Search results

A 2018 Crawford tweet based on a convenience sample is not very good evidence for a fact. All WOTC has are convenience samples. By contrast, the majority of online discussion about 5e involves feats. I can make just as strong a claim about the representativeness of that anecdata as WotC can for...

One thing I think even you must admit is true is that we will see more feats as 5e continues, so by that argument it began flawed and will continue to decline. Feats are tremendously popular, though, so does the ad populum argument not work also in this case? Many players use it, so it must be...

Because we can’t pick and choose which rules we like because there are no longer any meaningful rules related to alignment in 5e. I‘d have been fine with an optional system that mimicked how alignment worked in previous editions, but it is not there.

This is one of those credibility undermining statements.

These early muzzle loaders had a much larger caliber than what we think of as handguns and rifles today. I am not a gun nerd, but a larger ball (which needs more powder to fire) can hit a target with more energy than a smaller ball. Some early muzzle loaders had .66 or larger caliber balls. That...

I think they should have gone further in terms of stripping it then.

They did it, so it must have been the right thing to do? Does that mean it must be the case that the Weapon Master feat is good for some battlemasters?

As I said elsewhere: Alignment is a bunch of meaningless words without game mechanics that key off of it. A character could be Lawful Orange or Chaotic Blue and it wouldn't matter one bit in terms of the rules. This is one of the most compelling reasons to play older editions (than 5e), imho.

If you are going Psi Warrior, don't check out before level 7.

That they put a suggested builds list in for battlemasters (a bad one at that) into TCoE but not a similar one for warlocks suggests they don't have as good a handle on what would be useful as they should.

Depends on the table, really. They aren’t necessary for most concepts I come up with, but if some particularly powerful stuff gets doled out, there needs to be something for everyone, when there isn’t, thats weird (because it is, first and foremost, a game, story is secondary to that). DMs that...

Alignment only matters when there is a cosmology behind it and mechanics for misfits, previous editions had this, and it mattered to varying degrees based on what class you took. Removing it as a balancing factor doesn’t seem to have been applied uniformly.

Gimli or Boromir would clearly be more fun to have a beer with. Come to think of it, so would Bruenor or Regis. Wulfgar sounds tedious. Hell, Geralt of Rivia would likely be a more entertaining companion, now that I think on it.

Apparently “the heart of a ranger” means being a big square.

Now I want a battle of the bands, with one rock band representing each elf subrace. Difficulty: the band must have been active when the subrace was introduced.

Sometimes the only way to fix a thing is to burn it to the ground.

Traversing the Underdark to escape KISS fans makes sense.

If the tech/magic reduces the chances of them settling into a quiet life (because all the quiet life jobs are taken), then more of them will take up adventuring (and banditry). Frankly, it means adventuring parties ought to be bumping in to rival parties all the time, and if nothing else can...

5e's take on psionics is so far removed from the original ideas and conversations about those ideas I wouldn't give the flavor stuff a second thought. Psionics was, first and foremost, about spell points vs Vancian slots. Dark Sun's fluff came later, and it would be just as complex as, say...

Given that you didn't know how spell components work, it isn't that. Serfs had a niche because their labor was relatively cheap and there was not a more efficient way to use the land. Undead are that more efficient method, and if they are a possibility, nobody needs to build "feeding the serfs"...