Search results

That was Lancelot too I think (in some presentations had Galahad as childhood name). Also Gawaines increased based on the amount of sunlight... and was 12x at noon and Lancelot still beat him then. Lancelot though had other things going on like perhaps some throwback to the myth of Balder and...

Warlord had a dash of defender so its not even fully set in that fashion

Unless you stay low level as in no fire balls and remove cantrips I am not sure you can call it low magic if you do have spell caster classes. (everyone seems to have their own idea of what "low magic is" )

I do not have my books handy right now, but thanks for that.

Arcana altering the effects of a ritual was in the DMG2 but really all skills were empowered and very open ended. There was a paradigm where skill effects could often accomplish similar if not necessarily identical things to magic mentioned explicitly in skill powers (utility powers) and martial...

We called that DM may I as an option in 1e land and the DM is being taught to answer no since the system removed the non-caster method explicitly defined in 4e and maybe 3e. yeh but how do you encourage that by never mentioning non-caster/non-magic options? They gave the caster explicit...

Only you would consider that an example. Yes we gave an open ended one about magic so a magic item can do the trick or a monster with magical abilities could do it but some how Dave considers it an example that opens up non-magic

The examples definitely seem to be all be teaching DMs to not consider non magic Is that really the case in 5e? because if all the examples ever mentioned are explicitly created magic items and spells the more flexible thinking is being discouraged. I could be misremembering something though.

Oh can it? the D&D examples all seem to be character abilities and spells. (some of the latter like ranger abilities in 5e do not seem like they even should be spells) That is not the point remaking casters to all be encounter powers is not "against the rules" because dms can do whatever they...

Defenders were even more distinct in how they accomplished their goals a Swordmage was so completely not like a fighter its crazy...yup both effective defenders (though the fighter was also arguably a striker and at high levels almost automatically shift more heavily into that) and the the...

That is what I dispute too much DM load and the actual answer is NO your game isnt supporting it the DM is rewriting the game to make it so. 5e has far more opaque mechanics to 4e which makes it harder to predict the impact of adjustments (which is one of the reasons the alternate rules for 5e...

It may just be I want it more efficient. If you want to broadcast to your enemies by shouting out loud lets focus on the caster in the back row and telling them exactly your plans (maybe some times that will NOT make a difference) "and on the count of two go" ... are you discussing it? or...

Yes making up and adding your own rules counts as making up rules ...house rules because washing with blood isnt magic.... and only magic can undo magic is the 5e presented method. In effect that kind of thing is part of having to remake the monster manual because it does not suit my narative...

What qualifies as a "style of play"? AND how much DM work do you think is acceptable to achieve it? There are a ton that I consider a style of play which I cannot do well in 5e without ummm hacking the game to pieces and rebuilding. In comparison to 4e and 3e (according to 3e fans on here)...

It definitely has an impact on magics causing compounding effects or even different effects ... the advantage/disadvantage system also has a "similar effect" ie fairrie fire and being proned will both make you vulnerable to melee attacks but not doubly so.

I think its too early in the process to conclude that... even though I also hear grumbling elsewhere.

Characters should have to make some coordinated rush maneuver (possibly guided by a leader) involving all of them being truly simultaneous instead of stretched out over the 6 seconds based on their initiative... ie to restrict the combatants response to a limited number of opportunity attacks...

The idea the highly skilled combatants can only react to one but can make 4 attacks on their arbitrary time slot (even though the action is supposedly simultaneous) is kind of nonsensical. For one thing presumably these reactions are exploiting special openings and are easier than the other...

that is one more for the list...( it's a significant list of things from 4e that have been ported, from NADs to Epic Destinies to Monster Abilities to Skill Challenges and so on and so forth)

Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies can be the context for that as well (they come pre-packaged but I find one can readily adapt them to something unique.) Player chosen story elements injected into and affecting the game in a definite and concrete way.