Slashdot Mirror


Dungeons & Dragons Next Playtest Released

New submitter thuf1rhawat writes "For a certain type of geek, nothing is more important than Dungeons & Dragons. In January, Wizards of the Coast announced that the next iteration of the game (referred to as D&D Next) was under development, and now they've released an open playtest. They hope to gather as much player feedback as possible to help refine the new rules."

45 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Anything Else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, AD&D used to try and simulate real-world conflict as closely as possible, leaving it up to the players to come up with "cool moves", provided their attributes and GM would support it. The modern versions of D&D are more in line with Video Game Design, in that they're trying to mimick a mechanic that is fun to play, balanced, but has nothing to do with realism.

    I miss that realistic twist from the old rules, without "feats" or "powers" or other abstract concepts that are more just bootstraps to their specific world. I haven't been a table-top RPGer for 30 years, so I don't know what else is really out there, but I'm curious if there were any other properties that went the opposite direction, instead choosing to refine their rules in favor of keeping them out of the way of the experience of playing the game, and simulating a fantasy space. AD&D lost me completely with their 3.0+ versions because of that. Anything out there today that fits my criteria of interest?

    Oh, and what's with D&D Next relative to AD&D? Did Wizards of the Coast just fold everything into a straight "D&D" branding (which makes sense to me)? Or do they still have a separate AD&D line of games?

    1. Re:Anything Else? by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >I miss that realistic twist from the old rules, without "feats" or "powers" or other abstract concepts that are more just bootstraps to their specific world.



      Then USE the old rules. There are plenty of people that still do. Or better yet, write your own.. I don't think I've ever played with a group of people that used any set of book rules in its entirety.

      And if you're not imaginative enough to write your modules, it's incredibly easy to buy a modern module and convert it to any rule set you'd like.
    2. Re:Anything Else? by Wandering+Voice · · Score: 2

      One of the projects I am working on at home with my boys, is to develop a table-top RPG. There are many simple and fun examples already available to help with ideas. Though we are prepared to do lots of work in developing and testing. Still, our few session working on this have been a blast. Exploring the options and ideas is a lot of fun on its own.

    3. Re:Anything Else? by pthisis · · Score: 5, Informative

      D&D and AD&D had several versions alongside each other (they were separate games developed in parallel by TSR). After Wizards of the Coast bought TSR, they merged them into a single line that was named D&D but was more like TSR's AD&D rules. Consequently there are 2 different things called D&D 3rd Edition, D&D 4th Edition--to avoid confusion, Wizards of the Coast refers to the old TSR-released ones as "D&D Version 3" and reserves the name "3rd Edition" for the post-WotC merged game. But historically the TSR one was also called D&D 3rd Edition.

      The timeline was something like:
      D&D 1st Edition/Chainmail rules
      D&D 1st Edition/Greyhawk rules
      D&D 2nd Edition
                                                          AD&D 1st Edition
      D&D 3rd Edition
      D&D 4th Edition
                                                          AD&D 2nd Edition
      D&D 5th Edition
      (Wizards of the Coast buys them out here)
                          D&D 3rd Edition
                          D&D 3.5th Edition
                          D&D 4th Edition

      Wizard of the Coast's D&D 3rd Edition and later are evolutions of the AD&D rules more than of the D&D rules
      Unofficially the later years of AD&D 2nd Edition are called the 2.5th edition sometimes.

      The original 1st edition of D&D you had to have the Chainmail table-top game rules to resolve combat; that changed when the Greyhawk supplement was released, giving D&D its own combat rules. So a lot of people consider the change from Chainmail to Greyhawk rules to be as significant as an official new edition.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    4. Re:Anything Else? by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 2

      Absolutely. People just like to complain - there are enough source materials in every modern D&D incarnation that you could play radically different campaigns for decades, yet people still seem to freak out when something new comes along.

