Search results

I guess I see it as advice, more than anything else. Advice bigger than just D&D. If you're the type of person who can look someone in the eye and say "no, your gender choice, sexuality choice, or ethnicity do not fit in with my idea of what's fun at a table", well, you should rethink that...

Sure, fair enough. I found a quick little blurb, it hit the main points, without being super annoying (at least, not to my own ears).

Well, that was easy. Honestly, I found Tiamat railroady, but without doing what Paizo adventure paths do - namely, providing the full package. For Tiamat to work, you need to add treasure to it. And tweak plot hooks. And so on. Honestly, though, if you're going to do that... why not go for...

It's been mentioned already, but basically, "men's rights activists" are kind of jerks. I could go into a whole bunch of details, but I don't want to derail this thread more than it already has. But google some of the stuff that the MRAs go into, and hopefully you'll see how they're a bunch of...

I agree - to a point. When it comes to real-world issues, no, the GM shouldn't say that... because it's a GAME. If we're playing a game set in real world Europe, and a player wants to be a black knight templar? Fine. An openly gay nobleman? Sure. A woman knight (and not a "dame", either)...

Seriously, dude? You didn't read the lightness of tone in my post? The fact is, if a GM is being a dink, don't play at his table. Simple enough. The "egg his house" was a joke. I hope it was pretty obvious. Ah well.

Honestly? Even if it's always fun, if it's your only leisure activity... find new leisure activities. Not because D&D is bad or anything - it's awesome - but because I kind of believe that life is short and we should fill it with different things! The best things that have ever happened to me...

Sandboxing is fun. I'm in league with a few other posters on this thread - AaronofBarbaria and Discosoc in particular. Basically, I drop three hooks, give the players (not pcs) a very rough idea of the adventure, and then let the PCs choose where and what they want to do. I keep my...

You know what's kind of funny here? You're criticizing me for not getting the full interpretation of what you said... and then speak of the "real meaning" of the text I was quoting from. But hey, whatevs. We're getting to around four million posts at this point. I don't think any seem to...

Sure. And I mostly agree with you. My only disagreement is that when PCs do something awesome, they should check for it. There should be a big chance for failure - especially when you consider that advantage is pretty easy to get, diviner bonuses, bardic inspiration, etc. If someone wants...

I dunno about that. "Rule of cool" is awesome and all that - but having a 2nd level spell be super useful to defeat a dragon? Not so much. Especially a ruling that allows one PC to quite effectively solo a dragon (which was the original post). Sure. But way I see it? If you're on a...

So these answers are all my opinions... take 'em as you wish. I do not allow any teleport effect that requires line of sight to let a PC teleport into an open space that would be followed by falling. This is to prevent PCs from the good ol' "Dimension Door + Push" trick. But I WOULD allow a...

Waaaaay back in 2e days, I have dim recollections of playing an Eldathyn druid. The way we ruled it was simple - you could only fight in self defence. For what it's worth, provoking others into attacking you so you could defend yourself was not cool... but you COULD heal allies and the like in...

How the hell is Advantage at 100%? I mean, with over 600 voters? Mind is officially blown.

Which is why I said I was summarizing. It took 447 posts in a huge thread before someone decided I needed to be a lot more specific in what was a one sentence summary. It was never meant to be a full-on interpretation - just a snippet from someone who didn't want to make a long post even...

Thanks. I'm a big fan of this rule in hindsight. Someone who was supposedly super shy, who I had never met, showed up at my session and was super friendly. It was pretty awesome, and I can't wait for friday and session #2. I'm still unsure on my original question, though. Does that...

Sure. I can get behind that logic. And agree with it - the difference between, say, a longsword's d8/d12 is pretty minimal. But it's only one part of the reasoning. First, half-giants in every 2e dark sun game I ever ran had almost no armour - and almost no AC. So, they got hit more...

Your fluency in a language is genetically determined. Your fluency in english is culturally determined. Make sense? Pretty easy stuff. By the same extension, sexuality in regards to homosexuality/heterosexuality is (according to recent science at least) genetically determined. How it is...

Okay. You want to play the genetic game? Because that "meaningful standard" really only applies when we look at differences between our species and others... and even then, it's a bit iffy. Consider the debate on whether neanderthals are just a subspecies of homo sapiens. Because hey, they...

Ha, what? By the way, you ARE genetically pre-disposed to language. Maybe not a specific language, but to learn a language? Absolutely.