Search results

I started playing using only TotM. I was still a kid and had a good imagination, but I never had a problem with it. In the last game I ran for 6 players, 3 were completely new, I used it for everything. I had a map of the area, but I never drew anything for the players. None of the new players...

I do not like your change to Bless at all. It changes it from a "fiddly dice roll" (I don't consider rolling an extra d4 to be fiddly or difficult) that is always helpful to a fiddly bonus that is only occasionally helpful. At levels 1-4, it's essentially just a +1 bonus except for the saving...

I believe that they both stack. I wouldn't recommend giving out magic bows and magic ammunition with just straight pluses. Granted, I think that's somewhat boring anyway and would prefer more interesting magic weapons. And I think that you can recover 50% of all ammunition used, whether hit or...

I mean, in real life, someone levitating me up the side of the cliff would be exhilarating! It's just not a very interesting solution when you can do it to every problem of that type. Sure that could be the solution with the rules how they are, but it costs the wizard the ability to be effective...

Most exploration challenges that don't have a time limit will mostly just be solved by magic. Right now, there is a cost of a spell slot that may be useful at some other point. Party gets to a cliff. They're in no hurry, why try to climb it? They can just take an hour to levitate everyone up...

One could argue that because you weren't holding a weapon in your offhand when you made the attack, that it doesn't grant the bonus action when you then later pick up a weapon. I can definitely see the rule being read this way. I really don't have strong feelings either way, but it's definitely...

Agreed. It would probably rarely come up. Even if you specifically built a caster around this, I don't think there would be enough V only spells to be effective.

If something moves you without using your movement (ie Thunderwave), you do not provoke an opportunity attack. If something causes you to use your own movement, action, or reaction to move, it does provoke an opportunity attack.

The physical weight of the armor that you haven't been trained to use doesn't allow you to focus your concentration appropriately or muster the magical strength necessary to cast spells as you have to focus so much on just holding yourself up in the armor.

True, in which case it would definitely use it's Dash.

Since it says that the command can't be directly harmful to it, I think a DM would be justified using it's action to Disengage and then moving. It really depends on the DM though. I'm not even sure how I would play it as the DM. Probably would depend on the group. The spell even says the DM...

I want to focus on this statement. You claim that the variables and randomness of play mean that it is useless to determine which is better. Which I partially agree with. The usefulness of these spells can vary depending on the game that a person is playing in and the makeup of the party. But...

It seems like everyone (you and the players) are just ready for the campaign to be over. Let them do whatever they have been and just try to make the last fight fun for them. Sounds like you have maybe 1-2 session left to beat it. Too late to try to force a new play style on them. Try to just...

Because it reveals the actual gameplay experiences that would favor one over the other. I've seen FF used pretty well by our bard. He doesn't have DW. But I can't think of any actual experiences where he's cast it and DW would have been a better option. That may not be the case in your games...

I agree that damage now is better than damage later. That's why I would rather hit the orcs with faerie fire on the first round of combat to allow my party members advantage from the start, rather than wait until the perfect set up of an orc next to 2 characters to hit it with DW to try to get...

I'd take Faerie Fire over Dissonant Whisper for a group of enemies. Especially after Autumn Bask's exceptional analysis. Even in your example, DW maybe kills one orc if 1-2 melee party members are next to it and have their reactions. But FF makes multiple orcs easier to kill for multiple party...

If that's the way you want to play the rule, then that's fine. But don't ask for rules clarification and then disparage anyone who argues against you. My argument is in no way saying that authors are idiots or being obtuse. My argument is that when something is considered magical for...

The rule does not say that it is non-magical. It says you create a pact weapon and that the weapon counts as magical for the purpose of ignoring resistance. Nowhere does it explicitly say that the weapon is non-magical. We are both reading the rule exactly as written and coming to different...

But you're trying to find loopholes in the rules right now. Adding the bonus to spells cast with the weapon is no where in the rules, but you are trying to read it that way and add to what is actually written. And I think it is a more logical conclusion that if something counts as magical for...

There is no ambiguity. The text does exactly what is says. Your attacks with the weapon get a +1 to hit and damage. There are no rules that say that using it as a focus lets you add that to your spell rolls. If that is what it meant, that is what would be said. Look at the Staff of the Magi...