Recent content by Charlaquin

I would never describe inspiration as uncomfortable, no.

Media is the plural of medium. As in, the means of conveying a work of art. That a work may not necessarily be challenging doesn’t make it not art.

This seems fairly obvious to me. They’re assuming PCs use standard array, and monsters always target the PCs’ weakest save, which at level 1 would be the score they put their 8 in, for -1. The +5 at 20th level is assuming +6 from proficiency bonus but still in the score they put their 8 in, for...

Let it go, dude. For the record, I’m a firm believer in the “don’t call for a roll if there isn’t a meaningful consequence for failure” technique, but you’re never going to convince anyone who doesn’t already want to run their game this way.

This pattern of behavior benefits the producers of that media, because it makes people feel pressured to consume new media as quickly as possible, for fear of having it spoiled if they wait too long. It’s another form of FOMO, and corporate media actively encourages it. I disagree with this...

A lot of people seem to have completely misunderstood the point of this thread. The OP is not observing a problem and trying to use group checks to fix it. If you’re thinking of everyone in the party wanting to attempt a task as a problem that needs fixing and suggesting solutions that don’t...

Yeah, this. Just google the words “dice roller” and you get an in-browser roller with all the standard polyhedrals.

Because it’s not really about preventing gambling, it’s about exercising control.

I’d heard something similar at one point, but reading @tomedunn ’s work on analyzing 5e’s monsters, I have a hard time believing it. He’s found a very strong correlation between effective HP, effective damage per round, and monster XP. I would believe that values were tweaked slightly from a...

Most likely the reason they didn’t give us the actual formula is that it’s more complex than the average reader would be able to understand. I think @tomedunn is pretty damn close to the mark, though.

I haven’t checked, but I would bet it’s the reverse of how the 2014 DMG monster building guidelines suggest adjusting effective HP based on number of resistances and immunities.

The optimal number is equal to the number of party members who have a 50% chance of success or better, +1 if that number is odd.

Found it. Though, I slightly misremembered; if everyone in the group has a better than 50% chance of success on the task, then adding more contributors to the group check does actually improve the group’s chances. Here’s the link