Search results

Armor should cause spell failure chance, bah. It's impossible to tell how many people are persuaded by something. Just have to put the writing out there and it will do what it will. Many people have already stated their opinion in this thread though about their dislikes with the system. You can...

You don't speak for what the community wants. Rolling d10 does not rely on that either. It's simply how the system would be, removing a degree of randomness and putting more emphasis on the actual skill a character has in something (bringing back actual skill points instead of the overly basic...

There would be a single rolling system for skill checks. You roll d10 instead of d20. 🤦‍♂️

Dunno about the body shape part. I'm not on board with fat elves or skinny dwarves. It would be like having fat cheetahs or skinny hippos, that's simply not what those creatures are. I'd also say Dwarves and Elves are earthy in very different ways and are supposed to consider magic in different...

I never wrote that thing you're saying about damage mod and my last post literally stated the very simple rule for carrying capacity. You don't listen. And why are you writing that anyone would become more confused about attack mod when there's nothing different about it. People already have to...

I give exp only for bank robberies, bedding the bar waitor/waitress, or completing an encounter where a party member died.

LOL, that's not how math works. "10%" is not the same thing at all times. The difference between needing 19/20 and 17/20 to hit means you're doing TWICE as much damage over time with 17. It's NOT only 10% more damage, and this difference is extremely noticeable for a player. Saying "2 extra...

This line of reasoning doesn't fly, it's like saying someone should run for president if they don't like the way things are. Just because someone has good ideas, it doesn't mean they have the time or platform to create the level of change they want to see. Realistically people are generally just...

Trying to rectify any bad review in your head with it being for clicks is just ignorance. Why are there THOUSANDS of comments across various platforms that have similar opinions, hmm? It's not about you. But clearly you think it is. There are tons of people reading. Who knows how many might be...

Acting like any video or written opinion only exists for clicks is ridiculous. Why does anyone keep fighting for something they believe in? Why you do you keep posting? Silly question. In order to make change happen, something needs to be spoken out against. By discussing what is wrong with a...

Plenty of people do, as seen in various threads and reaction videos across the net. Funny how you asked for examples regarding WotC's false advertising and then ignored all of them. Doesn't seem you're interested in listening to opinions about how 5E could be improved and why 5.5E is a failure...

Hence changing the rules. Something that could have been done in a new edition. I disagree to begin with that it's not significant: That isn't accurate. If you need to roll 13 to hit, there's 40% chance. Giving +2 attack roll means the chance becomes 50%, which is a 25% increase in landed...

"the flexibility of the new system goes beyond anything before" "it's easier to create a character than ever before and characters will be deeper than ever before" "any returning player will find more ways to imagine their character" "the backgrounds section is more beautiful than ever before"...

I said more than two things, and shouldn't have to pedantically list every single thing. The "new abilities" are nothing special: "Fighting Styles are now a type of feat", "You can now reduce Exhaustion by 1 level by taking a Short Rest", "Gain expertise in an additional skill", "increase in...

I never said it was a sole marketing plan. It's one of many things they have falsely boosted up as being some kind of big, important, creative feature. A package attempt to make it seem like 5.5 is a necessity to buy, along with all the other various 5.5 products that will follow. My product...

Where is your point? You claimed it's not what they are doing and have done nothing to support your argument.

Then why do the promotional videos act like this "new" method of character creation is some revolutionary, exciting thing? It's either false marketing or a bad job at trying to create something that was somehow supposed to be special.

Tasha's is a product that people had to paid for. Doesn't matter if less people have it than the PHB, it's still a regurgitation of material, not something really new. I highly disagree that the Ranger can be called "a completely different class" between the two handbooks to begin with. Moving...

In the Ranger video Jeremy Crawford claims "we made it into a whole new class!" There are many instances of this throughout the promotional videos. In reality they are just doing minor updates, the majority of which already existed in recent books like Tasha's, to get more money out of people.

My casting classes (besides Paladin and Shadowknight. Ranger should not use spells): Sorcerer: CON + CHA as top two stats. Spells require no verbal component or materials, as they are innate casters who perform magic simply by feeling and gesturing to where they want their magic to take place...