Search results

So, errata means it's a new edition, then?

This is a thing that gets to me, because I, too, want a well-detailed and immersive world. I love getting into my character's head, too. And yet, I also have no problem at all stepping back from my character, and saying, "You know what? The optimal / rational / smart in-character decision is...

I'm sorry, but this is complete bullpuckey. Unless, of course, original D&D - with its daily spells - is a video game, too, to you?

Investigation and assassination scenarios are not "corner cases."

Right - so, if you're only going to have one battle in a day, it has to be an absolutely *huge* one: equivalent to 4 or 5 smaller, "normal" battles all happening at once. Because, if you don't do that - by, say, having the evil nobleman have 30 guards immediately at-hand instead of a more...

Effin' brilliant.

Then, of course, you get the question of, "Why can I do something awesome exactly 5 times a day, every day? But I can never do 6"? It's still an issue.

In addition to my point above about the effective differences between "1 minute" and "1 encounter" durations, I'm not a fan of any rule which is, by nature, designed to be inconsistently applied (e.g., at-best-occasionally-enforced speed limits). Durations expressed in real-life terms longer...

So you don't like Whirlwind Attack, then? (Or the Bride vs. the Crazy-88s?)

Sure - I think, for purposes of the analogy, we're considering a combat where the goal is, in fact, "Kill the badguy," rather than "obtain the MacGuffin, which happens to be on the other side of the badguy." I'm not sure it's that much of a stretch. Consider the various interesting examples...

But the hit point issue is one of "end the skill challenge in a success," where "success" is being linked to "killing an opponent." Yes, it's a bit of a strained metaphor because a dead opponent isn't necessarily the only victorious end-state (surrender also works*), but you don't get to dead...

I see you subscribe to the Leonard da Quirm school of naming!

It's not. Come on, mearls - get your schtuff together.

Yeah - I can barely believe that the quoted poster is serious, but I know he is, so ... It's like, what the heck kind of world do you live in where providing the DM with information - information that he is free to ignore to his heart's content - makes any darn sense at all? It's just ... I...

In which case, the guy isn't dead, then, is he? EDIT: Recall, the original point was: So if the opponent is off-scene, thanks to being dropped off a cliff or into a hole or some lava, but he isn't at 0hp, then he's not dead.

I'm with the Midget and the OP on this one. My current Pathfinder character has a buff I use in every major combat that lasts 10 rounds (1 minute). Every time I use it, I put a d10 on the card I made with the information, and rotate it down 1 notch each turn. Easy, right? Well, sometimes...

Each of those results in some amount of HP damage, yes?

So, there are basically two paladins that I've played or DMed as NPCs, off-and-on, in different versions of D&D and even different rules systems and even different media (like, for instance, I'm currently playing as one in a game of Mount and Blade!). The first is a character I created with my...

Enjoying something is not a prereq to criticism, but ignorant criticism is useless.

Of course it has player-generated wishlists. Please see the rest of the thread after CNN's post on how they work. And please see my follow-up question as to why they're "nonsensical." I mean, I know even back in the 2E days I'd say things to my DM like, "Hey - I want to go on an adventure to...