      No one says you have to use the new versions (plenty of people still use 3.5, for example), and D&D is formatted so that you can create your own campaigns and rules and characters forever with the same books you have no. Wizards/Hasbro know this, which is why they're developing a new system so soon after 4e came out - it'll sell more books (more people buy the core books than anything else). If you like those, great. If you don't, who cares? No one is taking YOUR game away.

    5. Re:Anything Else? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

      Yeah maximum 20d6 falling damage, so leap out of the plane at your destination, pop back a good healing potion after picking yourself out of the crater in the pavement, and off to the hotel to check in.

    6. Re:Anything Else? by beowulfcluster · · Score: 2

      If you like those, great. If you don't, who cares? No one is taking YOUR game away.

      An interesting advantage for tabletop games compared to fancy new MMORPG games. If someone would rather keep playing WoW with the 1.0 rules they're shit out of luck. At least if they want to be legal.

    7. Re:Anything Else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The timeline was something like:
      D&D 1st Edition/Chainmail rules
      D&D 1st Edition/Greyhawk rules
      D&D 2nd Edition

      Let's add to this.
      1985 TSR squeezes Gary Gygax out
      1989 Without it's creative backing TSR is hurting, decides to bring out "2nd edition" for a quick influx of cash by making people buy all new books.
      1997 TSR is bought out by Wizards of the Coast.
      1999 The game prospers and Wizards gets bought out by Hasbro who sees a cash cow.
      2000 To pay for their purchase of Wizards, Hasbro decides to bring out "3rd edition" for a quick influx of cash by making people buy all new books.
      2003 In order to squeeze more money out of their cash cow, version 3.5 is created in order to get a quick influx of cash by making people buy all new books.
      2007 Its been a few years, hey! Lets squeeze some more money out of the cash cow and get a quick influx of cash by making people buy new books (AD&D v4)
      2012 Its been a few years, hey! Lets squeeze some more money out of the cash cow and get a quick influx of cash by making people buy new books (AD&D v5)

      Does anyone see a pattern here? I predict: 2016 v6, 2020 v7, 2024 v8 ...

  2. Uh....May Fools Day? by RobinEggs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are they kidding here? Fourth edition is will turn 4 years old next month, and they're already actively developing the next set?

    It takes at least four years just to fully develop a new edition of a major tabletop game, with all the adventures and campaign settings and stuff that come out. And forget how long it takes the publishing to catch up, what about the players? All the rule and supplement books are at least $20; the most basic set of stuff for running a campaign is $70+, and that doesn't include any "toys" like campaign manuals or power-gaming goofy shit like epic-level character rulebooks / setting-based weapons and spell guides, etc. That shit's expensive, and it takes time to get used to.

    Releasing a new edition of D&D every five years is just as much a slutty cash grab as releasing a new Call of Duty annually. They're not even letting the new version settle in before they prepare to shove it out the door.

    1. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by Elgonn · · Score: 2

      This edition has been in the work for a long time. So they really didn't even let 4th live in priority for more than three years. I'm not sure they have a good thing going though at all. Everyone I know played 3rd, 4th but eventually consolidated on Pathfinder. Does anyone like their pen and paper role playing game simplified down to 4th's level?

    2. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by Ihmhi · · Score: 2

      3.5 is pretty much the standard in my gaming circles, but Pathfinder (a.k.a. 3.75) is gaining traction. People really like what Paizo has done with the rules and the setting.

    3. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by DigMarx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wizards of the Coast and parent company Hasbro really shat the bed with 4e, and WOTC have pretty much admitted they've alienated just about every demographic in their fanbase. The grognards were put off by the MMO styling, the simulationists hated the dissociated mechanics, the math trolls...well, they'll never be happy. The icing on the cake was the red box (it's 4.5e, but it's not). Basically they had to go back to the drawing board because Paizo, makers of Pathfinder RPG, have been eating WOTC's lunch for the past year or so. Plus, I mean, who doesn't like a slutty cash grab?

