Recent content by Scott Christian

Because the DM is not a computer. Maybe they have preferences too. I have played with DMs that really don't like the roleplay pillar, but love the exploration and combat pillar. Yet, they still use the roleplay pillar because their players like it. They certainly would never ask the players to...

So when the DM says no, you specifically feel like you need to challenge the DM? That sounds like a way to not play the game according to the rules. And I know that is a no-no. Somehow, somewhere, people find this not aligned with the spirit of the game. But it is not. The game clearly states...

Ask them, "If Matt Mercer was DMing, and in the new area the PCs were visiting, he had his dwarves make new armor types, would they need a list of said armor before they visited the area?"

It is probably because if their posts are about another system, their viewership goes down.

I think all these are plausible, especially for an experienced DM. I don't think anyone that is saying no is advocating for something different. They are advocating for when circumstances dictate that the background feature will not work. I know everyone likes to throw the big-bad DM argument...

I think it is very clear what I was saying. If the DM has the port written, and the player doesn't know the port, yet the DM does know it, then the player can ask, but the DM reserves the right to say no - because they know what exactly is going on in the port. This might happen with more linear...

The player should ask. My statement was the player doesn't know this port. Not every port is a major hub of business and trade. Some ports are literal fishing villages. Others are just stops to get fresh water. Others are used by military ships only. Others are only used in emergencies. Others...

I agree with you. It does state that, but it isn't explicit - and that is the problem here. Since it is implied, then both interpretations can be deemed correct. That is why I rewrote it. (To be fair, many of the background features are vague, and for good reason. Because the beginning of the...

Fiend Folio for D&D. Was just blown away, yet I really don't remember why. For Middle Earth, it was Bree and the Barrow Downs. I just really liked the organization of the book. As far as a creative standpoint, I think Earthdawn and Masquerade really expanded my interests. As far as adventures...

To start, the DM has discretion in D&D to say no. It is stated. But, if we interpret the writing: "You have a reliable and trustworthy contact who acts as your liaison to a network of other criminals. You know how to get messages to and from your contact, even over great distances; specifically...

Guinevere holding onto Arthur's sword made an impact on my young mind. But you are right, these are often overlooked. And will probably become invisible in D&D because of lore changes. Not that it is a bad thing, but through a game lens, it will definitely view something like a nunnery...

The easiest way to nerf the wizard is to simply remove its utility spells: invisibility, fly, jump, light, dimension door, unseen servant, etc. Give them damage, battlefield control, dominations, etc. But remove the utilities. Note: This does not mean you remove those things from the spell...

I know, and it seems to happen often in these forums. It's preferred playstyle (from a different game) that bleeds into the D&D discussions. We know how the game is played; the dozens of convention games, streams, and store play give infinite examples. But some simply don't want to adhere to...

DMed two, completed two as a player. All of them seemed fun for the players.

I beg to differ. Most players that dislike the term magic, dislike it for a narrow piece of the lore. The Conans and Wulfgars and Gimilis of the world. It does make the class feats very interesting when they try to describe them as non-magical. Like, you can clearly see the monk being Crouching...