Search results

So reading through this thread, I think I've seen every single class mentioned at least once as being "played a lot/too much"...

Plus, things like plot armor and rotating DMs and players isn't ideal for RP as the main goal. A system like AL doesn't seem like the best fit for that.

"Need" is maybe a strong word - obviously 5e exists as it is right now, and people play it. I think the point is that adding it in doesn't actually detract from the things that people who enjoy 5e the way it is enjoy about it, and certainly makes it a lot more fun and interesting for those who...

That sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Unfortunately, it's a DM that I've maybe have never met before who's ruling is final, and who can only be suggested to follow any line of reasoning or sage advice ruling. Thus, I'm staying away from disarming strike.

I totally agree with that concern. I wouldn't want to see AL fall back into that either. However, my observation is the WoTC is on a very different (slower) cadence for releasing new content and errata in 5e. It's been about 1 3/4 years now, and there's been SCAG, and one errata released? I...

It's not "my" perceived use, it's the one the authors intended it to be, which has been clearly established. Big difference. And I would appreciate it if you didn't try spin my ask for a consistency in AL play to a power grab over the DM. That is not my intention, and I don't enjoy being accused...

In that case "useful", yes, but considerably underpowered, and sage advice has been clear that this interpretation wasn't the intent of the authors anyway. But this is altogether moot anyway. I already got authoritative response that this issue won't be resolved, which sucks. Inconsistency of...

So you didn't explain why that reasoning wouldn't work, so I remain unconvinced. I agree it should be in the rulebook. It's just unfortunate that it wasn't more clear to begin with.

Ok. I'm curious - in the case of disarming strike, is the ability to pick up the enemy's weapon considered "in the rules" or not? To me it seems like it is, but on forums there's enough debate to make me think it's not. If not, then I guess I won't be choosing that maneuver then for a fighter...

I don't think what I'm suggesting is to going to reach that point. Not even close. As I've stated earlier, there aren't many of these that tend to cause issues, and the ideal situation would be to clear it up in errata. The worst scenario is to keep having them show up mid-game and be a...

It's better than getting "why not?" in the middle of the game, which is disruptive for everyone at the wrong time. You can ask them to just go with the ruling and stop arguing, but that doesn't mean they're going to (not that I think that they should argue either, but there are always going to...

Not saying it would have to be every single one. Just a small subset of the ones that cause problems mid-way through an adventure, like what's been discussed. I don't think this would be a burden to DM's to look it over once and say yay or nay. It would be easier on everyone (including the DM)...

Totally agree. Maybe one thing they could do in addition is, if a DM plans to rule against such "recommended ruling", they need to advertise that up front as people are signing up for their table. This way the players have a chance to steer clear if they want to. Otherwise, the DM is tacitly...

That's my observation as well. I'm not meaning paint DMs in general with a mean brush. But you make a good point - I guess what I do want to see is this making it into the errata, and nip this (and any similar) problems in the butt.

I don't see how the fact that it's contained within a given session solves the problem. A smaller problem, granted, but it's still a problem. Besides, you could have multiple DMs do this, which would go across sessions. Or in the case of a close fight, if the DM rules on the spot, "No, I won't...

Except that they can't give rewards outside of what's prescribed, nor go outside of the plot that's prescribed. That's what makes AL distinct from general 5e play. If you are going to take issue with what I'm suggesting, then you should be taking issue with those things as well by the same...

I disagree. AL already crosses this line with limiting what rewards DMs can give out, as well as the plot context that they must stay in. What I'm suggesting is still very far away from "micro-managing". How is "inconsistent play experience" supposed to be a good thing? Do you have a reference...

Picking up a dropped object is explicitly listed as something you can use your free action for (Basic rules. pp.70). You don't sacrifice anything (damage or AC) to do this. But anyways, I've read on various forums and threads that your "obvious" interpretation is not so obvious with many DMs, as...

So I know that 5e is all about "rulings, not rules". However, it seems to me like the very nature of AL either requires firm rulings on certain things (that a DM is not allowed to go against), or you end up getting an inconsistent play experience across different DMs that IMO breaks the...

Maybe I just have a different set of ideals for playing d&d than you, but how is a system where you want to be "chasing every single Gold Piece" a bad thing? As opposed to "oh look... gold, that pointless stuff that I barely care to figure out how much of it I have...". If you apply the same...