Search results

There's a lich in my campaign that always wore a phylactery so people just assumed that was where he kept his soul. Turns out that was an amulet of protection and his actual soul vessel was a seemingly innocuous lantern in a dangerous dungeon in the middle of nowhere.

I can think of a couple reasons not to give him the benefit of the doubt, but in general that's a good attitude to have.

The word isn't anti-semitic. It's just a Greek word meaning amulet--but the description for the past few editions has been similar to the Jewish tefflin, which is also known as a phylactery. They're trying to divorce it from that assumption and emphasize that the lich can keep their souls in...

Edit: redundant post

Why are Eladrin chaotic evil?

And the fact that all those games are so vastly different in approach is probably why people have such conflicted opinions about which edition 5E is most like. 5E takes elements of all the past editions and sort of blends them into a game that looks like past editions from certain angles, but it...

I mean that's a fair answer but I meant more in a meta sense about this conversation. The reason that these things can't be mutually true in your view is because of things said in those old source books. But D&D retcons itself all the time, and the current version of the canon they are...

Really wish there was a blank stare reaction. I want this post to feel this face: 😶

I admit I've never played P2E but it just seems like more trouble than it's worth. I read through the Fighter feats and what strikes me is how nearly every one of them has specific rules about how it interacts with the multiattack penalty. It feels like a nightmare to keep track of and it's one...

I mean sure. You could just run it so that there's no repeat save. Either someone in your party can cure the poison or you're stuck for the whole minute.

I think by now it's emphatically clear that a consensus of everyone has never been a thing. Even among old school players there was vast disagreement on the best practices in running the game.

The armor also made me think Hobgoblins.

If I were going for a more 4E style, I'd format it like this;

I'm weird in that I liked 4E but I'm honestly not a fan of the MM-25 changes to monster abilities that prompt saves. That may just be because I'm not used to it yet. I've spent 8 years adjusting to 5E statblocks only for them to change them. But spells are usually just as wordy as they ever...

I'm not sure why 3E lore has any bearing on how the cosmology of 5E works. In 5E the notion that the shapes of the planes are unknowable and the cosmologies are theoretical frameworks is the canon.

P2E carrying that over as the Multi-Attack Penalty is one of those things where I just stare at them like a deer in the headlights waiting for the car to hit.

I mean they did that, and people said they were turned into Mexicans. WOTC is damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's just a matter of choosing who does the damning.

oh god no that would be awful. That isn't a thing in 5E either! Only attack rolls are automatic pass fail.

You know I thought it was a nice cover but then I saw the word 'claimed' and that's all kinds of nope.

There's a lot about 2E that I just find bass-ackwards and obtuse*, at least in the core books. I really like the settings they did for it, but 5E feels like what 3E might have been if it had been designed by people who didn't think 'ivory tower' game design was a good idea for a TTRPG...