Search results

You're right that I did part of that math wrong. If your base is +6/8, you get +1/18 as an option. Then if you can "mitigate", you now have +6/18 or +11/8. And +11/8 is not generally as good damage-wise as +6/18. I do think it's worth looking at other things that affect damage. If you've got a...

The word "though" is a problem for this interpretation. No, I'm not. I don't think the statement is (intentionally) ambiguous. I think he assumed readers would perceive that the word "though" between two claims is intended to contrast those claims, and he contrasted "can't hide while being...

I can't figure out what this is supposed to mean. I presented actual numbers. You're presenting handwavium. If you can get a +N to hit, yes, that's worth doing. Whether or not you're at +10 damage. If you're hitting four out of five shots against AC 18, you're at +14 to hit. Or you have...

If you're not taking hit probability into account, then you are definitely getting bogus data, MHO.

It does, however, always mean moving from visible to invisible. So the halfling is not "staying hidden", they are transitioning to hidden. No, it's an interpretation of what he said. What he said is just the words. And you are welcome to get confirmation for your reading any time you want. I...

Ignore the "other source of damage". Say you have a base to-hit bonus of +6, your base damage is average 5 points with a +3 damage modifier, you have a -5/+10 ability, and you have the ability to "mitigate" the -5, which is to say, you have the ability to add +5 to hit somehow. You now have...

Hmm. So when you talk about "mitigating" the -5 part of the -5/+10 things, how are you contrasting this with "what you'd get if you used those same tactics to gain plusses, and didn't offset them with the -5 to hit"? Say you have a tactic which allows you to get +5 to hit, precisely offsetting...

If you are obscured, at all, you can remain hidden. That's why the ranger ability to hide merely by being-camouflaged, without being obscured at all, is a special power. And the general rule is that "you can't hide from a creature that can see you". And that's why "you can hide even when someone...

Yes. But Crawford's words clearly indicate that they can. 5e is less unambiguous on the distinction, but it's still there in the natural language used. It's not specifically called out with special game terminology, but it's still there. I think you're reading too much into that. It may not...

If you wouldn't let them hide when someone's staring at them, you are directly contradicting the unambiguous statement we got, that they can vanish, which is to say, cease to be seen, while having been seen until they did so, while someone is staring at them. And you're allowed to make that...

I think it's worth looking more closely at this. "Normally, you can’t hide from someone if you’re in full view. A lightfoot halfling, though, can try to vanish behind a creature that is at least one size larger, and a wood elf can try to hide simply by being in heavy rain, mist, falling snow...

Until they hide, they were not "hiding", and were thus noticed. They are observed by the observers, but because they have special powers, they can attempt to become hidden even while someone is staring directly at them. At which point they become hidden, if they win the contest. But before they...

Since anyone can hide when not directly observed, calling out that some people can hide under particular circumstances, when anyone could hide in those circumstances if not directly observed, is meaningless unless it's intended to communicate that they can hide even when directly observed. Which...

I would think that in general it's totally reasonable to ask people for explanations of why they do a thing. I mean, any time you have a cooperative exercise, if someone wants a thing, I think the default is "okay, we'll do that thing you want" unless there's a specific reason not to.

The amount of prep time you need varies widely with party, GM, and everything else. I can run a pretty fun game given five minutes and scratch paper for prep.

I am unable to make any sense of this. I don't think I've ever met anyone who didn't have a bunch of unrelated skills picked up for no long-term reason.

Downfall, not Skyfall. My favorite had to do with warhammer minis, but I haven't been able to find it again. (The Steiner line was something like "Stiener's mom sold his at a garage sale" I think?)

The distinction between -4 on attacks and +4 on saving throws suggests that, in this context, "attacked" specifically means "attacks of the sort which require to-hit rolls".

I am pretty sure that none of this extra functionality was ever intended for invisibility. It gave you immunity to being seen. It didn't make you immune to an attack which happened where you are. A lot of the handwaving assumes retroactive editing of NPC locations. But that doesn't work for...

I am pretty sure that, post Windows 10 Anniversary Update, Windows doesn't count as letting you control stuff. :P Anyway, I really do prefer tablet-like things, but I also prefer things that I can run offline.