Search results

You say that "the designers of 5e apparently hate spell casters," but then you go on to admit that spell casters have "encounter defining spells" and mention how vulnerable NPCs are to save or suck/die type spells. These two statements are contradictory. If the designers of the game really hated...

I think you might be on to something! First, those darned rogues went and stole the wizards' spotlight by picking the locks before those poor wizards could finish casting knock. And then they thought they could take levels in monk and assassinate creatures with their bare hands? Showing up...

Yeah, I'm just curious why that's the case. Maybe they're aware of some broken combination that I'm not. Or maybe they just hate monks. :p

Jeremy Crawford is the co-lead designer of 5e. He doesn't just interpret the rules, he makes them.

Most of the Sage Advice rulings are sensible, but sometimes I am left scratching my head. Would it really be game-breaking for monk/rogues to be able to sneak attack with their fists? I don't know what problem they're trying to prevent here by jumping through all of these semantic hoops. Do...

Many spells should have obvious effects as they are being cast that could help the players identify them. For example: DM: "As the robed figure gestures, a fiery bead appears between his hands, increasing in size and brightness as he chants." Player: "Look out! I think he's casting fireball!"

I think it's worth pointing out that magic item values have a range. Two magic items can share the same tier but have different values. A rare item costs between 501-5,000 gp, according to p. 135 of the DMG. You could always rule that Winged Boots are worth 5,000 gp while the Boots of Levitation...

A lower level spell cast in a higher level slot should be just as effective in some ways, but the higher level spells should still be better overall, otherwise there's no reason for them to even exist. If you could just cast lower level spells in higher level slots and they'd be just as good...

The main problem I have with horrid wilting isn't its damage, it's the lack of any other secondary effect or other advantages. Sunburst does similar damage to an 8th level fireball, but it also has a huge area of effect and blinds enemies. Those factors give players a reason to use it instead of...

No matter how "iconic" a spell is, an 8th level spell should always be better than a 3rd level spell. There shouldn't even be a contest. As for dealing necrotic damage, there's circle of death at 6th level for that, and that spell also puts horrid wilting to shame. Circle of death is also a...

When I said "taken away" I didn't mean to imply that it's something the player had before (though it is something a lot of players are used to after a decade and a half of having it). I was just referring to the game design decision of what to let the player control vs. what the DM controls. In...

I don't think the rules need to be air-tight and DM proof (if such a thing is even possible). There are two extreme ends of this spectrum. On one, the players all sit at the table and listen to the DM tell stories, with no control over what happens at all. On the other, the rulebook is this...

The part that hit a nerve with me was where you said that "5e is built on an assumption your DM isn't looking to screw the players. If it's a paramount concern for someone, 5e may not be the game for that person." Since I was the person you quoted when you said that, it seemed like you were...

Just because someone doesn't like a bad rule doesn't mean they're a dysfunctional player with trust issues. How would you feel if WotC decided to release a "clarification" that players no longer get to choose their character's race, class, feats, etc. Instead, the DM gets to choose. The player...

I like the way you think. ;)

As someone who really likes the conjuration school, I don't like having to use necromancy and transmutation spells to provide my minions. I want to play a conjurer that summons elementals, fiends, and other extraplanar beings to serve me. Undead and animated objects don't fit that character...

This is one of the reasons why I am disappointed by the ruling. Wizards already have a 1 minute casting time on their summoning spells, giving them a huge handicap compared to other summoners, who only need 1 action. All of the overpowered uses of summoning I heard of were with conjure animals...

It doesn't have to. "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren’t limited by its range, unless the spell’s description says otherwise" (PHB p. 203). Spiritual weapon doesn't say otherwise, so it doesn't have to remain within 60 feet of the caster.

The biggest concern I have with the conjuration ruling is this part: "The design intent for options like these is that the spellcaster chooses one of them, and then the DM decides what creatures appear that fit the chosen option. For example, if you pick the second option, the DM chooses the two...

Ok, I'll admit that I was making an assumption. I suspect that this ruling was a way for them to fix the 8 pixie power play without errata. I could be wrong. Maybe this was the way they intended for these spells to work all along, and it just took them almost a year to decide to tell us. Either...