Search results

And that's where your thinking differs from every other person in the thread. The rules cover the basics of an infinite variety of circumstances. Filling in the gaps isn't making a new rule (you'd approach an infinite number of rules), rather it's applying the rules to situations where they...

You weren't talking about changes to the rules, you were talking about interpretations of the rules and also about use of uncommon rules.

Indeed, because you were trying to apply irrelevant truisms.

Have you had them repeat exactly? Because if not it's rulings, not rules. Look at hiding in mist - mist isn't a binary on/off thing in real life, you get infinite degrees of it. Making a call on whether there's enough mist together with other factors for a character to hide in doesn't mean...

Tiamat, and the other 80's cartoon characters. Characters from the Baldur's Gate CRPGs - particularly Minsc and Boo. Even most of my geek friends and family would be hard-pressed to name a "D&D character". From what they understand the whole point is to come up with your own characters.

60. It seems most damage spells outrange it; most control spells don't.

My DM only used counterspell in one session, but he did mention afterwards that he'd plan to allow sleight of hand checks to obscure which specific spell was being cast, assuming there's enough noise that verbal components wouldn't be easy to identify. Which would be pretty cool and thematic for...

I see the one about spell level, but not spell identity - link?

Monk with Hunter's Mark wins. Personally I prefer Horde Breaker over Colossus Slayer on a Ronk, it's better at higher levels - particularly if you use it to Stunning Strike an additional foe.

If they're staying behind heavy cover it should often be possible to out-range the counterspell. I was really wondering how the caster knows which spells are being cast that are worth counterspelling? Can they always correctly identify the spell? Do they do it for everything, including cantrips?

My DM wasn't much into using counterspell. When he did try it out I instead cast where the counterspell-er couldn't see me (being a halfling helped) or out of its measly 60ft range. Fireball has a cast range 2.5x longer than counterspell, though of course there isn't always room to take...

Honestly Devil's Sight + Darkness not being a one-size-fits-all solution to every situation isn't the end of the world. If dispel magic is going to be used by NPCs the player(s) should adjust and come up with additional tactics.

Counterspell and dispel magic are also very highly effective against casters with more spell slots due to the action economy. They're even stronger against Warlocks in longer fights, yes, though to what extent depends largely on the tired old chestnut of how many combats vs short and long...

How often are you going to be looking at the exact same circumstances in any of these examples (stealth, persuasion etc)?

Sure but 5e includes appropriate magical item effects in CR. Larloch was loaded in that respect e.g two dozen ioun stones in use at any one time

Elemental Monk 15/Fighter 2/Assassin 3. Fangs of the Fire Snake nova + Action Surge + Assassinate. 12d8 - 6 crit attacks (Action surge, 2 ki for flurry) 12d10 - 6 crit FotFS bonus damage (9 ki) +30 - ability mod *.84 = 126 fire damage Being able to do that at 15ft reach is pretty sweet

That was tongue in cheek. However deities are far from omnipotent outside their portfolio in Forgotten Realms, and Larloch is written as being stupidly powerful and well-equipped.

Exactly what I did when I played a Monk in LMoP. I had a Fighter and melee Ranger in the party, as well as two casters with cantrips at the back. I was the clean-up crew, going after the enemies who had been hit at least once to finish them up so I could (usually) retreat safely. My AC was 15...

But we're talking CR range, not level range. Though I suppose much of Larloch's difficulty was also meant to come from Batman-like levels of preparedness; traps, chain contingencies, epic mooks serving him, and so on.

It sounds to me like a perfect example of "rulings not rules"...