Search results

Ok, I think I need to say less. Which do you mean? 1) role-play means choosing your actions based on a combination of class and personality. 2) role-play means play acting your personality.

Im concerned that the premise of this is not being interpreted the same by all reading and posting here. Does play a personality mean play acting, or does playing a personality just mean choosing actions based on the personality - in addition to the chosen class? I.e., what would a fighter with...

Anti magic field. Not anti concentration field. Duration lasts until concentration is broken, but effect is suppressed by amf. The wording and the ruling are very consistent.

Yes, thank you. I meant to emphasize more on the free action concept, and how it's common in 5e to have this kind of thing with no action. I think you handle it fine with your wording.

I don't have my MM here, but there's a standard way that 5e handles this. No such thing as a free action in 5e. It typically will say 'no action required'.

They go too far in trying to avoid power creep. None of the post-phb races compete with the phb races. Half orcs are still by far the best fighter or barb race. Dwarves are still by far the best clerics. Etc. These subsequent races have minor situational and novelty, but overall, in a campaign...

There's a reason turn based rpgs are set in a fantasy or sf setting. The war games that d&d grew out of were unit based, where damage took out individuals. But to merge that with first person, 1 pc per person, and maintain suspension of disbelief, they needed to change to fantasy.

And a shield or wearable armor could provide protection from the force producible by medieval weapons. Modern body armor only minor protection from modern weapons, and human reaction time provides no protection at all.

Too many movies. A modern gun fires how many rounds per second? D&d combat system can't simulate combat with modern weapons mostly due to the time scale relative to human reaction times. In medieval combat, there was lots of circling and feinting.

Also, not sure if trolling or serious.

Actually, hold on. In your description, does ranger Rick keep fighting, or is he down too?

You may be watching too many movies. How does a gun do damage that doesn't reduce combat effectiveness immediately?

Ok, thank you. That's the sucker punch scenario that these discussions always come to. And it's the debate about what 'threat' means, as in '...become aware of a threat.' When initiative is rolled. So the thing about that is turn based play is the method for resolving combat. Stepping back, the...

Ok, thank you. In game terms, it's a class feature that gives that advantage on a pc that hasn't acted yet or is surprised. Do you believe that all attacks against a surprised pc should have advantage?

Ok, so the analogy breaks down when considering modern weapons and larger scale engagements than what d&d is designed to adjudicate.

I'm sorry, but are you disagreeing with what I said? Was there any particular point I made that you disagreed with? My main point was surprise as paralysis, and in particular, when experienced and trained fighting people are moving through a hostile environment where they are going to be fully...

I think the big mistake is the logic of surprise as paralysis. PCs are highly tuned fighting machines, and when they are moving through a hostile world, they are constantly wary and looking all around themselves. "Puckered up", as they say. Surprise is just they already decided what to do with...

I think of the game surprise mechanic as the players have already chosen not to do anything with their turn. I find this fits well with all these logic issues people have with the sucker punch surprise attack questions. The whole game could be done a round at a time, really.

That wasn't directed at you, Robert.

Cold is con because it's a temperature, regardless of the shape. Fire is dex because it's directional, no matter the shape. It has an origin and a direction, and so it can to some extent be dodged and blocked.