Search results

Guardian-type Fighter misses a player: "He swings his sword at you, and you parry deftly. Take no damage." Slayer-type Fighter misses a player: "He swings his sword at you, and you parry deftly - but you still really feel the blow in your arms. Take 3 points of damage." There's no descriptive...

It took me a week to get the files; the work-arounds on WotC's web-site weren't working for me, and I didn't feel like re-signing-up for the playest to regenerate the email given the other server problems, and then I went on vacation (and had planned to spend some of the time reading and maybe...

D&D Next is sooo videogamey. :D

Still happening to me. :(

Why not? So why are there nigh-unlimited swords +1 and potions of whatever floating around, if they're so rare and hard to make? :D

Pemerton, I love reading your posts. Great stuff!

I rather like this post. The preponderence of magic items in old school games, coupled with the relative inability to actually make them, always struck me as odd. "You have to combine the tears of a new mother and a vial of water gathered from a spring in the middle of the Misty Mountains...

These days, all of my campaigns are run sans-XP. Instead, the players level up at appropriate story points. Ferinstance, I "recently" ran a short campaign, starting at 1st-level, in the Great Dale in the Forgotten Realms. It was a kind of murder-mystery-meets-geopolitics-meets-dwarven-tunnels...

*sniff* It's been a long, long time, eh? :D

I'm not sure I agree with this. My memories of 2nd Edition play include a lot of, "For this specific spell, you make a PPD save at a -4 penalty," or, "If used against a single target, the target takes a -X penalty to his save vs. spell; against two or more targets, they get a +Y bonus" etc.

I fail to see how there's any serious debate occurring here. The plain answer is that Evasion works just fine, regardless of the size or number of shields you happen to be wearing or carrying. If you're interested in providing a house rule answer, you should call it out as such. And if you're...

I was just about to ask for that. :D

That sounds like it was a pretty fun session! I think the quote PS pulled out is particularly telling; what a great touch!

I'm guessing: Jesus:Jesuits::Jeebus:Jebs

8, 8, and whatever is best for the player (probably PfA). There's no way via the rules (AFAIK, anyway) to pick the better DR in situation 3, since they're both DR 10 against the attack, so default to the friendliest possibility.

I'm pretty sure he means, "Other than untrained Bluff, Intimidate, or Knowledge checks, do you ever use Charisma or Intelligence checks?" IMG, yes, but not tremendously often.

Except you're still making the weird jump from, "When playing this make-believe game, people will avoid [doing X] because it leads to less fun" and landing in "Man, in the real world, people totally suck." The one does not lead to the other and, frankly, I don't get the abstraction you're making.

I'm gonna go with "because it's an imaginary game with imaginary consequences." Ergo, you know, not real. Who cares if I acted cold-bloodedly towards the orcs; they don't actually exist! No one really cries when the orc warrior is slain, he doesn't actually leave any orphans behind. And this...

In a straight line? Moreover, the monsters are usually just as fast as you (if not faster, some of the time). Anywhere you can get to, they can, as well. So running didn't work and he died, anyway? Should've stayed and fought. That'll teach him next time! :D Except if, for instance...

... Split ... the ... party? Moreover, if the monsters are just as fast as you, and you're engaged with them (in close, if not melee, range), how are you going to break line-of-sight? If you move around a corner, they can, on their turn, move right around the same corner and catch up to you...