    4. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by JoshuaZ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They have to release fifth edition because 4e has been such a dismal failure. A lot of people stuck with 3.5, probably a lot more than they anticipated. And some of the people just switched to Pathfinder which is effectively D&D 3.75. There was pretty big backlash on 4e. A lot of people have objected that all the classes feel similar (every class pretty much has some number of daily powers, some number of per an encounter powers and some number of at will powers), that magic has become too weak, that multiclassing is too inflexible (you can't just take a few levels of one class and a few of another but rather need to spend feats to get some limited multiclassing functionality), that it feels too much "like WoW" (this last encompasses many of the other objections but also gets to the feel that the game is not as simulationist but more gamist since NPCs and monsters are no longer working off the same rule set of players). There are other objections also, but the basic result is the same: not great sales for WoTC and a very fractured base.

      It also doesn't help that WoTC took the time to also redo their forums around the same time and make a lot of good links to homebrew content and the like go simply dead, and then precede to dump all discussion for pre 4th edition into a single forum (why yes, it does make so much sense that people trying to design new prestige classes in 3.5 should be posting in the same forum where someone wants advice about how to run AD&D.).

      I think that a lot of people are hoping that 5e will look more like 3.5 or 2e than it looks like 4e, but I'm not that optimistic. So far WoTC has shown that they have more business sense than TSR but less understanding of what players want (although TSR made some real doozies in that regard also).

    5. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My playgroup's biggest problem was the amount of "system mastery" required to play the game in a timely manner. When every character has 10+ abilities which are all useful in slightly different situations using keywords like push, pull, slide, daze, stun, mark, etc., it can take an incredibly steep learning curve. Add to that all the bookkeeping you must do round-to-round for 5-6 PCs plus 5-10 monsters with abilities that have durations, cause damage each round, refresh and can be re-used, trigger off actions or events, have moving or variable areas of effect, and so on. Combat took forever. We run a session once a week for about 6 hours, and found that we struggled to run two combat encounters each night. Sure, we could structure the night better so that we had everything optimized to keep gameplay as smooth and quickly paced as possible, but that's not a fun way to play a game. D&D is about sitting around a table laughing and bullshitting with friends. I don't want to organize my game session like a business meeting. I get enough of that at work!

      The other issue is that such a strong mechanical focus in the rulebooks for 4E overtakes even the storytelling and roleplaying aspects of the game. Ideas like Skill Challenges work great for things like navigating the wilderness or disarming complex traps, but the designers tried to force this mechanic into any encounter that wasn't a combat encounter. Including those better resolved with talking and roleplaying (which really doesn't need rules). Additionally, often in the published encounters we found that the author assumed the players would succeed at skill challenges or that the DM should allow unlimited retries even when you're doing things like... trying to be diplomatic or search for information in a hostile town. So it became "roll dice until I say you can continue with the story" and then "oh, you failed again? what happens... it looks like you can't continue and have no hope of picking up the trail. that's lame and defeats the purpose of running a module, so let's assume you succeeded or it's game over".

      Those of us in the group that loved mechanics loved the game. Mechanically combat was fantastic. It was complex and interesting. It was never just "roll a d20 and roll for damage" over and over. Problem was... those beautiful mechanics completely got in the way of the rest of the game. 4E was a tabletop war game shoved into an RPG box. It was a really good and fun tabletop war game, but it wasn't D&D.

      The only mechanical issue I had with the game is that the mechanics were too delicately balanced. It was obvious that even a +1 or -1 to a die roll was immensely important. The mechanics were so tight that it was obvious while playing it. That's... too tight. The fudge factor needs to be higher.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    6. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by Selanit · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The big problem with Wizards of the Coast is that it's being run by marketing specialists who don't game. They're hugely out of touch with their target market, and the result has been a crappy product that few people want to buy.

      Meanwhile, Paizo -- the company that makes Pathfinder -- has taken the pulse of the d20 gaming community. The company is run by gaming geeks. Virtually everyone there plays for fun, even the CEO. Paizo makes most of its money off adventures, not rules -- their subscription-based monthly adventure modules are their primary revenue stream. All of the actual rule mechanics are available free online under an open license, and if you want pretty illustrations to go with them, the PDFs are reasonably cheap.

