Search results

True. Not implying that it's supposed to be a fixed thing in all cases. But having things flushed out as an example often will help DM's think of things that they otherwise wouldn't have thought about otherwise.

You could say the same thing about the common items listed already. In that case the DM would rule a price accordingly. Having a starting point to reference against isn't a bad thing.

The whole point of this discussion is that there isn't enough things in 5e to buy with gold. Simply stating what the rules are currently is not coming up with a solution. Look at the title of this thread. This isn't supposed to be a reiteration of how things are right now, it's how things...

The items/weapons that a character can buy - just like how it is now, but in a more expanded, fuller sense - for starters. The same way that there is a tiny economy for buying basic weapons, armor, healing potions, etc... This wouldn't need to depend on basic rules/PHB (fyi I've yet to see an...

But the characters themselves do persist, and to that end an economy would make sense for the reasons you mentioned for a campaign. My point is that a more robust, functioning economy would be more "fun". The AL modules do award GP, and that seems to suggest it should be for "something", and my...

You're still not addressing the issue. If someone wants to play AL, they must stay inside of the rules. I'm trying to raise issue and discussion to make AL better (i.e. fix the broken economy) within that context. You're basically saying, "Take it or leave it". That's not helpful, and from an...

But this just argues against the whole idea of AL to begin with. The fact is AL characters can't just go in and out of AL rules at will and still be "AL legal". This is like the joke where you tell the doctor "It hurts when I do this" and the doctor respond "Well then don't do that." You're not...

Not true if it's Adventurer's League. Otherwise yes, but the lack of form or guidance for those things to take shape, and just putting it all on the DM to come up with something, seems like they're having to do something that WoTC should have already done.

Perhaps I should say in the narrative in official adventures released by WoTC. Otherwise, it's at most a tiny detour that has to merge back to where we would have gotten to anyways, without any lasting effect. If the DM is making their own adventures, that's a whole different kettle of fish -...

Sorry, but my observation is that all these things doesn't add up to much compared to what you get. Also none of these things gets me excited about getting gold. There's nothing for me to "save for" that has any tangible effect on adventuring. So what if I own a whole city? When does that...

For me this just indicates that there isn't enough valid uses for gold in 5e. Any suggestions that I've heard to remedy this (that doesn't take this issue head-on) are anecdotal at best.

True, but again that's balanced by having the ability (time) to be able to cast a 1hr 10 min spell. Also, 1st level spells slots aren't are a rare commodity, especially at higher levels. Yes indeed. But if it runs into any trouble, it's probably dead. - So you could put the out-of-combat...

Ahh ok. Well maybe then I would just add a comparison between an owl familiar helping every round (and flying away safely), and the bless spell. advantage gives approx. +5 to hit, bless gives +2.5 to hit on average bless targets 3, familiar can only help one bless also benefits saving throws...

I meant you have an enemy that takes a round or two of focused attacks to drop, rather than the ranger use one of its attacks to get rid of an annoyance. But for what it's worth, I wouldn't feel like that enemy familiar is exploiting anything - it's just a force factor that the enemy caster has...

Hmmm... if you went off players' reactions that as a way to make rulings, I think you'd find your hands severely tied as a DM - at least for some players that I know. But anyways, I guess as a player in the games that I play, I'd just think of it as a gimped enemy. Having one attack be with...

This goes both ways. I don't have to guess what kind of response I'd get if I'd complain about the "unreal-ism of turn-based mechanics" to the DM in the case that the monsters were getting the upper-hand due to it.

One common DM ruling that I've seen is that the familiar can only help with ability checks that it itself is proficient with. In the case of the owl, that's perception checks, nothing else.

Ok that makes sense. Now here you're convincing me this ok. Haha.

Maybe haste + action surge might be a little over the top? hmm...

Keep in mind the additional stacks each require a successful attack roll. Yes it's possible for insane damage but increasingly unlikely as you consider more attacks, since they all have to connect. Also, think of the case where only 1 hit lands. In that case it's below a lot of other magic...