Search results

Where's the option for 'Only one - me'?

So the Leomund's Tiny Hut is somehow not tiny enough? Damn you Leomund and your false advertising!

If the barbarian has PAM and Sentinel then this feature is just rubbish, as it eats your reaction.

I too think that Instinctive Pounce is crap, even if it didn't replace Fast Movement. People like to cite specific situations where it might be useful, but those situations tend to be rare. The fact is, flat bonus speed is infinitely easier to use, and you get to keep your reaction for something...

Because its the same thing, in or out of game. I don't like a-holes, so i don't play with them. My character and my party don't like a-holes, so we won't party with them. Now get the hell out of my thread.

You're telling me if an a-hole does something to me which is permanent, I'm stuck with both the injury, AND that a-hole? No, no I don't think so. Not if I can help it. Look, lets not talk about PVP here. My intention was to talk about game mechanics that is generally unacceptable, or just...

If a party member cast Wish on me with that usage, I dont see how it is different from PVP. Weapon attacks are valid mechanics too, but doesn't mean its right to use it on other players. Same goes for Suggestion, Command etc. The moment you use it on me and argue "Why can't I use it? Its within...

The issue with Tunnel Fighter is that it is broken. Just remove it and your problems will be gone, no need to fix other things.

I dont know any DM that allows Tunnel Fighter. That thing is broken enough that even seasoned players don't ask if they can take it, they just assumed its not an option.

I've played a Wild Magic sorcerer, and some of the wild surges change your appearance, age, etc. Those that temporary change your appearance are amusing, but some are permanent change, which are a problem and I can understand if one refuse to accept it, or simply not want to play that character...

Don't reaction abilities always have a condition to trigger? Dont point out the Spore Druid UA to me, cos im just going to ignore that as a one-off thing.

After looking at Rune Knight and Revived Rogue, I thought that some things should never appear in the books as mechanics. I just feel that things like height change, and personality/bonds/flaws change should not be a class/subclass features. They are no concrete rules for that, and you can't...

One day i read Magic Missiles and tried to visualize how it would look like. If you throw 1 dart at a target at the max range of 120 ft, and 1 dart at a target at 5 ft, and another dart at a target standing at 60ft, all 3 darts would somehow strike their targets simultaneously. But for that to...

This is why rules lawyers aren't invited to parties.

But but but, Grappler feat...

I could never get my head around this too. Then again, this is a game which the 'Heavy' property of a weapon is depending on the size of the creature, not the Strength score.

You're wrong. Its already established that 'melee weapon attack' don't require weapons, therefore 'weapon attack' is the same, but it can be either be a melee or ranged weapon attack. To contrast, just go to either Booming Blade or GFB, it states that you must make a 'melee attack with a...

If i ever play a monk who can have flaming fists, i dont think i can resist the urge to yell SHORYUREPPA when i use flurry of blows.

This should have been in the PHB/errata to make things clear, instead of having to read through all the rules and come up with a conclusion. New players aren't going straight to the MM to see that difference, they go for the PHB. Not the OP's fault, but because of how bad wotc is at writing...

What the errata means is that, instead of using a weapon in a melee weapon attack, you can replace it with an unarmed strike (which means it still is a melee weapon attack). If an ability states 'an attack with a melee weapon', then it requires a weapon. Its confusing and dumb, but there's...