Recent content by CreamCloud0

elaborating on how i'd classify these TECHNIQUE focusing on mastery of your physical form and combat skills. ability examples include: fighting styles, weapon masteries, martial arts/ki-empowered strikes and piercer/crusher/slasher feats. subclass examples include: battlemaster fighter, kensei...

admittedly, humans have consistently been one of the ones to not get any form of special vision or senses though, right? so tannis having it is somewhat notable to making him more than just a baseline human, plus those novels weren't written for 'modern DnD' they were for, what? 3.5e? i haven't...

interesting thread though i'm a little unsure of the endgoal, i think i'd just go with three: technique(covering both your martial and discipline), brute and trickery.

for the manipulee, yes, for the manipulator it's a big fat nothing isn't it?

and the manipulator doesn't get anything in compensation either? for the manipulee brushing off their success?

this sole last paragraph provides degrees more illumination on how things work than that entire liveplay snippet besides the few things i could pick out about there being convince conflicts? in which relate to ranks of precedence that determine who can usually order who around and something...

reading the bolded am i understanding this correctly, so what happens if the manipulator succeeds but the target PC doesn't choose to be manipulated? is there some penalty or otherwise consequence?

does anyone have any examples they could bring to the discussion of how social mechanics are implemented in some games other than DnD? i'm seems they manage to not make it mind control in other systems, or at least i never hear complaints of it being so...

in the interest of not making the martial alternative to a cantrip vastly inferior yes you can wear them on your belt, however things like the lantern of revealing would actively need to be held because...otherwise they don't properly shed their light on things to reveal them say, you can wear...

maybe if TBIF were actually used it would be able to mitigate DMs 'forcing' PCs to act out of character, you establish something in your TBIF and if some social check or supernatural effect is trying to make a character act contrary to their nature the player gets to point to their relevant...

we're not talking about morale rolls here, we're talking about failing attack rolls and enemy's making saving throws and thus being forced to miss or not effect them with a spell. ;)

what about when 'it's not in character for my character to do that' is actually saying something closer to 'it's not what i want my character to do'? i may not want my character to miss attacks against their opponent but that doesn't mean i don't have to make attack rolls, hey! they've been...

while they did use the phrase 'perfectly rational' i think you've fixated too much on the dictionary meaning of perfect (flawless) rather than the conversational use (very well), i believe you've seemed to of done similar in this thread a few times where you've taken things to the extreme end of...

you're extrapolating 'logical and reasoned decisions' far too far down the chain of consequence.

the quoted sentence continues beyond the part you bolded you know: it's not asking for pure logical constructs of rationality, it's asking for characters who make smart well-reasoned decisions that make sense for the circumstances they find themselves in, the information available to them and...