      At Paizo, the adventure comes first, and the rules are just a framework. WotC puts the rules first, and the adventure second. Even this WotC play test strikes me mostly as the WotC marketing droids aping Paizo. Which just demonstrates their cluelessness even further.

    7. Re:Uh....May Fools Day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't work for Paizo, and I largely agree with the grandparent. Yes, Pathfinder is very similar to D&D 3.5. People *liked* D&D 3.5 - Pathfinder fixes a few bits that didn't flow quite right, simplifies a few other extraneous bits, and repackages it. It's a straightforward fork of an open-licensed project, and a good one.

  3. Quick Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The playtest is pretty limited. Lots of little minor changes. But what I can make out so far:

    4th Edition Base - Limited Power System + New simplified math system for positive or negative modifications to circumstance + Vancian Casting (kinda)

    If you're expecting a huge shift or one back to 3rd you're better off sticking with Pathfinder at this point.

    1. Re:Quick Summary by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What boggles my mind is the missed opportunity at iOs/Android apps.

      Have one unit as the "DM". Other people in the same area/LAN can be flagged as players. DM can see everything, players can only see relevant combat data and their own character sheets. You could literally replace all of the paper with a well-written iPad/Android suite and they'd make boatloads of money doing it.

      Unfortunately WotC seems content to just re-release the game every five years and clean up on the sourcebooks. It's vile.

      As an explanation for the sheer depth there is in 3.5, did you know there's something on the order of 700+ classes and prestige classes in that edition? And that's just in the official sourcebooks.

    2. Re:Quick Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Say what you will, 4e makes a great tactical combat game. WotC was working on a digital thing for it, except the head developer committed a murder-suicide.

      http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008085333_murdersuicide01m.html
      http://www.examiner.com/article/the-murder-suicide-that-derailed-4th-edition-dungeons-dragons-online

    3. Re:Quick Summary by damiangerous · · Score: 2

      For example, could you tell me where the druid lvl 0 "create water" spell specifies the type of water

      "This spell generates wholesome, drinkable water, just like clean rain water." I guess if it rains holy water in your world, she would have an argument.

  4. Re:d3 by QQBoss · · Score: 3, Funny

    d6/2, round up. Turn in your geek card.

  5. Re:d3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    d6/2, round up. Turn in your geek card.

    d2. Come on man, if you don't know the damage for blowguns and pixie bites what good are you?

  6. So Many Good Alternatives by xaoslaad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My advice is to try Pathfinder, Castles and Crusades, or Microlite20.

    M20 is free. Pathfinder and Castles and Crusades have cheap PDF/eBook alternatives to buying expensive books.

    They all seem more intent on maintaining a usable rule set than simply releasing new rule sets every few years in order to convince people to rebuy all their books.

    1. Re:So Many Good Alternatives by Riceballsan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not to mention with pathfinder, pretty much everything is SRD, the monster stats, the rules, wealth by level, virtually everything you would want or need to run a game. (3.5 did this for the most part, but intentionally left major omissions such as wealth by level, experience tables and pretty much everything that was added in the suppliments after the fact). You can pretty much run a pathfinder game straight from the information at d20pfsrd.com

  7. Re:All posts thus far are in some other language.. by JoeCommodore · · Score: 2

    (rattles die....) 20! Veni, Vidi, Vici!

    --
    "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
  8. There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up either. by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is no d3. The lowest die is d4.

    As an ancient D&D player, I must say you are wrong. The Three Sided Die is shaped like a football with three ridges. The football shape keeps it from standing on either end, and you read the top ridge.

    You can use: "d6 divided by two, rounding up" in a pinch, but prepare to be pointed and snort-chuckled at.

  9. D&D is a crappy FRP system. by bcrowell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I spent way too much of my teenage years playing D&D...very enjoyably.

    But...

