Search results

So what are the parameters of this discussion, then? Only 2024 products? No legacy content?

This. I see tons of complaints about Fireball online, but when I actually cast it in game, it rarely has that kind of impact. We were up against some kind of CR 4 flying spirit wolves in a Kobold Press adventure, and my party kept screaming at me to use Fireball. I finally got three of them...

I understand what you're saying, the problem being that few people seem to know what a "non-magic buff" looks like. I mean look at all the "let's make a Ranger non-magical" threads. You see an awful lot of suggestions that make the class less powerful in their zeal to avoid making the Ranger...

To be fair, there's a lot of non-caster fanatics who will riot if non-magic is buffed as well.

Possibly because the lesson that's learned is that Charm Person is completely unreliable and thus, shouldn't be used. Not a big deal if you can freely prepare different spells, but significantly more annoying if your class isn't allowed to change spells out as easily. And if people aren't...

I have another question. Do your monsters fight to the death? Mine often try to flee when they realize there is no chance of victory- this varies based on mental processes and general personality- a cowardly goblin realizes they are in danger and will flee a lot faster than a prideful dragon...

I liked the variant rules from 3.5's Complete Divine, where Turning did damage to undead.

There's always Deadlands magic, where you have to assemble a winning poker hand or else...

Amusingly, not long ago I got into a fight with some undead warlock monsters and they could all cast Shatter.

Woah that's awesome. Too bad it didn't see print.

It's not broken at all (following is all based on 2014 rules). So you get temporary hit points equal to your Warlock level + Charisma whenever you reduce a creature to 0 hit points. Let's take a look at level 3. We'll assume a Charisma of 16. Your best damaging spell is probably Scorching...

You can run into this with lots of spells. I had a Bard player lose his mind when he tried to use Command on a Gnoll and I asked him "hey, can you speak Gnoll?".

If I present an encounter and my party stomps it flat within a round or two, I feel like I didn't really do my job of challenging them. But I know it's also important to have that be a possibility, otherwise, what's the point of progressing and gaining new abilities and better numbers? If the...

I don't mind transparency during a playtest. I definitely prefer knowing what the developers are up to, and the decisions that are being made. I'd love to see actual playtests in action, make videos of them, share stories about "oops" moments. And to an extent, sure, if they want feedback...

Hey it's not a problem, rather than make a check of my own that I'd just pointlessly fail, I'll just give another player advantage on their check!

You may very well be correct, but it's obviously debatable because, well, people are debating it. I personally try to avoid "it does/doesn't make sense" as a basis for rulings when I run the game, because it basically boils down to "DM may I perform X action" scenarios. I don't want my players...

It's like this. If I'm searching for a hidden enemy, I make a Perception check. If another character searches for a hidden enemy, they make a Perception check. The odds are better of finding the enemy because we are both rolling. But instead, we have this scenario where one character IS NOT...

Well, even if you can assist a Perception check, you're still penalized by dim light. It's just now your check and passive is straight up, not boosted. Even though I still think it's weird that two characters working together see better than one, but three, four, or five characters working...

Their line of logic kind of went like this: 1 person watching- 1 person's Perception is being used. 2 people watching- 2 person's Perception is being used. Where they balked was the idea that two watchmen could Help each other, boosting each other's Perception (advantage and +5 passive)...