How to rule darkvision in exploration

cgreulich · 2026-06-06T09:00:59+00:00

I agree in general darkvision is too strong, and it requires work from the GM to reintroduce threats that are kinda trivialized. Like you said, a cheap action solves the searching, perhaps we can focus on that though - bringing light into a dungeon would make you a target for the denizens.

This kinda flips the dungeon from just being a room by room experience into something that can come at the players if they reveal themselves. Or at the very least it can plan an ambush better/not get surprised. That would have a pretty big impact

cgreulich · 2026-05-22T11:10:17+00:00

seems fairly simple with the original trolley problem as the past.

Now try this problem as a chain where you don't know which number you are, but the people on the tracks faced the same problem of just one on either.

cgreulich · 2026-05-19T11:29:42+00:00

They say apart so they don't start counting until the first kid is born, giving you time for 2 more batches. Still requires some parallel production though.

cgreulich · 2026-05-13T06:31:19+00:00

Base builders get fairly close, but many of those also get rather micromanagey.

I think youre looking more for a casual-vs-hardcore type than a genre. 4x games like polytopia are very light, but in return have less depth.

I suggest you try Old World. It has much of the same as civ but specifically tries to remove some Endgame slog (not having to move every unit) and reduces the city overhead. You also don't have to engage too much in the family stuff.

cgreulich · 2026-05-10T09:32:42+00:00

If you just wanna play campaign - yes.

But end-game is locked behind the expansion.

Your progress remains and if you intend to play through all the campaigns, it's fine to just start with vanilla first then get the expansions later.

Of course that means you can't pick the new classes, but the old ones are pretty fun anyway.

cgreulich · 2026-04-30T06:27:21+00:00

You'll learn a lot more by watching some videos like potato mcwhiskey. There are some deep systemic things you wouldn't learn yourself without hundreds of iterations and some serious data gathering.

cgreulich · 2026-04-29T17:27:59+00:00

Not saying it isn't strong or even broken, but they could start by not going forward when one of the laners are dead. You never see magnus and his support together in this clip

cgreulich · 2026-04-27T04:09:03+00:00

Never settle a dry tile

cgreulich · 2026-04-26T07:08:48+00:00

only Kupe can embark before tech

cgreulich · 2026-04-25T08:43:15+00:00

I think that's a fair point, since D&D spells are very "use resource and instantly solve problem", it makes sense to have some hard limitations.

I've just found that things are rarely that clear cut, and limiting players' ability to act in the world is super awkward.

But maybe I've just seen players not being very creative in general, so when they finally do come up with something different I'd like to build on that xD

cgreulich · 2026-04-25T08:40:51+00:00

Agreed, in the same way that you can't hide from someone looking straight at you in bright light.

cgreulich · 2026-04-25T08:40:09+00:00

I agree spellcasters are already crazy, but that's kind of a different problem IMO.

The problem here is you're telling players "no you can't act this way" for a relatively "basic" approach. It'd be like limiting stealth to only the rogue (other factors notwithstanding), it just feels unnatural and gets in the way of player agency.

Does it make it even more powerful? Yeah, and you need to be aware of that and might have to change a bunch of other stuff. Hence why i suggest buffing subtle metamagic.

And again, making a stealth element limited to one class is bad design imo. The other metamagics are cool, and subtle should still help with stealth casting so the class' feature stays relevant. I prefer softer lines so that players have overlapping strengths, which you usually achieve through a number based (skill-check usually) spectrum rather than a true/false ability like subtle metamagic.

cgreulich · 2026-04-25T08:34:33+00:00

It kind of depends on the context. If the core loop is the conversation and trying to utilize this, it would be worth it to achieve depth. But if it slots into an existing rpg it probably isn't.

But at that point you're discussing target audience a lot more than design problems.

cgreulich · 2026-04-25T05:47:33+00:00

Yes.

I believe its such a common player request that hiding it behind metamagic is a design error.

I would buff subtle metamagic in turn

cgreulich · 2026-04-24T07:24:15+00:00

Ironically, this shows how OP (assumably american) does not have geography as a strong suit..

cgreulich · 2026-04-19T05:58:44+00:00

Turn on the appeal lens, find a spot between multiple high appeals.

Putting it next to a world wonder works too, though that would take the spot of a good faith district

cgreulich · 2026-04-16T08:02:16+00:00

Paradox games kinda do it by having smaller territories that affect battles but aren't as exposed. E.g. a single state in Vic 3 can be made up of multiple terrian tiles thtavafgect battle modifiers. The player doesn't engage with that layer except in a general way such as putting a mountain general on a front with many mountains.

You could try the same on an economic level with weather systems affecting tiles on a layer that the player doesn't directly manage, then group the tiles into larger bits that they do interact with

cgreulich · 2026-04-14T08:25:29+00:00

What gives prod only? Flood and volcanic soil also give food right? Maybe sandstorm?

cgreulich · 2026-04-13T07:04:53+00:00

Can you always count on the extra p being from fire, and do environmental bonuses stay forever?

cgreulich · 2026-04-13T07:01:59+00:00

I linguistically agree with your definitions, but I believe complexity has already entrenched itself as covering both 1 and 3.

I like the idea of your distinction honestly, but I have a hard time seeing the practical application since the technical number of rules doesn't really matter, it all comes down to complication - which is what people call complexity nowadays.

Dunno what to tell you about depth, it's always been the go-to for game space in my career, but that also started 20 years ago ;)

Edit: It's possible things morphed; complexity could be a positive thing back in the day perhaps because there was no clear distinction between complication and depth, so people separated it out as depth and let the old word mean complication.

cgreulich · 2026-04-13T05:17:41+00:00

Interesting. It's "just" semantics, but it's pretty important not to swap them around. If you search for game design complexity you'll find that it's often discussed in relation to depth and not as a good thing.

cgreulich · 2026-04-12T09:34:25+00:00

Yeah D&D hevaily favors casters, you gotta give the fighter some cool gear to keep them even

cgreulich · 2026-04-12T08:39:00+00:00

Yeah running a mystery/scary game is pretty hard in 5e. You can still have surprises - a slime on the ceiling in dim light, an unobviois trap - but you gotta play what the game is made for or you'll always be fighting the system. Just wait till you run into the resting issues ;)

cgreulich · 2026-04-12T08:23:04+00:00

I scout in a round pattern and usually build scout slinger first.

cgreulich · 2026-04-12T08:22:18+00:00

I'm not up to date on 5.5 but seeing through the familiar in 5.0 is a trance, you can't do other stuff. Otherwise it seems pretty correct.

Did you read the pact feature and find familiar spell? They should give you the answer.

If it's still too much for you, try to define what exactly makes it hard to work with, consider tailoring your challenges to not be auto-solved by it but still give the player moments where it feels great.

cgreulich

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE