Sadras
Legend
@Maxperson's "time travel" argument relies on a distinction between rolling to hit and rolling the damage. I'm curious what he says if there is no damage roll.
Someone casts a Charm Person spell on your character, do you wait until you know if you fail the saving throw before deciding when to Counterspell? Same with hit rolls and damage, you're hit - either cast Shield and protect yourself, or take the damage and miss the opportunity to cast Shield.
And more generally, I find it interesting that Maxperson is very quick to tell us how the 5e rules should be understood (on this thread vis-a-vis clerics and warlocks; on another current thread vis-a-vis initiative), and yet is revising/ reinterpreting these various rules because they don't fit with his picture of how the game works. That's not necessarily a fault in his picture, but it does strongly suggest that it's not a very good picture of 5e! (If there are all these features that it can't handle.)
My personal opinion and why I do not get involved in these kinds of discussions, clerics/warlocks, urchins, champions, initiative is that there is no real benefit to gain from these, to any party involved. There is no learning experience.
EDIT: To add, 5e as it is has its faults, but for me (a) it has many of the best parts of 2e-4e, (b) is the easiest of the systems to tinker with, (c) it is light for DMs, and (d) the books are inspiring. IMO 5e provides the best picture of the D&D game.
Do I really care what a poster's definition of a street urchin or champion is? Or what a person's view on what initiative symbolises? Or how one comes to worship deities/serve patrons for clerics and warlocks and how active they are at someone's table?
Last edited: