Search results

A new DM isn't someone who owns and read the 2014 MM and has the 2024 MM and is comparing them side by side to see that the information was removed. If the rules for shields apply... then apply them to the shield. You say you don't "know" the impact of the shield, but that is my entire point...

Minor mechanical note: The wizard can no longer make reaction spells like Shield and Absorb elements as their signature spells.

I'm not attempting to shame them. I'm asking "is that it" and expressing my confusion because the mechanical differences seem incredibly rare. And if the only thing they want different is immunity to effects in the game... yeah, I'm going to side-eye that. Just like I would side-eye someone...

While I know you will call this a problem with the game design, and foolishness on the part of the players, and continually dismiss it as signs of how your games are better... most people don't want to play the game in an approach of constant paranoia about every single adventure. There is...

No, it really shouldn't speak to that. The 1st level adventurers were doing things too dangerous for the Townsfolk. The fact that they are 5th level, and 5th level is stronger than 1st level has nothing to do with the gap being too large. And if you don't like 5th level, make it 11th or 15th...

Calling this confusion reminds me of my father who tried to drive off the road, because I said "go straight" and the road curved, so he decided to drive straight and nearly off the road because I wasn't clear enough. You decide to have some Kuo-Toa not holding their shields. Do they have AC 13...

I don't care if you have them, or you saved them for the occasion. "I needed to use an 8th level spell to keep my party from dying" =/= "That attack was utterly trivial and no threat to the party". If it was no threat, why did you need a powerful spell to counter it? No, it shouldn't. Heck...

These things still exist technically. All Demons to my knowledge in 5e are resistant to fire, cold and lightning damage, while all Devils were immune to fire. Most if not all celestial were resistant to radiant and necrotic. All constructs are immune to poison and I think all of them are immune...

Oooh, I LIKE that. Hmm, with the Cyclops returning to being Divinely made, me personally shifting Hill Giants into more "homesteading farmer" than "dirty, stupid brute" and shifting Ogres to fey... I'd almost be out of the "large, dirty, stupid brute that smells bad and eats a lot" monsters...

I think you are missing the point. I rarely use Charm Person or Hold Person on a party. Hold Person more commonly, but maybe once or twice an adventure. So... if the only difference between a Tiefling and a Playable fiend is being immune to charm person, an effect I'm not even using... then...

We have all made the point that we aren't spineless pushovers many, many, many, many times. I don't understand how that could be shocking to you unless you've refused to understand any of the posts made on the subject over the last few years

If the party is able to get information that the forest exists, and is dangerous, then why can't they get information on the nature of that danger? And actually, the less known about the threat, doesn't it seem more and more like a baseless rumor? The farmer going "Well, I don't know why it is...

Well... There is railroading and there is... plot motivation? I'm really not sure about the term. Expanding on this particular context. 1) The game was politically heavy. We started with one of the character's being royalty and the others working at the castle. Then the royal character's...

I'm glad you haven't. Other people have. This sort of miscommunication is pretty common actually, which is why I brought it up only to be dragged down into arguing that I'm wrong and everyone can just tell or should just treat all events with the same level of threat preparation.

Of course they can. You don't encounter all traps at max hp. But a party of 3rd level adventurers DOES have the training and equipment to handle most naturally occurring threats. Again, this is the point. EVERYTHING the Adventurers do is "dangerous". Fighting bandits is dangerous, fighting...

Wheaton's Law in action.

And yet if you just describe anything as strong as a goblin as "dangerous" (because they are!) then how do you tell your players that this forest is where they will fight dragons and this forest is where they will fight owlbears? Why, I recall that same movie. And I recall the fire was pretty...

Actually 2014 rarely did more than state "natural armor" and then leave up to the DM to run back the AC calculation to figure out where the AC came from. So... this Kuo-tao is the exact same. IT has an AC of 13 with a dex of +0. It either has natural armor or leather armor. Describe it either...

I still don't see how testing the dragon against level 20 PCs helps show that it cannot face level 17 PCs. There seems to be an obvious disconnect with that. Classic? Sure. Have EVER worked well in the past 20 years of the game? Less so.

But it has never worked. It didn't work in 3.X to the point that they redesigned solo monsters in 4e, and it still didn't work. And they tried to use legendary actions in 5e... and it still didn't work. So why would we expect it to work after 20+ years of it not working?