Search results

Did drinking potions as a bonus action have any appreciable effect on battles? And were you applying that to all potions (per DMG rules) or just healing potions, since you started before the DMG was out?

Thanks! As far as methodology, did you run both versions (2014 and 2024) of the same creatures through the creation rules?

Thanks!

In 3e a +1 to hit was considered equivalent to a +2 damage. Does it not work out that way in 5e? Because by that metric a rare (+2) weapon is worth about 6 damage, while that +2d6 vicious is worth 7, so definitely close to rare than the 9 damage for very rare.

Are you looking at 2014 or 2024? All 8 specialties are given a full subclass with unique abilities in original 5e. If you are saying you prefer the (mostly) unified specialization mechanic to unique features, that's fine. I just want to make sure you aren't comparing 2e to the 2024 5e, which is...

Okay, I'll give you details. I don't expect (or want) these to change your general impression. Fans of certain elements see their presence or absence more strongly than those who are indifferent to those elements. I expect that you notice the absence of the things you like about 4e, and don't...

I think it feels like a 2.75e. In its most fundamental mechanics it is based on 3e. Its most fundamental lore is built on 2e, informed by 1e, and with heavy expansion from 3e and 4e. I'm definitely in that category that likes it and sees it as being most like my preferred editions. It goes...

A monster's proficiency bonus is derived from their CR. How should one deal with that?

How would you determine the CR of a creature you made?

In context, it's worth noting that the 4e version in DMG1 took Yeah, you're right. She's CR 4 rather than 3. I hadn't eaten for a while when I was finishing that up, and my brain was feeling it.

Sure, that's what I have too (along with the rest of the pre-2024 monster books except the giants one).

Yeah, a lot of the terms in the all of the old books (those that weren't just made up to have a term) would be different if they were revised for accuracy. (Longsword?) I have (mostly, though sometimes I end up going down the rabbit-hole anyway) avoided verifying the accuracy of the terms in the...

The fact that a tool is rarely used or rarely even needed is only one factor in determining whether it should be made available. Another factor is how necessary such a tool is when those situations do come up. Not proving necessary tools for a task means the task can't be performed. With...

Absolutely. Unfortunately they seem disinterested in coming up with a better presentation of the math, and would rather just leave future DMs with no information on how to make new monsters. And since they have their internal rules for monster creation, that makes it even sadder. It's not like...

Monster 2: Yuki-on-na For this monster, I'll be converting a monster from 2e and 3.0e. Converting monsters can actually be more difficult than making new ones, so we'll see how long it takes. Along with that thought, I'm not going to bother with organizing steps this time. I may try to work up...

Let me start by partially agreeing with the last points, then address the others briefly. The main problem with the 2014 DMG monster creation rules is organizational. In that sense, they are a microcosm of the 2014 DMG in general. All of the stuff is there, but if you aren't very familiar with...

Yes, CR isn't designed to compare PC level to monster power. But the point of this thread is to determine what CR a PC would convert to if it was treated like a monster and the math was run--which can be done. If you do that, then a PC of the same CR as the monster should be an even 50/50 chance...