Search results

Since I don't use CR, I may have made a mistake, but below is what I get when I try to run my last combat encounter through the chart on Page 274 of the DMG. I want to emphasize that these were significant (albeit low-profile) NPCs in my world whom the PCs decided to engage and eradicate, well...

I disagree with your analysis on several levels. First, I don't think "average effectiveness per action" is the one and only barometer of intraparty balance. I'm sure it's at least a large consideration for some players at some tables playing campaigns run in certain styles, and I suspect it's...

Personally, I ignore CR and don't worry about PC vs monster balance--the monsters and NPCs exist in my campaign world independently of the PCs. It's mostly up to the PCs in my campaigns to decide what to try to engage (at least until they provoke an NPC into hunting the party), and that includes...

I think campaign style is a confounding variable that heavily impacts whether unusually low or unusually high numbers of encounters actually lead to balance issues at a particular table. In particular I think how combat planning happens at a particular table can make a big impact on perceptions...

I entirely agree. But I'm still frustrated that they introduced a new (and particularly blatant) such instance in what was ostensibly supposed to be a clean-up pass through the rules.

Which encounters turn into combat encounters is often mostly or partially up to the PCs in my game. My current game has a heavy focus on faction politics and the PCs tend to try to talk before resorting to violence, so the average is well below 1 combat encounter per day. The most we had...

As I have stated (and restated), common sense, (or, in other words, a given table's boundary between creativity and ridiculousness, or between fair play and exploits) being the new upper boundary on the effectiveness of Spirit Guardians is indeed my issue with the changes to the spell. I don't...

That doesn't change anything--contolled mounts always moved on the rider's turn. The problem is when there are many riders in sequence on the same round. Is there another change that would fix this?

Each PC would be mounting the animal, riding it around zapping people with the small-sized Cleric riding behind them (and taking their own action), and then dismounting to make room for the next PC. But I entirely agree that this won't see play. I'm just frustrated that the upper bound is now...

As I mentioned in the thread that spawned this one, I dislike the 2024 Spirit Guardians changes because the upper bound on the spell's utility is now dependent on what your group considers creative versus what your group considers ridiculous. Personally I find navigating that dynamic less fun...

Sure, there will be times that dealing weapon damage plus Spirit Guardians damage to a single target will be better than dealing Spirit Guardians damage to multiple targets. The creative/ridiculous options enabled by the 2024 rules won't always be the best choice. And the cleric only needs half...

A Barbarian with Extra Attack could still make one attack after grappling the Cleric. Spirit Guardians damage against everyone that can be reached in one move is likely higher damage than what the Barbarian can do with one attack anyway. Also, some of the other creative/ridiculous options (such...

Yes, I'm aware of the once per turn limitation. The change from 2014 I take issue with is letting the save and damage trigger when the emanation enters a creature's space. With that change, increasing the distance the cleric can move on their own turn increases the number of enemies that can be...

If you want an apocolypse that isn't intentional but is still cataclysmic, having the planet's closest moon fall below the roche limit and break apart--with the pieces deorbiting over a decade or two--provides a fun slow-motion catastrophe. For a faster version of the same thing, it could be a...

Personally I have no problem with how the damage triggered in the 2014 rules (although I thought the spell was somewhat overtuned). Creating an environmental hazard that individual enemies can be knocked into is indeed fun. By contrast, the 2024 rules incentivize moving the Cleric rather than...

I think you missed the point of my post. I was explaining why I personally have a problem with how Spirit Guardians is written, even though neither I nor any of the players at my table would use a tactic the rest of us considered ridiculous. In other words, even though our self-restraint means...

Sure, grappling the cleric to move Spirit Guardians around is ridiculous, but what about other ways to maximize the number of creatures hurt by the spell, such as using other forced movement effects on the Cleric, or the party focusing on boosting the Cleric's speed? Are either of those also...

I can't agree that there's nothing to discuss other than the designer's high-level goals for stealth. An essential part of analyzing and discussing new rules is examining how the designers implemented their intent. Neither. If anyone has new information from the PHB or designer comments to...

At a high level, yes, I agree that the designers intended the 2024 rules to be able to resolve a character attempting to prevent enemies from locating them by sound. Partially that's because of the mention of "sneaking past a guard" in the stealth rules, and partially that's because I can't...

That may or may not be true, depending on whether those who have reacted to my posts on the topic did so because they agree with me, or for other reasons. (And to reiterate so that my position is clear, I agree that the text in the book indicates that becoming and/or remaining unheard was...