Search results

Also just to say... for those who feel that 5e doesn't offer enough differentiation between weapons, the feat system is a great place to add that back in. That way people who like the complexity can take advantage of it, but those who don't can keep things simple.

I had the same thought. Still think the gap between 1H and 2H would be a bit low, assuming shields are still +2 AC. If they are +1 it would make sense. There are those (and I thought well-represented among the OSR community) who quite dislike damage-on-a-miss mechanics. I don't mind it but I...

Wikipedia says that strigoi itself probably goes back to strix, so likely enough they are all related one way or another.

I've never seen anything from an early designer about where the idea came from, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was taken from Strix, they certainly leaned heavily on classical mythology. Neat!

I take that dual 1h means dual wielding two weapons? For the martials, dual wielding is better, that seems a bit weird. And I take it you can't target two different creatures while dual wielding? It's an interesting approach to TWF. On the whole, though, I think I would probably use a shield if...

Is this for the original or the reboot?

Ah, so some spiders are creatures but some aren't? I'm fine with that. And I'll raise you some chickens are creatures and some aren't. Also, to my knowledge there's no lower limit on the size of a tiny creature. Sea horses are listed as tiny, and they are much smaller than a cat.

Ah snap, you know what the right way to do this is, to suppose the warlock has a bag of tricks that he uses every morning. If he gets a weenie animal like a bat or rat, he sacrifices it to activate his hex. That gets around the chicken-hauling nonsense or the hunting breakfast dodge, and it...

Alarm isn't impacted one way or the other because its not targeting the bug. Though myself, I'd rather not have alarm going off every time a bug wandered by. Because I'm the DM and that's my table rule. I don't see how the intention of the caster factors into this ruling at all. I care very...

OK but this is a bit of a dodge. What exactly is this creature you are hunting? 99% of the time when I play, we have rations. When we don't, the travel rules have you foraging through the day as you travel, not specifically in the morning to catch something before breakfast. And is it you doing...

I should answer your question: yes it is fair and consistent. I also think it is a bad ruling.

Well spiders do have 1 hp, they are in the monster manual. So if you've established that there are spiders in the area, you would indeed have them stymie the sleep spell? And I can carry a box of spiders around to protect myself?

"At our table, CR0 creatures with a max hp of 1 do not count as 'creatures' when targeting spells and other offensive abilities."

Why do you say it is incompatible with 5e?

I agree you've been clear that you'd warn a player about any consequences, noted and appreciated. But what is your ruling in the situation that's been suggested: you push a 200-hp enemy off the cliff, and then jump down after to finish it off. Both parties take 20d6? Enemy takes 20d6 and you...

So how exactly would you adjudicate a sleep spell in a forest full of spiders?

That's how @FlyingChihuahua phrased it, I was just sticking with their language. I would have a little trouble if I push a monster off the cliff and it takes 20d6 damage, then I say I want to jump down after it and the DM warns me that I'll die if I do. Not as much as if they didn't warn me...

Great because this gets at the fundamental problem I have had: I would say that there are plenty of valid reasons a character might jump off a cliff and they shouldn't trigger punishment. You seem to agree, I'm glad. The only further step I'd argue for is that you ought to ask the player what...

Actually I would eagerly change my mind. Are you saying then that you personally would not rule that way?

If I understand correctly, this is exactly how some people are saying they would rule.