Search results

Except if your problem is "blow all resources, long rest each day", then all you need to do is have the possibility of multiple encounters in a day. It only has to happen one time that the party blow all their resources and then get attacked, and they'll take the lesson (hopefully). It's also...

If defeating a trap means "nothing interesting happens" and you don't like that, then don't make it an option. Don't make it an option that players sink 3 skills into and then tell them they didn't roll well enough. That said, jgsugden's description shows that the 3 rolls are optional and each...

The problem with requiring 3 checks is that even if your PCs have a 75% chance to pass each check, they only end up with a 40% chance of defeating the trap.

This is basically the exact same thing that I've been arguing for. If you make out-of-combat rolls immediately fail an entire venture (ie - you fall to a point where you cannot continue your course of action, failed stealth checks immediately rouse the camp, failed deception rolls immediately...

Interestingly enough if you look back in previous editions they're a little better: things like magic mouth are specifically described to rely on sight and the like. However what's really needed is a comprehensive breakdown of what the sensor can perceive. And that can't be too broad either:At...

In which case you're doing a lot of pointless rolling. If there's one thing to spot, you can make one roll to spot it, no matter how many turns there are. If you're really heavy into obfuscating things, then make one roll each time the players go anywhere. The only scenario you have to avoid is...

I just figured it's still worthwhile on an internet post!

If you can do this, you can almost certainly make the lever simply not do anything at all. I would have thought that wedging it with pitons would also potentially work if done carefully. You are ruling out the potential of opening the object in some way that avoids the spring mechanism. It's...

Turn based checks effectively mean that you will fail your infiltration unless your stealth score is so good that you don't actually need to roll. Do you have a 75% chance of remaining undetected for one roll? Well after 5 rounds, you've got a 23% chance of being undetected. Now you might be...

I find it hard to believe that there exists a table where this ability would be problematic in it's most powerful form unless they've done something like ban ability modifiers to damage for ranged and melee combat. By spending a single ki point, a not-stupidly-built monk can punch someone for...

I wouldn't bother comparing with monster stats, because monster stats are dumb. Things like saying "he's got no personality at all" is kinda silly too. Someone who's bland is just bland. This guy is offensive. He is literally the most annoying person you have ever met or seen on tv. He is...

From the player's point of view that's just going to feel like you're just messing with him. There's nothing in-world to suggest that you can protect magic against a dispel magic (and high level wizards would be really invested in doing so: few things are more annoying than having your...

This article seems a lot like empty page count to me. More random selection between perception and investigation. More random arbitrary rules on how hard it is to perform basic physical actions (ie - why do you need thieves' tools and a successful roll to disable a bear trap? Why do you need...

To me, that's really only a difference in narration. I don't actually think that "We stealth" "Ok, roll" <rolling> "Ok, you sneak up on the compound and are spotted and attacked/scope the place out and return to base" is any different to "We stealth" "Ok, you sneak up on the compound. Roll...

All you have to do is 1) make battlefields that have hazards 2) resist the urge to make every enemy immune to those hazards I always found that 2) was the issue with all the potentially fun uses for forced movement in 4e: it seemed like all the official modules took special delight in showing...

Don't call for a roll until it matters. It doesn't matter what your players get on the dice at that point, they can't get a do over. That applies for basically everything, which makes the 5e version of passive checks pointless for most of their stated purposes. This, like most "hilarity...

"As an action, you can spend 2 ki points and choose a creature within 30 feet of you. On a failed save, the creature takes 3d10 bludgeoning damage, plus an extra 1d10 bludgeoning damage for each additional ki point you spend." For you to be spending the ki up front, it would have to say "you...

We have, way back when. Since monster damage is variable and hit points were variable, it just led us to having no clue about what might happen when a monster swung at us. Now you'd think that would make us nervous whenever a monster came along. All it made us do was avoid taking damage as much...

They are in common...

Yes. If the party consists of hulk, thing and colossus, then the DM can basically throw anything at them and know that they'll all perform more or less evenly. If it consists of hulk, thor and hawkeye, then he has to make sure that his giant flying worm doesn't eat hawkeye in a single bite and...