Search results

This is how I'd do it. There seems to be a bit more room for art . . . and interpretation.

It tells the rules lawyers that someone no more than 60 feet away from the source will hear the sound no matter what. Outside that, no guarantees. That exact loudness varies depending on where you are listening.

Saves are pretty similar (the same?) in 5e and 6e. But since all classes use the same saving throw advancement (proficiency + ability bonus) there's no divergence. . . . unless "divergence" means "not all saves get the proficiency bonus." I'm fine with that - different classes are probably...

Pretty much. Although my head did explode when I watched this video on BG3 combat. I guess, after Mordhau, it's about impossible for me to go back to turn-based, D&D-rules combat on computer. I'll play the discursive version once in a while, though.

Well, we're at least referencing D&D and other games that have an ability similar to darkvision. Which is a lot, I think. I think @Argyle King noted correctly that darkvision is an asset. The king didn't note what darkvision can remove from the play experience. So: What is lost by a party...

Looks like we're waiting to hear back from OP, but I just read this into it: "Diverging saving throws are saving throws that improve faster for one class than another class." On one hand, there's very little reason why level 20 in each class shouldn't end up with about the same hit points and...

The campaign advice, as described, accomplishes two goals for WotC: it makes newbie DMing easier, and it focuses DMs on new WotC products. Level up enough times, and a DM doesn't need advice on sandboxes. But let's also note that this leaves the door open for an Advanced DMG. "Buy, buy, buy...

Oddly, I think saving throws are on their way to recovery. Save vs. Petrification seems pulled out of thin air, but Proficiency with Constitution saves seems more intrinsic. If D&D would just realize that defending takes just as much effort as attacking, I might consider a 7th ed campaign.

OMG, just shoot me in the knee.

Sure, but modern combatants aren't looking for secret passages, trying to haul treasure, or following magical motes. They are watching for traps (mines) hopefully, and a torchbearer can do this too, but only the torchbearer chooses from the dilemma: do I follow the sparse lighting already in...

It's a difference, but I'm thinking more "remove them from combat" than "PC gets disadvantage, 4 point penalty, must guess where opponent is, etc." It's the former case of "everyone gets low light treatment" that treats everyone exactly the same.

There's a third choice. - Let everybody have the information and treat them the same, with exceptions for scouts. If there's a melee in poor lighting (i.e. by firelight), even the darksighted characters are going to have to deal with moving shadows and light sources. Being able to see...

Meh. DMs have it bad enough. PCs can help a little. The DM describes everything in normal vision range. On her turn (?) a PC can ask, "I use my darkvision. What do I see?" Or the DM says which enemies are in dim light, and the darkvision PC can go, "I don't have disadvantage due to darkvision."

That would be nice, wouldn't it? If DDB is like most things corporate, actually getting a person on the phone who understands your problem, and is enabled to fix it, will be an ordeal of its own. Blockhead, I sent you an XP in the hopes that gaining a level speeds up the process.

It's the D&D dungeon crawling motto: Doors & Darkvision.

Oh, come on. Playing slot machines involves a lot of important choices. Do I ask the gal next to me to put out her cigarette, or move to another machine? How much longer can I hold out before my bladder bursts? Someone on the other side just hit a big payout, so should I move to another set...

The poll needs a 5RD-only option. I'm not paying for that stuff.

Huh. The cyclops always struck me as a singular-not-dual type of guy.