Search results

How you came to the conclusion that I rarely use exhaustion? Exhaustion is actually a very real and frequent danger in my games.

That's what I think too. Exploration might not be the "worst pillar" but it's by far the one that demands the most from the DM.

I confess I didn't bother to crunch the numbers myself even though I've been under the impression that an average fighter should outperform an average rogue in most cases.

What @Horwath said isn't something absurd. Previous editions had specific rules for terrain that only provides one way cover. Arrow slits are the prime example of that type of terrain feature. Both in 3e and 4e, the arrow slit rules stated that a target standing at 5ft of the opening would...

Well, I use gritty realism so the Remove Disease isn't really as free as you might think. And what you mean how I would "implement" that? I just follow the rules in the rulebooks...

Fourth edition actually had this codified in the rules as "Power Sources". Yes, I know everybody hates 4e, but I feel the need to mention it whenever I have the chance. Sorry.

I choose a third option for our current SKT game: I only allow the variant abilities from Tasha's. We don't have a ranger, but I already made it clear that if someone wants to roll one, the PHB abilities must be swapped.

Well, you don't have to artificially set up obstacles that completely negate the party's special abilities. A good DM could easily design a great variety of challenges that requires different approaches to be overcome. If all the structure of the adventure hangs out on any specific obstacle, we...

Well, Wandering Monsters aren't the only thing you can throw at the party. For instance, Exhaustion and Diseases are quite effective and scary ways to enforce consequences for exploration encounters going bad.

You make a melee weapon attack as part of the spell casting when you cast Booming Blade.

@Charlaquin was just making the point that you don't have to completely vanish from existence for you to be considered hidden by the game rules. You can still be considered "hidden" behind a single pillar in the middle of the room, even though your opponent is going to likely guess that you are...

Are you suggesting that the game is a more enjoyable experience when you combine the three pillars? I agree!

I'm just curious if you make it increasingly harder for fighters to hit the same opponent repeatedly? It stands to reason that the enemy would eventually pick up on the fighter's attack patterns.

Yes, that's the most obvious application for Naturally Stealthy. That's why I was really shocked with OP's DM ruling on that situation. Even more shocked with so many people here defending that position.

Sure. That's why a rogue should be hiding and then shooting in the same turn. That's the easiest way to deny the opponent the chance to just go around the pillar and reestablishing line of sight.

You are the only one in this thread claiming that combat is part of the exploration pillar. @iserith clarified that wandering monsters are consequences for some actions during exploration, but not necessarily part of the same pillar. Exploration can lead to combat or social e encounters. It's...

That seems legit. It's not unreasonable that Arcane Trickster might outdamage a Battle Master at some levels.

You are right, I didn't do any math to compare both, so I might very well be wrong about that. Maybe I can sit down and run the numbers once I'm back home.

Arcane Trickster can SA with blade cantrips for starters...

I know I can be a real @#$hole sometimes, but hear me out... I'm not trying to prove anything by quoting a few rules. As a matter of fact, you and me are in agreement in this one. The way you handle stealth is pretty much how I handle it too. I'm not sure why we're arguing here? That said, yes...