    D&D is a crappy game system. Every fifth-level fighter is the same as every other fifth-level fighter. Every ninth-level magic user is the same as every other ninth-level magic user. The only way a character differs from others of the same class and level is in their strength, dexterity, etc., and those are (a) mostly not very important, and (b) generated by rolling dice, which is not very interesting.

    Systems like GURPS and Traveller did a much better job of allowing you to create a character with individual skills, strengths, and weaknesses.

    Why is anybody still playing D&D instead of something better?

    1. Re:D&D is a crappy FRP system. by pthisis · · Score: 2

      You're absolutely right that there's strict differentiation between classes in D&D compared to other systems (or at least there was, before 3E's skills and feats). There are pluses and minuses to both mechanisms, IMO, but forgetting that distinction is why the post 2nd-Edition D&D rules have all sucked: either you want to play Dungeons and Dragons, in which case you want strong class delineation, or you want a skill-based game a la GURPS. 3E tried to blend the two with just plain ugly results.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    2. Re:D&D is a crappy FRP system. by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dude, your DM must be an asshole. And also your DM must be in 1985.

      Every 5th level fighter has a wide variety of feats to select from. A 1st level human fighter has THREE feats to pick- you could specialize in archery, melee, reach weapons, combat maneuvers, or take defensive feats or mounted feats.

      You also have skill points to determine non-combat things, such as how perceptive you are, whether you are good at sailing and/or cooking, or pretty much anything else.

      The term "magic-user" hasn't been used since 1st edition, and of course, every caster's actual spells that he has access to make a wide difference- on top of the feats, he has.

      And in practice, you have widely different magic items.

      Dicing for stats, while certainly supported, is but one of many ways to assign character stats. Unarguably the most popular version is a point buy, which lets you build a character much closer to the one you want.

      Your terminology and assumptions are out of date, but even way back THEN, you could point buy, and had other things to distinguish characters, even though we didn't see feats to represent areas of specialization until 3.0.

    3. Re:D&D is a crappy FRP system. by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      D&D is a crappy game system. Every fifth-level fighter is the same as every other fifth-level fighter. Every ninth-level magic user is the same as every other ninth-level magic user. The only way a character differs from others of the same class and level is in their strength, dexterity, etc., and those are (a) mostly not very important, and (b) generated by rolling dice, which is not very interesting.

      If you think this, you really should look at 3.5 or pathfinder a bit more. There's a lot of customization. For example, sorcerers get a limited set of spells known, so pretty much any two sorcerers will have different abilities. A sorcerer gets around 40 spells to choose from (unlike the classical "Vancian" casting of a wizard who has to prepare spells, a sorcerer may cast their spells with no preparation). So every sorcerer has a slightly different set of strengths and weaknesses (in core alone there are over a hundred spells to choose from) Similarly, the Tome of Battle splatbook made a pretty similar system for combat classes where they can learn specific martial maneuvers. Again, the level of customization is high. And this is before we get into feats and prestige classes. I agree that GURPS does still do a better job in terms of overall flexibility (especially weaknesses which D&D never really handled that well) but the level of flexibility is still pretty high.

    4. Re:D&D is a crappy FRP system. by whistlingtony · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Every fifth-level fighter is the same as every other fifth-level fighter."

      It's called a role playing game... ROLE.... Not ROLL. A swashbuckly Robin Hood type (5th level fighter) is very different from a cynical mercenary (5th level fighter) or a retired town sheriff (5th level fighter), or perhaps even a soldier in the service of the local Lord (5th level fighter)

      It's not about the stats man, it's about the CHARACTER. Now get off my lawn....

      Tony

  10. Re:There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up eithe by Sussurros · · Score: 3, Funny
    So just when did you start playing D&D? I started in 1981 and there was no d3 then.

    I met my girlfriend through D&D. Lost my virginity through D&D too. Different girls and in a different time.

    --
    I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
  11. Re:There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up eithe by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

    So Palmela and Her Five Sisters then?

    You do realize you made that post on a Saturday night on a Slashdot story about Dungeons and Dragons, right?

