Search results

The concealment context here was clearly visual. The made clear by quoted reference to "see". Also note the very next paragraph where I explicitly make allowances for exceptions in situations where extra effort is used to defeat other senses that the fluff of the blindsight in question is based...

It's absolutely clear that blindsight allows you to "see"; as it cancels all the various mitigating factors that would prevent you from doing so (lack of light, lack of eyes, concealment, invisibility, etc). It is explicitly stated that you cannot hide from something that can see more than 25%...

I would rule no (as a general rule; I might make exceptions, the justifications for both are in my previous post).

The rules clearly state that you cannot hide from a creature that can see you. I think it's clear that blindsight allows a creature to ignore concealment, lighting requirements, invisibility and even line of sight within range. It follows, fairly straight-forwardly, that hiding from a blindsight...

The rate at which time passes "in game" and the rate at things unfold at the table are completely different. My post refers to the ratio of encounters to rests; the execution of the rests themselves is immaterial (relative to my post).

And depending on his intelligence; might factor in how far he moved to reach the crate as well as what directions he could have moved (from the crate) without losing cover.

What the move action should be is also dependent on NPC/PC's priorities and the amount of risk they deem acceptable. If survival is number one, simply retreating is a very valid choice; however it is entirely possible that the character has priorities that trump survival (duty, revenge, monetary...

Attack -> move -> hide = fine Passive perception using up an action is not ok, I could see an active check doing this. Hiding behind cover is ok, but being hidden doesn't mean someone who was recently aware of you position loses the knowledge they just had. In your example the barbarian would...

Thank you for, finally, re-defining the premise to eliminate social dependantcy. The base rules support healer-less healing (through rests, potions and DM throttling of the encounter pace). The published adventures less so, although this is to be expected as the majority of published...

I was referring to earlier, when the topic was first interduced. You have give more information than "...high level encounters... cleric needed to heal 80% of the time... 'hard'". In order for any of that to be meaningful we need to know the group composition, encounter composition, tactics...

The default rules support healer-less play just fine. I prefer a grittier (but slower encounter per in game day) style, so I do not use the default rules. My PC's recover no hit points during a long rest unless they are at a plot designated safe point (an Inn for example). Each long rest they...

I believe the lack of clarity is because multiple editions and game situations are being discussed, in the same post, with a general lack of qualifiers. The TPK not being possible statement, I believe, is being attributed to 4e; which to be fair, if the actual encounter building guidelines are...

It's a fair point that pure healing slows combat. Traditionally this was offset by the coexistence of pure buffing. 4e moved a lot of the buffing into secondary effects; this worked well for combat/support builds, but I see how this might be less desirable for full support builds. I think 5e...

I'd like to see a combined update of "Faiths & Avatars", "Demihuman Deities" and "Monster Mythology". Second choice would be a PHB2 filled primarily with additional subclasses, potentially an additional class or two, and possibly some feat/fighting style/maneuver/spell list splat.

1. Not everyone has useful information, underlings in particular might only know enough to perform their specific role/job (which might be useful, but not necessarily obviously so). 2. Use the interrogation as an opportunity to feed disinformation to the party. The interviewee might lie, or...

Clearly you are able to make the distinction between being "unimpressed " and bullying a player. While the sanctity of a player's character or immersion may well very, the players themselves are still bound by the agreed upon standards of socially acceptable behavior (whatever they may be for...

An implication exists for some clerics, of certain deities. There also have existed, for multiple editions, clerics of certain deities for which no such implication exists; or even, indeed, the opposite implication. There are other classes for which similar implications exist for specific...

A lack of respect in and of itself perhaps; but once they combine that lack of respect with bullying, they are (IMO) behaving like douchebags (assuming of course the target does not wish to be bullied). It is simply not reasonable to hold the game's mechanics responsible for the player's out of...

The socially inappropriate behavior in question is not the lack of desire to play a healer; it is the act of pressuring another player (socially) into breaking character (in this case, by healing against the character's nature).

No, I did not ascribe any judgments about the collective wishes of your players. You ascribed such judgment in the establishment of basic premise and susequently proposed that it was the DMG's responsibility to fix it for you. I decline your request to "step aside" and furthermore, must insist...