Search results

Just an observation: the analogies are obfuscating the points being made in this thread, not clarifying them.

For me, using exact measurements is a compromise to facilitate game play. As DM, I do not want to give rough estimates to the players, watch them act on it, and then decide (using ability checks or any other method) how wrong they were and adjudicate the results.

Yes. I don't think that metric can be damage as measured by hit points. That's too abstract.

Yes, it's sort of like saying that. The Red Dragon Sorceror rises imperiously from her throne and, with a snarl and a flourish of her staff, sends forth a blast of fire. Moments later, Lameo the Regular Sorceror ignites some bat guano. Boom. One fireball does 37 damage. The other does 40...

I didn’t mean to imply that we are only talking about spells. I was remarking on the difference (as I see it) between the ability to cast a spell (an action taken by a character in the fiction of the game) and ability to roll more dice for damage (an action taken by a player).

The gladiator is a good example of different ways to look at abilities. Rolling an extra die of damage is not meaningful to a character in the world — not something to be learned. It’s just a different way to calculate damage. There are methods that PCs can learn that allow them to do more...

Oh, sorry!

Citation needed. Just one. Please provide one reference to anyone in this conversation who has panicked or lost their mind.

No one is suggesting that you should be so burdened.

To be fair, no one is calling this a crime (unless I missed something). They’re asking for in-fiction explanations of the restrictions or in-fiction means for the PC to acquire the spell.

3' is the BH range in AD&D 1e.

Musketeers.

I’m behind the times and unlikely to adopt another set of changes in D&D rules that aren’t of my own devising. I just don’t have it in me.

Nothing that WotC can do to halflings will be considered a "fix" by everyone involved, especially people like me that don't think they need fixing. It's still worth discussing ideas for changes, but I can't cut through the clutter on this thread to find what specific changes are on the table for...

It doesn't require metagame justification any more than using a monster that's not in the MM needs justification. In the fiction, as has been mentioned in several responses, there are many ways for creatures to have magical powers - spells learned by research, spells granted by pacts, by gods...

Full agreement on that from me!

Disagree. There are no more badly written cardboard cutout character in entertainments with diverse casts than there are in those with non-diverse casts. There's no degradation of quality art that can be attributed to writers "pushing" diversity.

Even the Hobbit and LotR are just Tolkien’s modern day translations of ancient documents. None of the historical accounts therein can be considered accurate. Unreliable narrators combined with historians’ bias and the limits of translation make all of it suspect.

There is never a point at which WotC must change something. They get to decide if and when to change something. Why is a specific number important to you?

Believe that one person is offended and that the other person is not.