Search results

Called it!

...cue Oofta explaining that the king has to stand there and let himself get repeatedly stabbed, until dead, because the playtest feat, from a UA offering, does not say the charm breaks for any reason. Yeah. No, serious. That's coming. Brace for impact!

Challenge accepted. Your silly example would not work. I'm not sure I'm getting the gist of your issue here. Assuming all that happens, in your example here, is true, your problem is what exactly? What are you mad at? Wait. So the king has all these epic bennies and you set him up to be a fool...

When you, yourself, feel the need to put such adjectives on the thing you are worrying about, I think we're all good. I mean, name any similar piece of the game and I'm sure someone can come up with a "completely silly example" or "completely stupid scenario" to highlight potential abuse or...

"Avoid" or "fix", huh? That appears to be an incomplete list of possible reasons for why the table isn't experiencing an issue with what someone else might perceive as a problem.

Not exactly, but close. It's not always a "win button" in this case because its against a single humanoid. I'm not sure what this "melee bruiser" humanoid is. In 5e, even primarily strength focused humanoids can achieve passable ranged capability (thank you, bounded accuracy!). Not to mention...

I think its generally very important to quash untruths. So, yeah, thanks! Congrats. That's the process. Too bad they won't get actual playtest feedback from you like they will from me, though. I'm fairly certain that's their favorite.

Both. Frequently. Oh noes! An insurmountable win button! Again, if you actually saw the effects of frightened in actual play, you might see things differently than that nebulous, misleading claim of yours is hoping to imply.

Are you sure? Please provide a link indicating as much. I highly doubt that is their "whole point". Because, if that's true, I've been doing it wrong. I will have to apologize to WotC for actually playtesting their UA material at the table, rather than just provide speculation.

ARE YOU A SORCERER?!? I see you countered his wall o' text with a twinned wall o' text of your own!!!

I suggest a more careful consideration of the frightened condition and how it plays in practice. Have you played 5e? With the frightened condition making an appearance? Because I have. And as much as it can occasionally offer a substantive benefit, briefly IMX, it is not as grand a "win button"...

Using the rules, as presented in the 5e books, is not "houseruling" or "nerfing". What you are doing is either misunderstanding how 5e is designed and written, or being disingenuous. I can't say which, not my place. Also, you seem to be implying that anyone is saying these feats should be...

Then it would seem your issue is with 5e, not me. Perhaps a different edition, or even entirely different system, would better suit your particular playstyle preferences? And there is nothing wrong with that. Are you implying that players I associate with would? Or just players somewhere in the...

Bravo, sir. Surgically delivered. An excellent read. I give it 5 out of 5 stars.

5e as intended: Player: "My character, Charismo the Oratious, leers at the hobgoblin king and levels an eloquent threat hoping to get him to back down." DM: <determines that the outcome is uncertain> "Make an intimidate check. If you succeed he will consider you dangerous and will probably back...

You completely missed my point. You keep moving past DM adjudication and straight to skill check resolution, then complaining that the DM adjudication isn't working as intended (which it would if you used 5e's system design as intended).

Were you of the assumption that any amount of language, worded in any way, could mitigate tortured conversations in this place? You, sir, deserve an XP in the form of a laugh for that one!

It's a feat that enhances a skill. It still uses the skill. I see nowhere in these feats, nor in the 5e rules, that dictates they change the fundamental assumptions of play. Trying to drag 4e parlance and design philosophies into this edition seems like folly. But your point just strengthens my...

Seems like some of the fears being presented here result from a playstyle wherein the player declares he is going to make a skill check, rolls a die, and asks the DM to narrate the result. I believe this method was fairly common practice in previous editions, and some still do it in 5e. But I...

If you are looking for that kind of bump, why not just change champion HD to d12s?