thanks for all the live chats

1:56
Comment From Aoirorentsu
thanks for doing this!

1:56
Comment From Robilar
Thanks a lot! That was a meaty presentation. Yummy.

1:56
Comment From K-bec
Tanks for sharing all this. Can't wait for the play test!

1:57
Comment From BrentNewhall
Thanks very much for doing this!

1:57
Comment From Robert M
Thx guys, keep us informed. Play testing should be fun.

Brak komentarzy:

Prześlij komentarz