Recent content by Maxperson

And 112% will just invent percentages out of thin air to try and prove a point that isn't correct. There's no consistency in a TON of 5e rules and rulings. What you guys are asking for is a return of 3e and codified rules for everything under the sun, and a lot that isn't under the sun.

We tried codifying everything that "needed" it and got 3e, which is my favorite edition, but did make a lot of DMs and players feel stifled by the rules. I have no problem with DMs running things like intimidation a bit differently. And what intimidation is FAR from being, is something that...

We already have that in intimidation. Then great news! False. 1) And this is the big one. Lots of time it doesn't cause you harm. Someone not liking you and/or what you just did =/= harm. 2) Deception can fail and then what? 3) Persuasion can fail and then what? 4) There will be times that...

Yeah. We don't alter it into a wildly different thing for the sake of convenience. What you want isn't intimidate. You want persuasion 2.0. Intimidate does in fact have good uses. I've seen it, and I've done it. It's just not as useful generally as persuasion, because it's a DIFFERENT...

I bought the two new Forgotten Realms books with the alternate covers.

I think it's more than that here, though. Allowing free travel through Gondor virtually guarantees(from Faramir's point of view) that the hobbits will be killed and perhaps tortured before hand when they reach Mordor. In that sense free travel is a Doom.

Elves sort of dwell partially in the spirit world and that connection fuels their creations as well. It's where their "magic" comes from. Those elves who aren't "dark" elves have creations that fall on the "holy" side of things. Swords that glow blue in the presence of orcs, etc. I think the...

When I read this my initial thought was that it wasn't the Nazgul, but Sauron himself that he was in contact with via the Palantir, but wanted to be sure, I read Saruman's history. It was Sauron. The most interesting part of that history, though, wasn't the confirmation about who he was in...

I have yet to meet a DM who didn't treat it like some sort of morale check against enemies. I've intimidated many groups to stand down instead of fighting us, and had players in my game do the same.

With the former the reasons for why their old choice of harmful/bad is because threats of violence. Intimidate isn't just another persuasion skill that pushes instead of pulls. With persuasion you use reason and emotion to convince. With intimidation you use threats, fear or overwhelming awe...

So can every stat. A 20 strength CAN help you hit more, or you could just roll low and miss every attack. You CAN do more damage with that strength, or you can roll low and do less damage than the guy using the same weapon with no strength bonus. What charisma CAN do is 10000000000% more...

There can be big, strong people who can't sell(charisma failure) the intimidation via strength. They are obviously not mean and are bluffing. Others can sell(charisma success) the intimidation via strength. On the other hand, strength in itself can be somewhat intimidating, so I play it by...

I've been thinking about this. Stats don't change that much, with strength and constitution being the ones you can affect the most through training and healthy eating. Even then, though, what your are born with limits you. Someone small and thin will never be able to train to be as strong as...

My method of rolling stats will pretty much guarantee you can play what you like. You get to roll 5d6-2L for two stats, 4d6-L for two stats, and 3d6 for two stats. You assign those rolls to specific stats before you roll. Say you want to play a strong fighter who will take a leadership roll...

Charisma can keep an ancient dragon from eating a 3rd level party. That's a lot more "do not die points" than an 18 con is going to give a 3rd level PC, or an 18 strength will give a 3rd level fighter, or... Charisma can persuade a lord to send his knights to clear out a goblin warren your 1st...