Search results

If I'm DMing? Depends on the group. If I'm GMing for a group of adults, I make it clear that I'm OK with sex, though we'll fade to black right about the time clothes come off. I also make it clear that I'm not comfortable with rape/sex abuse in the game, and if it ever comes up at all it'll be...

Good call! :)

Hey Leigh Sales, your research intern sucks at their job. Or maybe that's your editor. It's hard to be sure.

Because hit dice are all over the board, and were not designed to track monster CR. This was a 2E-->3E change, and wotc has stuck with it since.

It was (and continues to be) because in pathfinder and 3E, clerics/druids are quite powerful and patching up other characters mid combat isn't usually an optimal use of either their spell slots or their action economy. CLWWs are superior in every respect, except in extreme cases.

I use inspiration in my (sigged) house rules that allow players to spend Inspiration to ask a question and get an honest answer.

I'm surprised 5E is as popular on roll20 as it is. Consider that those playing 5E online are receiving little-to-no electronic adventure support from wotc; whereas those playing earlier editions and Pathfinder have bucket-loads of pdfs available to them.

Irrespective of his other talents, Chris Perkins is a master showman. I mean, I don't even want to get excited about his coy hype building, but darn it all if I didn't smile just a little bit when I saw those tweets.

I believe the "comment on the comments" format exacerbates the problem too. For example, I'm pretty sure a lot of people see this when they look at the thread UI. (Can't say I'm without guilt myself, here.)

These two statements are very different. The designers say these features are intentional, but they're laziness/honest mistakes. ... presumption These design goals are too broad. ... not presumption

That's just a more presumptuous way of saying that the design goals aren't what you, personally, are into.

If so, then they forgot a lot of things, and did so in a manner that served their stated design goals. Which, while not impossible, does leave open the possibility that Occam's not in your corner after all.

I suppose they wanted the mechanical implementation of this attack to vary from table to table. I don't know their exact reasons for going this direction, in this instance--but they've been clear that "each table is different" is part of the 5E design mandate.

I only use Perception in free-flowing scenes (e.g., the Duke's ball), during combat (at the cost of an action), and to oppose invisibility. For the latter it's useful; for the first two it ain't. EDIT: It's also useful for monsters, but I suppose that's a given.

Or their design goals are different than the things you personally want to see in the game you play.

The other party does have a good reply: "Stop crapping over the group's play experience." Which is what "Don't be a rules laywer" means.

What elements of spellcasting do you find difficult? Deciding spells? Tracking spell use? Looking up spells? Personally, I dig the warlock as far as easy goes; but I haven't seen a lot of the classes in play much yet.

It helps that Paizo also runs a sizable storefront, and that they can stick to promoting products sold on their storefront. Still: great company, great site.

To this day, that thread remains one of the funniest things I have ever read on the subject of RPGs.