Search results

You’re nitpicking. I’m not interested. The don’t allow the same gambits. Unless you can show me a large flying creature that can be summoned with Summon Beast and a 3rd level spell slot, you haven’t made any point at all, you’ve just nitpicked my wording.

If you are gonna just refuse to acknowledge the difference, I guess there’s nowhere to go from there. 🤷‍♂️ Summon Beast is not the same to Conjure Animals. It doesn’t do the same job, it doesn’t just replace it. It is an alternative option that works differently. In fact, the Summon spells...

Again, good goal, crap execution. Neither the Tasha’s spells or these UA spells do what was most valuable about the existing conjure spells. They don’t put a physical creature on the board that can operate pretty freely as a creature of its type. Yes I’m aware of the intention, thank you.

Like visually and stuff sure I guess. Tonally, though? Idk about that. The Ewoks are great! IMO the gold standard for sequels is Terminator 2, or the Two Towers, but yeah I mean I just don’t enjoy ESB early as much as most SW fans.

Yes. If there was a way to make in combat healing better and out of combat healing weaker, it would be even better. I’d be really unhappy if they did that. The classes should have very different capstone features. A good goal, but IMO the worst execution I could imagine. I have no interest...

I have have lengthy conversations many times about why I dislike Rogue One, and why Empire is good but not even close to the same tier of good as the other two OT movies. A New Hope is the best movie from an outside view, just want to watch a movie, perspective, IMO. Jedi is both the most...

I also liked it, in spite of some storytelling issues I have with it and the complete abandonment of any interesting romantic interest subplots for one of the worst “OTPs” I’ve ever seen. My UO: A New Hope is the best Stars, followed close my Return of the Jedi. Empire is fine. Rogue One...

To clarify, I probably have met some, but they’ve never failed to get the hint from the rest of the table that we aren’t playing that game.

Same. I’ve never met any player that obsesses over optimal play, or feels punished by the system when they do something like spending their turn freaking out because their best friend just got ganked in front of them. I was pretty disappoint when they announced the system originally. You don’t...

I think here, they will succeed or fail based on how much they stick to 5e core. Because none of the really good games that use 5e are just core 5e plus. They all change and replace things. The game that is Adventure Time with core 5e is a thing that as of right now only exists rhetorically...

D&D does these stories just fine. It doesn’t force them to happen. Often in D&D, also, the combat is the fun opportunity to do cool heroics, but the actual conflict is not the combat.

The kid has every reason to go adventuring, the sorcerer still has a ton of room for growth and for personal goals that can create conflict and drive adventure, and the Druid was barely explored beyond doing while shape and liking sorcerer kid when he’s confident but not when he’s a mopey whiner.

There are many “points of view” that are antithetical to “everybody is welcome”. The criteria is, “don’t seek to exclude or marginalize people due to not being part of the dominant socio-economic-ethnic group or gender and sex normative group.” And if there is a situation that isn’t clear...

Probably, if using those game elements. I don’t use level 0, nor do I have a clear distinction between “commoners” and adventurers. So, in my game, they’d have the same HP range, and the PCs would just have more ways to negate attacks and to special attacks.

Yeah probably, as well as increased ability to mitigate whole attacks and other damaging abilities, but still less of that than the current HP bloat. Combine it with 0hp meaning death saves but not unconsciousness, and I think the game would be dramatically more fun at high levels. Why would...

Of course you can. What an absurd jump from what I said.

It would be silly to not give the subclass unarmed strike benefits. That’s it. That’s the whole equation. And again, Jackie Chan is a graceful master of his own body and the environment, who is using acrobatics nearly as much as objects to wreck faces. Like, he isn’t fighting like a D&D...

Okay? How does that dispute the statements in the video? Like I disagree, but it doesn’t matter, because the conversation is about the video, which your pithy non-argument doesn’t counter in any way. Show in the quoted text where I said he doesn’t. Show in the quoted text where I said...

I’ve watched a lot of Jackie Chan movies, and no, that doesn’t actually sound like him. It sounds like a Brawler. Beside witch, the name cannot just be dismissed as irrelevant. The subclass is that sees all objects as potential weapons, and hits hard regardless of what they are hitting with...

I marked average at all levels, but really I’d prefer none at level up. Your ability to survive increases by virtue of you being better at defending yourself and taking down opponents, and a farmer with a quarterstaff can always, always, take you down with enough luck. PCs shouldn’t ever...