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  12. Miniature game or Role Playing? by ageoffri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My biggest complaint with the fourth edition of D&D is that it has become a miniature game. If I want to play with miniatures I'll pull out Warhammer 40,000. Even the published material really just encouraged people to buy various miniatures to use on the supplied maps. Before the GM became a total ass, half the group I was playing with had not played role playing games and just don't understand what a game is. I tried suggesting other systems and the questions were always how do the maps work, how do the miniatures compare. D&D 4E is not a role playing game and I hope WoTC goes back to a role playing game.

    --
    -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
  13. Re:There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up eithe by witherstaff · · Score: 4, Funny

    You had one very interesting GM to allow losing your virginity through D&D. Were there multiple dice rolls or just a simple lookup chart?

  14. Gaming Evolution by Saxerman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For the first few levels of Gamer, the game system matters quite a bit. Be it so you can collect 'em, min/max them, abuse them, or complain and contrast them. These levels tend to be an adrenaline filled ride, and quite a rush.

    After Gamer level four, you start to get access to the skills which suggest the rules themselves aren't as important as you thought. And maybe you start to doctor up your own set of house rules errata, or start to blend aspects from various systems you like, or just start writing up your own.

    Around Gamer level seven, the social and creative aspects of gaming can come into sharper focus. This also tends be around the time of the realization that the raw supplies for gaming aren't just coming from RPG and office supply companies... but rather from life itself. Creative inspiration can suddenly be found almost anywhere, not just from books, movies, and songs, but every cultural medium... every thought or emotion.

    By level eleven (or sooner, from certain types of cross-class synergy) you tend to have open access to the skills that let you liberally apply your gaming experience to manipulate many of the rules found in life itself.

    And since I'm here, I'd like to give a big shout out to those who gamers who breeched the teen levels. Your secrets remain safe with us.

    --

    A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

  15. Re:d3 by registrations_suck · · Score: 2

    First Edition all the way - everything else sucks and is nothing more than a money grab.

  16. Re:d3 by registrations_suck · · Score: 2

    You can always use chits in a zip lock bag like we used to do before we could afford the dice (small kids, y aknow) - you can have a dAnything.

  17. Re:d3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is no d3.

    Guess again, Bucky. Link to d3 and other less-common but nevertheless very real dice.

    The lowest die is d4.

    I've got a d2 right here that cost me only a quarter.

  18. Re:d3 by cgenman · · Score: 2

    Close up of a D3.

  19. 1e fans should check out OSRIC by SteveFoerster · · Score: 3, Informative

    You may be interested in OSRIC, which is a free PDF of 1e crunch, with all new fluff for copyright purposes. Basically, OSRIC is to 1e as Pathfinder is to 3e.

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  20. Soldiers in the Israeli army who play D&D get by lewko · · Score: 2

    Why would the Israeli army be so against D&D? They claim that those who participate in the game, "are detached from reality and susceptible to influence."

    If a person admits to playing D&D to the army they are automatically placed in low security clearance and are sent to a psychologist

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  21. Re:d3 by Heed00 · · Score: 2

    ...you don't know the damage for blowguns and pixie bites...

    Word is that the newest version just refers to these as "ouchies" -- "You have received an ouchie, you are now hopping from one foot to another for the next three rounds."

    --
    Thought thinks itself.
  22. Re:There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up eithe by equex · · Score: 2

    No. You roll d6, and 1-2 is 1, 3-4 is 2 and 5-6 is 3.

    --
    Can I light a sig ?
  23. Re:There is a d3, it's not a d6 / 2 round up eithe by Lordfly · · Score: 2

    A d3 was essential for my Pathfinder character, an alcoholic gnome "drunken master" sorcerer; the DM tweaked a mechanic to allow all of my spells to be affected by my alcoholism; 1 was 50% less effective, 2 was normal, 3 was 50% more effective. Made for some tense moments (my fireball spell fizzling) or some utterly awesome moments (my fireball spell shattering the wooden bow of an Orc ship, saving the town and drowning about 50 enemies).

    I miss Pathfinder.

    --
    hookers and grits.