Recent content by shadowoflameth

Thanks Everyone. It looks by the result that I'm not alone in my mixed feelings about the changes. My own group seems to be OK with staying on the current rules for the foreseeable future.

I GM'd the old Marvel game for years. One Universal Table and all and really liked it. Simple to play, easy to learn. I could get players in it and a new player would be in the swing in one session. I also loved Villains and Vigilantes in it's time. Now though, I've been running exclusively D&D...

This is a poll of what groups plan to do with the revised rules coming.

I've found that a tip I got worked well. If the player is stumped to have a backstory, write one sentence. '(character name) is a(n) (adjective) (character race), (character class) who wants (noun).' That's usually plenty.

If you're starting at low levels, consider the Inheritor background. Maybe your character was supposed to inherit Item X but didn't get it because it was stolen by a famous thief whom the guard didn't catch. Now you set out on adventure to recover it. Then when it's level appropriate, the DM...

Secondary to the good stuff here, WotC stop it with the needless name changes of things. I've played with hundreds people over the decades and not heard from anyone offended by the word Ki.

That's fair. It is a minor ability. The flavor of snatching an arrow out of the air is a fun thought. but in play doesn't turn the tide. I like deflect attack, I keep thinking of deflecting a melee attack successfully and taking the weapon away to throw at someone, or deflecting and unarmed...

My initial impression, The Ki Point cost removal and changes to Step of the Wind and Patient Defense are good, and much needed. The Bonus action attack is good and it gives the Monk options in melee that only the monk can get starting Early. i.e. a reason to not just be an unarmed fighter...

I have no problem with differing opinions from my (passionate) one about this, and again, play the way you enjoy, but playing an unarmed specialist martial with a d4 weapon that has to spend points to do what a fighter can do at-will with d6 or d8 from 1st level is objectively bad design. If the...

With a standard array you can potentially have two 16s at 1st. That isn't the problem. The problem is that two abilities that in principal work well (Flurry and Stunning) are tied to a d4. The d4 Martial Arts damage is a non-ability because all the weapons in the game except the blowgun already...

So kicking around ideas for a chronurgist. Has anyone used it in play? What worked well for you and what didn't?

If they truly intend it to be a revision and not a whole new edition, then the simplest fixes are the best, give him a fighting style at 1st, make Unarmed strike (FINALLY) a Martial Melee Weapon and a Monk Weapon and make the three special attacks of the Way of the open Hand it's Martial...

My response to the Monk play test survey. 'It's so bad that if it isn't fixed, it'll effect my decision to buy the book.' Simple fix.

I hope they read the feedback. My own yes, but I hope they read a lot of it. The monk is so bad, I answered the survey saying that if it remained so, it would affect my decision on whether to get any of the new rule books.

Doing it without permission would be plagiarism. Doing it on a project for hire with the go ahead from the publisher paying both artists for their work is working on the project. And it isn't by mistake to'miss' that an AI tool was used. As WotC rightly points out, there was no guideline against...