Search results

My headcannon has always been that gods are in no way connected to their followers' non-domain powers and whatever behind all magic that checks the price of diamonds being used as spell components also assigns spells and delivers them to those who pray.

Already on it, though not for 5e. I'd love to hear your thoughts though.

Torches and pitchforks. How are bard magic and wizard magic in any way related? Bard magic is even directly portrayed as having a different source than Elminster's girlfriend. Why does the God of Magic provide divine spells? How do celestial patrons able to hand out arcane spells? If we can...

Wasn't thinking through things and fixing casters 4e's big mistake though?

Weren't 'priests' in Dark Sun not even the kind of priest people typically pretend needs to the only kind of priest? As in, no gods needed, you just believe in something really, really hard? Also, they're like... 'elemental' priests; basically wizards with the healing D&D grudgingly admits it...

Whose fault is the whole' arcane/divine' split in D&D?

I agree with your conclusion, but I'm pretty sure the Joker Heads still think they just failed at making a Joker movie and Arthur Fleck is still awesome and good and a Tik Tok of them wearing white cake and growling and yipping at the camera like an incontinent chihuahua is still the most badass...

The sad part is, even that wasn't enough. Heck, this year the makers of Joker burned their franchise to the ground to try to get through to the misaimed fandom and the Joker people completely no-sold it. In media, first impressions, however wrong, have become permanent.

And that's when you keep talking it out. In fact, that's WHY you keep talking it out.

So anyway, Session 0 is important, but the job isn't done there. It's best to keep checking in with plyers to make sure they're still having a good time, things still work for them, and you still have buy-in for what you think you have buy-in for.

Nothing in that sentence suggests you're speaking to the community. You said more than one person likes that. At the very least, you and Lamefan. Unless I'm overreaching, both of you are 'people'. Done and dusted, there's not remote justification for pushback there.

Or we could just not police people posting observations of multiple people and semantics them to death with the idea they're speaking for a way larger group than they mean.

But the OP keeps begging us to come up with something that's not 'good is evil, actually'.

Pretty sure 'people' is the plural of person, so if there' more than one, there's 'people' and you can speak for them if you're one of them.

I'm personally sure that Grimdark is a punishment metted out on the 90's for the 80's.

"I have a twitter account."

And that's why, when the waiter looked appalled when I barked 'manflesh' as my order, I chastised him for being a bleeding heart, then roasted and consumed his bleeding heart.

That'd be a big no from me. And I think people trying to make good into a martyrdom competition would be a justification for the buffboi neutrals. One of the big reasons I hate alignment so is how often someone else's version and expectations of good is so far from mine that the light from one...

I'm sorry, but there are enough people trying to go 'but what about the good parts of slavery?' with their gaze flicking between me and a nearby cotton field already, and 'enough' starts at negative 8 billion.

The insane demands of... respecting consent? Or knowing what consent actually comprises? What 'demands' are you seeing me make? Because I said your definition of consent being ironclad after Session Zero was not how consent works, then I explained how consent works. No demands, just spitting...