Search results

That's not "metagaming", that's just playing in a player vs. player mentality. The only solution for it, especially if the DM won't step in to mediate, is to find a group of players that are looking for the same type of game-play experience that you are (i.e. ones that aren't looking to answer...

I think the point of the game is to have fun, and if a particular sort of name helps you have fun, that's the sort of name you should use. And I think it is difficult for me to judge a name as not being "serious" because I've seen real people with names that most folks I've experienced...

It is true that the encumbrance rules of this edition aren't as harsh as those some prior editions used... but on the topic of encumbrance, do you think anyone realizes that the average number of coins found in a CR 5-10 treasure hoard weigh nearly 200 pounds?

Since the lore master feature says "against every target", it only boosts magic missile damage by more than 2d10 if you spread your missiles out. So it's not quite as bad as "101 points of auto-hit force damage" makes it sound, since throwing a 5th-level magic missile at a single target while...

I think you're assuming a different context than really happens in a typical case, especially because this is a thing that I changed a few editions back. There really wasn't such a thing as "a simple level loss", because losing a level had impact on all kinds of things, ranging from increased...

I too used to do stuff like making new characters start at lower level and harshly enforcing level loss for returning from death, and have since changed to a completely different take (specifically, players get to play the level of character everyone else has whether their character died or they...

No, I'm not. I never said anyone is making such a claim. And yes, one of my examples equates to that. My other example, however, equates to exactly what your examples here do, and is a more reasonable approximation of different editions of D&D as it shows that, sometimes, a few core ideas are...

Which is not a distinction with any relevant difference in the context of my statement.

I don't think it is actually fair or reasonable for a person coming into a new game or new version of a game to expect that the things established by other games or versions are going to be handled in the same way. You don't load up Legend of Zelda and expect that you'll have to jump on enemy's...

That's not what I said. I said it has to impact every single gamer for it to be an objective issue - there is a huge difference. You get onto someone else for phrasing their opinion in a way that suggests it applies outside of their own experience, but then you do the very same thing in...

If there were "objectively" an issue, everyone would be experiencing it. Some of us aren't, which means the issue is subjective.

You forgot to add "...for me."

Rhenny has nailed the answer. For relevant portion of rules text, page 197 of the Player's Handbook, specifically from "Dropping to 0 Hit Points" heading onward.

I use random encounters, though I expect that my definition of "encounter" includes your definition of "event" because my random encounters do not assume a particular sort of response from either side. When not using published material that includes random encounter lists, which I use when...

That is one of a few rules I borrow from the Rules Cyclopedia to cover things not yet done better in 5th edition.

I too am a DM whose policy on changes to characters can be summed up by a single statement: The point of your character is to be fun to play. If it isn't, change it. It doesn't come up very often, though, since my players are pretty accurate in reading material how it will play for them...

The only "right" rules are the ones that work for your specific table. This is especially made the case because the 5th edition game intentionally took a stance that is basically "This is the kind of thing that ends up getting resolved a bunch of different ways no matter what the rules are...

I don't think that's the case. I'm fairly certain that if a spell cannot choose more than one target at the level you are casting it, it is able to benefit from the twin spell metamagic. Do you have evidence that supports your stricter interpretation?

Here's two ways to do it: A) The phylactery the party destroyed was a fake. B) The lich had some followers/disciples that the party didn't eradicate, and they spent the intervening years doing the long and arduous tasks necessary to reassemble and reanimate the lich.

I would go with "No." The process of turning yourself into an undead creature seems like it precludes your soul being "free and willing to return" (i.e. you've bound it to your phylactery to become a lich, or are showing by becoming undead on purpose that you don't want to exist in a living...