Search results

Fundamentally with the right players and the right DM, you can run any system and have fun. As a system becomes less and less balanced, it takes either more and more effort on the behalf of the players and DM or more raw luck to achieve that.

Thanks for the answer. The concept seems ill fitting to me, but as long as it has served it's purpose in your campaign, I guess that doesn't matter :)

My recommendation to every DM reading this thread would be to bear in mind that the rule books are pretty poorly written when it comes to basically anything outside of the most straightforward combat. Given that, I doubt it makes sense to anybody that someone with a strength of 20 will become...

I guess my main question would be: why use 3d printing to do this if the pieces are all modular and generic? We've got a set of hirst arts moulds and made some stuff up with plaster, which comes in way under the price of plastic. I mean - I suppose if the price is coming under buying a...

You bring a tent because rain. I personally wouldn't bother bringing a sleeping pad if I was worried about weight. It's purely a luxury item. You can almost always find somewhere that's comfortable enough to sleep. Now what I might do is hand out a bonus for NOT roughing it. Something like...

If people that are high enough level to raise dead and cast greater restoration have interacted with this poison, how come nobody has used contact other plane, legend lore or divination to find out what the cure/secret focus is?

Just a point: I don't think the spell can physically restrain you. However hold person is not physically restraining you either, or it would have a physical save. Just as with manacles, phantasmal force can create something which appears to confine you to the point where you should be...

They could also have presented a lesser table that skips 7-10, 13-16, 27-28, 41-42, 49-50, 65-66, 71-78, 81-84, 95-96. Lots of cosmetic and fun stuff, no more massive combat wreckers. And they could even have presented the current table as a DM option. Preferably with scaling effects instead of...

My first port of a call with a lot of spells like this is to look back at the 3.5e version of the spell. In 3.5e, alarm couldn't discriminate between creatures, it only had the option to not trigger if a creature gave a password before entering the area. 4e just kind of took an editorial...

There's way more creatures with a high con than there are with a high int. Even things that are described as cunning manipulative spellcasters get an int of 13-15. The sole exception is dragons. Explain why phantasmal force cannot paralyze the target? if you can create any visible phenomenon...

I'm comparing loremaster to diviner, and I'm find myself torn as to which is better. Loremaster has that neat expertise, but a diviner can just drop divination spells to find the same info, then get the slots back. Loremaster can pull some neat tricks changing spells, but a diviner can pull some...

Funny, because the competition shooters I know all say to draw and release as soon as the draw is complete: don't hold. Basically for exactly the reason you say. There's a mildly amusing anecdote about someone who took a bow around to someone's house for some kind of demonstration, and their...

No, typically what happens is that you make an attack roll, and if you hit, you tick off some hit points. If you've ticked off enough hit points, it dies. Enough hit points is usually multiple rounds worth. Regardless, D&D provides the DM with a model for an expected reality: if you've made a...

The spell says it creates an object, creature or other phenomenon. It doesn't say anything about inflicting conditions, choosing how the illusion reacts to the target, or restricting any actions at all. It never gives an automatic investigation check when an interaction is illogical. All of...

Except you are NOT arguing RAW. Both of our positions are interpretations of a very open ended spell. Your position is that the spell can create anything, and will be modified by the target to create the rules effects the caster desires (ie - the caster says "I want to blind the target". The...

The problem with this interpretation is that it makes the spell far too good for a 2nd level spell. So you're taking the lack of a specific example to mean that a 2nd level spell is significantly more powerful than any other 2nd level save-or-suck spell?

That's a given. Why not? The spell says the target rationalizes any inconsistent interactions: since the spell can't exert force, it cant resist an attempt to break the chains, so you've got an inconsistent result. It's resolved by the target breaking free. See above. The spell can't exert any...

Yup Nope, I was saying... Is that. The illusion can't actually stop an application of force. You can move your arms fine if you choose to, so the illusion had to change to make sense. The chains break and you are free.

The issue with requiring multiple successful rolls to resolve a single action is that it dramatically reduces the chance of success: as another person pointed out it's the equivalent of applying disadvantage (and potentially to a higher degree) to the check. Combat is a different kettle of...

As soon as you make a chain, you've already got multiple discrete groupings of solid matter. Would you deny me a door? Would you deny me a wall? Would you deny me a wall with a door in it? etc etc. In short: there's not really a logical reason not to allow a complex trap if you're going to...