Search results

There's always Deadlands magic, where you have to assemble a winning poker hand or else...

Amusingly, not long ago I got into a fight with some undead warlock monsters and they could all cast Shatter.

Woah that's awesome. Too bad it didn't see print.

It's not broken at all (following is all based on 2014 rules). So you get temporary hit points equal to your Warlock level + Charisma whenever you reduce a creature to 0 hit points. Let's take a look at level 3. We'll assume a Charisma of 16. Your best damaging spell is probably Scorching...

You can run into this with lots of spells. I had a Bard player lose his mind when he tried to use Command on a Gnoll and I asked him "hey, can you speak Gnoll?".

If I present an encounter and my party stomps it flat within a round or two, I feel like I didn't really do my job of challenging them. But I know it's also important to have that be a possibility, otherwise, what's the point of progressing and gaining new abilities and better numbers? If the...

I don't mind transparency during a playtest. I definitely prefer knowing what the developers are up to, and the decisions that are being made. I'd love to see actual playtests in action, make videos of them, share stories about "oops" moments. And to an extent, sure, if they want feedback...

Hey it's not a problem, rather than make a check of my own that I'd just pointlessly fail, I'll just give another player advantage on their check!

You may very well be correct, but it's obviously debatable because, well, people are debating it. I personally try to avoid "it does/doesn't make sense" as a basis for rulings when I run the game, because it basically boils down to "DM may I perform X action" scenarios. I don't want my players...

It's like this. If I'm searching for a hidden enemy, I make a Perception check. If another character searches for a hidden enemy, they make a Perception check. The odds are better of finding the enemy because we are both rolling. But instead, we have this scenario where one character IS NOT...

Well, even if you can assist a Perception check, you're still penalized by dim light. It's just now your check and passive is straight up, not boosted. Even though I still think it's weird that two characters working together see better than one, but three, four, or five characters working...

Their line of logic kind of went like this: 1 person watching- 1 person's Perception is being used. 2 people watching- 2 person's Perception is being used. Where they balked was the idea that two watchmen could Help each other, boosting each other's Perception (advantage and +5 passive)...

In theory, yes. In practice, it's been my experience that most GM's in 5e don't allow you to unilaterally use the Help Action without some provisions. Like say, you can't help someone open a lock unless you also have Thieves' Tools proficiency, or you have to explain how you are helping. One...

Fantasy Craft's rules constantly refer to other sections of the book, forcing you to keep going forwards and backwards to determine how things work. We used to joke about needing to make a hyperlinked pdf to properly play the game.

I really liked the Osmium Elemental.

These are the oldest 1e sheets I have laying around:

You know, there's a very simple answer to this if you need to obscure things from players with darkvision. I pointed this out to my Warlock player the other day. They were approaching a dragon's lair in a swamp. "As you approach the mouth of the cave, the edges of which look half-melted...

Not totally unreachable, as it happens.