Search results

I really, really never complained on martials being weak. Look up, even as I've being answering you: Power wise, fighters are great. They can be a little boring, though, if the only thing they can do is I attack. You realize that you are broadly and consistently ignoring what I say and twisting...

As I've said, multiple times now: bring a better one. I'm not claiming mine to be perfect, at all. Correct it. Improve it. Share it. And I'll accept every correction you made as a legitimate attempt to discuss. But no, you insist in an ad hominem fallacy, thus strenghtening the perception that...

No, it isn't unnecessary. Perhaps in your game, you choose to ignore rules to improve the wizardry experience, which, for the first time, I read someone complain of as lacking power (!). Seriously, people that cast wish can't complain about being underpowered. I've run too several campaigns of...

Are you kidding, right? Have you really played wizards? pretend to contribute? Really? I've played a weird wizard (high strength mountain dwarf war wizard), and I was flying throwing fireballs. Or hasted, with false life, and using a battle-axe side to side with the champion, and dealing almost...

Wizards aren't only useful in combat. They can fly. They can teleport. They can charm. They can buff. They can inflict massive damage (like 8d6 in an area) hurling fireballs. They can do damage without fail. They can bypass damage immunities and resistances. They can summon and redirect the...

It isn't rare, but I think you nailed it. As it affects spellcasters more than anyone else, an otherwise perfectly reasonable tactic becomes taboo. It kills a sacred cow: the effectiveness of spellcasters. It doesn't matter than a heavy armored cleric or paladin would be perfectly able to...

I'm a DM. In fact, my actual DM was a player in a campaign I've run. I allow characters to attempt anything, and assign a difficulty based on, well, difficulty. A grappled creature can cast, if it is not further impeded. As I've said before, the choke requires actually two grapples: a normal one...

FACEPALM. Yes. There are already rules for damage. There are there: unarmed attacks. "I want to rotate my grip to block his carotid arteries" "Make an unarmed attack". There you have. You are making a strawman. Also, as I've said countless times before the uproar and indignation, A DM ASSIGNS...

Also, If you even read what I've said, you should know that what I've said about disarm isn't the best tactic for a wizard against a fighter, but for a cleric against a fighter or rogue: command: drop. Or merely a contest between a T Rex and a fighter (Druids are spellcasters too). And paralyze...

Improved actions as a whole improve the game, and you didn't address anything I've said. You also didn't provide any example of how to shut down a caster without killing it. And yes, they are fantastic dealing damage and being resilient. But then, if everything they do is dealing damage, it is...

Reasoned objections? Which ones? You haven't addressed not even one of my counter-arguments. You only keep the attack, reducing my arguments to only deflections, and making absurd claims as to be te same to one hitting monsters and such. -You said "But in my small amount of experience, a rule...

Of course. And as a DM, I also do that. But he someway thinks is best to overrun us with many foes and do about 30/40 damage per round. As the frontliner of my group, it is usually me who protect my casters to be stomped. The monk also does some frontline job. I'm not using you to validate me...

And I'm aware of that. don't give ideas to the GM. I'm not a player only, you know. I've DMed several years. I'm mostly a DM. I've tried this on my players, and they also expect to the fights being brutal, and don't take anything from granted. And if some monster wants to grab my caster friend...

It is there any rule that says that spellcasting can't be prevented in any way? I've bypassed some rule that I'm not aware of? It isn't exactly playing by the rules that when a spell calls for a verbal component, if you can't bring it you can't cast it? It isn't how spells like Silence works...

Maybe. The creature will have disadvantage on the check to restraint? It will be another check? Will it be uncapable of using said hands to attack me? If it does, of course. I still can kick it for puny unarmed damage. Or try to escape at disadvantage. Or cast a spell without somatic/material...

There is no rule that prevents anyone to choke anyone. There is no rule for choking at all. Like there is no rule to kick the groin, nor to throw sand on the eyes of the enemies, nor to bash someone's head against a wall, nor to any specific attack. They could be modeled, instead, with the rules...

Oh, for God's sake! The GRAPPLE has disadvantage to succeed, it is MORE DIFFICULT to make a grapple to choke than a simple grapple. Player: "I want to choke the wizard" DM: "Make an Athletics check at disadvantage" Player: "I've rolled a 7 and an 18. I have Athletics +7, so it's a 14" DM: "The...

Also, I never said that the wizard is restraint. Only that it is silenced, and grappled (with disadvantage). They still may make a weapon attack (with a dagger, for example). Knocking someone could grant disadvantage to the attacks, but needs another attack. So, another attack that you don't make.

Choking could be like grapple, but with disadvantage. Also, you are a sucky wizard if you allow a fighter come that close. And yes, it is supposed to disable a wizard: you don't want him to cast. Look it the other way around: you are a wizard, you charm a fighter with a suggestion: what could he...

Things like choking should be allowed as improvisation, always giving the possibility of the caster to escape. It is really unfair that a fighter that could stand being stabbed and heal in a sleep couldn't do something that I could and, in fact, is a staple in many many real world fights. Not...