Search results

Like Bez, my Bard will play the maracas.

I'm almost certain that we won't get a new setting. I love 5e but it's the edition that doesn't give us new things.

One hell is more than enough as far as I'm concerned. It may look different depending on your belief system, but it's still the same hell. And there's no Abyss or Gehenna or Pandemonium or any other theme park hells.

Yeah. I gotta say, though: repeating "this is just subclass material" over and over again is not like something out of the Cambridge Union either. There have been lots of arguments and ideas posted in this thread. To me, they sounded distinctive, in terms of flavor and in terms of mechanics, and...

If it were up to me, a 1st-level Artificer would only be able to have one temporary magic item (a "Burner" :) ) at the same time. As he would gain experience, he would be able to learn disciplines which would help him maintain several Burners at the same time, to be able to focus on specific...

I disagree. Being able to infuse objects, on the fly, with magical powers that everyone can use is a strong, unique ability, one which is much more distinctive than anything the Sorcerer can do.

Let's get rid of Elves and Dwarves as well, then, by the same logic.

Things go wrong when players start thinking in terms of moving their mini on the grid and stop thinking in terms of playing their character in the situation. In my experience, in some situations, minis can severely hinder player immersion and creativity.

It depends. In my experience, minis can add value to combats but they can also utterly ruin the whole experience.

You keep coming back to that point but it seems to me that it's patently untrue. Here's the thing with objects: other people can borrow them and use them. That rope? Otto the Rogue can use it. Your mending spell? Not so much. That's what an Artificer is all about: giving out toys to everyone.

I'm not interested. With 5e, minis, paper pawns and other similar products are no longer as necessary as they used to be. Plus paper pawns are very easy to make, so I don't think WOTC should focus on them.

They could just Greyhawk the whole module and save hours!

I think we should all build and playtest the perfect 5e Artificer class and post it on this site.

I've been toying with the concept of an Outlander Bard who's not so much using the "power of music" as he is able to channel the spirits of his ancestors through folktales and chanting.

Another idea: have all your mooks belong to the same death cult / be part of the same hive mind / be possessed by the same Mind Flayer. When questioned, they will all deliver the same information in the same tone using the same words. :)

They're not vague, they're just badly worded.

It's probably the best edition of D&D, or at least it's as good as BECMI, which is no small feat (but 5e has more options, more moving parts and is more sophisticated). It's probably a matter of personal preference, though, but I don't find it very exciting. It's just D&D, you know what I'm...

I'd love to have both but I'd rather have a second PHB, with new archetypes and feats, and maybe new classes. I found the Monster Manual pretty to look at but not very exciting, I'm not sure I'm eager to see a whole new book full of hp-bags.

Are you sure you want to name your continent like something that's edible?

I agree. In my opinion, favored enemy and favored terrain have never made any sense and they still don't work. ("We're not in the forest anymore, so don't ask me where we are or where we should go: your guess is as good as mine", said Aragorn.) When I came up with a Fighter archetype which is...