Search results

A 20th level wizard / 1st level cleric gets only 1st level cleric spells. A 20th level cleric / 1st level wizard gets only 1st level wizard spells. Because I say so. :)

You seem to have a knack for pulling the wrong meaning from text by taking it out of context. If you read my other reply you'd see that when I said "I won't argue RAW, because it's stupid." I didn't mean the rules are stupid, I meant arguing about RAW is a stupid pointless waste of time. It...

Playing a beholder intelligently should make it less predictable too. They should be able to do the unexpected and catch players off guard. They're supposed to be very smart and very dangerous. I play them that way, anyway. Someone mentioned the facing issue from earlier editions being the...

I won't argue RAW, because it's stupid. But I will respond to your last sentence: It is perfectly believable that you can be surprised and subsequently notice a threat (the attack that hit you) and remain surprised. Since you can't take any action during your first turn, no matter how many...

How about travelling during a bad thunderstorm puts the party in the path of a landslide? Small arboreal monkeys with high stealth that play tricks on and steal items form the party - played for comedy, not to irritate. A ghostly village appearing over the ruins of an old settlement, along with...

The description in the MM makes sense if you are designing a video game Beholder that has no real intelligence behind it. Just saying... Seems like a lot of enemies aren't given much thought beyond "scream and leap" tactics. Edit: this isn't meant to be a criticism of the MM. I just...

I disagree with your interpretation, but I will not argue 'rules as written' as I think it's a pointless waste of time. I simply pointed out your logical fallacy. I am not arguing whether or not the rules support the following, suffice to say I have already made my opinion on that clear: From a...

Wow you guys are really literal. :) It would never have even occurred to me to play a Beholder with the straight up random behavior described in the MM unless it had nothing better to do. It seems natural to assume that's what it does barring exceptional circumstances, but it is an...

It's not rationalization. It's assuming that not every creature has the kind of flexible intelligence to go beyond its natural limits as in-game humanoids do. If you want monsters to level and gain class abilities, that's fine, but then you have to accept the logical conclusion to that...

Yep. Monsters don't level. No feats, no abilities beyond the Monster Manual stats, etc. That's enough to scare off most would be monster players.

Sorry, but that does not follow logically. "If you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!" is the logical inverse of "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat." That means the two statements are logically independent. In other words, not noticing a threat is a sufficient...

You can do whatever you like in your game. In my experience it may be fun in the short run, but tends towards the disruptive in the long run. Players looking to play monsters are typically just looking for a quick power boost, making them the center of action/attention of the party. As for...

*snicker*

Where are the means to become a lich spelled out anywhere in 5th Edition? Even if it was, which I'm pretty sure it is not, in my game that would just get you transitioned to NPC status. Hope you have another character handy. I might allow the player to retain control of their new form IF (and...

Not really answering your question, but as the DM you can do anything you like, up to and including ripping a character's arm off. I don't let players play "monsters". The game doesn't really handle it well. Liches are supposed to be supreme spellcasters, and level 6 is nowhere close...even 20...

Here's another fan created timeline using material from a bunch of sources, including Planescape, Ravenloft, and Spelljammer. There are contradictions among the sources so you have to choose the "correct" one for you.

Sure, but that is something different entirely. In fact it explicitly says "Time is a constant in the known planes of existence, and cannot be expanded, contracted, created, or destroyed. The length of a day in one plane is the same number as the length of a day in another plane." When it speaks...

Hmm, not sure which book that would be, unless it was from a 2nd edition book at the very end of the 90's, in which case I may have missed it. Unless you're counting something from Dragon magazine or the like, I can 't imagine where in 1st edition something like that would be hiding.

Thanks, I was thinking more along the lines of rulebooks and such, but that's cool too. I pull a lot of my stuff from old issues of Dragon and Dungeon magazines. I've spent a lot of time hammering out a cosmology (still a work in progress) for my 5th edition game that combines what I feel are...

I'd love to know where you read such a thing. I'm very familiar with planes / alternate worlds of first and second edition and I recall nothing of the sort except perhaps an offhand statement to the effect that among all the alternate primes our Earth might exist. Certainly nothing as concrete...