Search results

Or, It's a fantasy world - that means just because solutions are technically non-magic it doesn't mean they have to be consistent with what would happen in the "real world."

I remember that scene. And the ruling was bad, BUT: From what I remember, Mercer was CLEARLY and very visibly already frustrated with the group for just waffling about for so long instead of just getting on with the actual adventure (must have been an extreme case). I think his ruling there...

With house rules - the players, at least in theory, have access to them beforehand. Here, we're looking at an "on the spot" ruling - the player would have no way to know that their action would fail. So for the first instance, it's not the same. After the first instance, it essentially becomes...

Yes. In these situations, I think putting the player on the spot - forcing them to justify the ability - is exactly backwards. The ability works, and the DM should quickly figure out a way to fit it into his idea of the fiction. Heck, Mercer describes the actions of his players all the time...

But where not talking about the rules, by the rules the ability clearly works. We're talking about - do you overrule the rules. And in my experience, when this comes up -DMs let magic slide because "it's magic..." But make the non-magic solution have to pass the "does it make sense test..."...

Of course it's the same issue. The characters are living in the same world. It's blatantly unfair to have 1 set of characters be able to get away with just about anything because "it's magic..." and another set of characters have to have every one of their abilities/actions have to get through...

Perhaps. I've seen Critical Role enough to know when Mercer asks a question like that - it usually means your chance of success is at/near 0%. He's actually quite conservative on his game rulings (at least last I saw, haven't watched the current campaign at all really). I agree with @James...

You realize, most of that is easily available online? Why would WotC do it when there are plenty of people jumping to? Note, if we were still in the TSR era, TSR would be suing/ threatening to sue all of the people doing the work you want.

That's a weirdly pessimistic way of saying they have a clear monetary incentive to cater to old grognards like me.

Please explain how putting out a 5e Planescape supplement setting that is VERY faithful to the old one, but with new things added (such as a new adventure etc.) is "only targeting newbies...?" Please explain how much of 5e is distinct call back to the 2e/3e rules (quite often angering players...

There is a HUGE difference between things not being cannon prior to 2014 and WotC only focusing on "anyone who knows nothing of D&D from before 2014." and I would maintain the latter is just plain false. Just the fact that they put out Plansescape and it is SO reverant to the original shows...

Not sure what to tell you, I've been gaming for over 35 years at this point, certainly not a new player. WoTC is putting out plenty of stuff I find interesting. Group had a blast with Spelljammer, and I'm really looking forward to running the new Planescape adventure. After that, likely back to...

Spelljammer may have missed the mark on a few things( To their credit, they owned up to the Hadozee misstep and acted on it), the lack of proper ship combat rules was a glaring omission. But it also tried a few interesting things. The Adventure included has an interesting fail forward mechanic...

I've certainly seen wandering monsters promoted as means to enforce pace of play. But I've seen it as a random wandering monster roll every x amount of time (resting or not). Never as a, you rest too often you get a monster (but never as long as you rest "just right.")

It's a long thread so I may have missed it, but has ANYONE suggested this is a good or even acceptable method? It's so heavy handed, I can't see many (any?) players tolerating it at all. The DM can dictate the pace of play by adventure design (making it clear where resting could result in...

What specifically do you disagree with? If the players control the pace of play then wizards will generally have their most powerful spells available for any given situation. A wizards most powerful spells (and even a few pegs down from there) are SIGNIFICANTLY more game changing than anything...

That's exactly my point. Since D&D, like it or not, is quite "mother may I" the degree of difficulty rests on how much the DM allows the players to control the pace of play. And to tie it back to the thread. How's much the players control the pace of play will also greatly affect the power...

But shouldn't the story mostly emerge from play? How often the party rests will GREATLY influence what kind of story ends up being told. And that depends on the players control of the pace of play. Granted, in most modules and certainly most adventure paths - the "story" is already mapped out...

Here you go. There is a lot to wade through initially and it cuts off abruptly (never finished) but it got through enough to get a pretty good idea. @Flamestrike ran it. I made a spreadsheet at some point. Will have to see if I can find it.

Especially when @Micah Sweet hasn't even seen the product they are complaining about! But is instead relying on the reports of others (and, conveniently, relying on the negative ones while dismissing the plethora of positive comments). I, for one, thought it was pretty good, with LOTS to build...