Search results

Well the big thing missing here are the more complex motivations that real people have. I describe my campaign as a living sandbox. That is, there are all sorts of things going on in the background that might come into play. Politics, schemes, romance, along with criminal elements, etc. The...

It’s important to understand that the 5e design differentiates between a 24 hour day and an “adventuring day.” While the default testing rules encourage them to align fairly closely, I think one of the reasons the PHB didn’t tie a long rest to sleep was because of this separation between the...

I enjoy this sort of thing,but also like to maintain practicality in a game. So there are language families and you can try to determine the gist of something if you know similar languages, especially when reading written materials.

Yep. Although to be fair, those were also written during the time the rules had yet to be finalized. I'm sure they tweaked things as the rules were finished, but it must have been tough to be writing an adventure for a new system. I don't pretend that my homebrew version of the Realms is...

Personally, this is one of the issues that I have with the way D&D has assigned a pantheon of gods to nearly every race. I put lizardfolk in a category with troglodytes, bullywugs as having a more primitive form of religion, if at all. They would have something more like a shaman than a...

True. But it still made me smile :) so I decided to share. I hope you did too! And I get what you're saying. With something published by WotC you're getting a minimum level of quality that you don't with 3rd party or homebrew material. And with the limited amount of time most of us seem to...

Obviously there are a lot of reasons. A few possibilities. The amount of time people have to play vs. how many things are available. Distribution - kickstarter/internet is one thing, being in every game shop and other outlets another. 3rd party products often cater to a specific play-style or...

I don't. The various "theories" presented in the sourcebooks over the years are just that, theories, in my campaign. Those and many others exist. The reality is, since characters rarely visit the planes in my game, it's all irrelevant, until such time they do. Where it does matter is in magic...

To me it's both. I prefer a published setting, and have been running my campaign in the Forgotten Realms since it was released in '87. Having said that, I followed directions and have made it my own. To start, it's much closer to the originally released setting in feel and content than the 5e...

Can I call that out as an ironic answer for somebody with a handle of ad_hoc?

It's not, nor was that what I was saying. I was responding to the comment "if that's your idea of a constructive houserule, sure" when I noted that the easiest solution was, in fact, to simply remind folks what the actual rule is. I think it's very clear from my posts that I'm hugely in favor...

Umm, a constructive houserule? I don't recall any request of such by the OP. Just an observation by them that some people forget that a creature with darkvision has disadvantage on Perception checks in darkness, and that they didn't like the idea of them not having such a disadvantage because it...

Or remind them of the rule? That works too! In regards to a dim step - with low light vision you can either see perfectly, or not at all. There's no intermediate step where you can see, but not as well (that is, you have disadvantage). For a creature with low-light vision there is no such thing...

I agree. And frankly, in addition to reminding folks to apply the rules, if your table doesn't want to worry about it (or doesn't think creatures with darkvision should have disadvantage), then just ignore that part of the rule. It's not really necessary to do anything more than that, really...

This is all within the DMs (and the players') interpretations of the rules. For me it also goes back to 1e combined with "common sense." In 1e, you couldn't read with infravision. Furthermore, dim light in 5e is sufficient enough to give you disadvantage on Perception checks (passive or...

Yes, this thread is about the fact that some people forget that darkvision imposes disadvantage on Perception in the darkness. Perhaps the majority of those people that forget that are ones that played 3/3.5/Pathfinder/4e? There are many people just picking up 5e, or those that played prior to...

My assessment of specifics may not be 100% correct. But it really boils down to this: 1. I don't think there is a problem to fix. 2. You do. So, for folks that, like you, don't like the way the 5e rules work, the 3e rules are as good as any to go with, depending on your goals for the "fix."...

We're still working out that math on that one. The trick is one of game interest rather than one of realism. For example, plate armor was pretty effective against every known weapon of the time. So we started with a 5/10/15 scale, the idea being plate would stop even most of the damage from a...

OK, so you want to revert it back the rules for an earlier edition? Fair enough. My vote is, well D&D the entire time it was produced by TSR, and they should all have infravision. See, I like the dim light provision for darkness. Because it makes sense. It's not that they have perfect vision...

Uh, no. It's an answer to questioning, "Why do intelligent creatures use light and when?" I don't particularly care when something uses light or not. That's kind of "up to them." But since I'm the DM and I need to know when they would choose to use light, I have to ask and answer those...