Search results

1e didn't work that way if you were rolling treasure randomly. Even low level creatures had lairs with treasure that could include magic items. There was only one chart for armor, so you could theoretically find +5 plate at 1st level. Also, the 1e DMG didn't have chain mail higher than +3...

For me. For new DMs that isn't true. CR doesn't mean a whole lot.

Why can't my 200 year old PC elf who did that do those things? You get to pick ages, and sometimes even start at higher level. Not every game is against having PC villains.

I just took a quick peek at some of it. It looks quick and easy, and it would be fun to play. However, given what I've seen of Daggerheart, I'd much rather play that than Shadowdark if given the opportunity.

I'm in that boat. This discussion has got me interested in looking at Shadowdark, though.

Thieves could also throw daggers and darts. Druids had daggers, darts, hammers, and spears. And so on.

I saw people try to go against those rules a number of times. Generally the DM just said, "No you can't do that" and when the player asked why, the DM said, "Because the rule say you can't." One DM, though, would actually allow the monk to light that fire or wizard to swing that sword. Then he...

We were kids at the time. Understanding the balance intent behind gold for xp was a bit beyond us junior high kids. All we saw was "Easy XP! No way!" Never mind that all the level draining and so on that the game threw at you required that you gain more than just the XP from fighting and...

It happened to me a few times when I first started playing 5e. After those few times, not so much. I learned from my mistakes. Tomato, tomahto. Both of those things require pretty much the exact same skills for the purposes of this discussion. You need the ability to look at a monster with...

Yeah. I'm assuming no special classes like ranger or paladin were qualified for.

That's true, but in all the different 1e games I played in, I saw RAW XP and leveling used exactly 0 times. Some groups didn't do training at all. Some didn't do training, but required a safe spot(such as an inn) before you could gain the level. Others required training, but didn't cap it...

I'm not so sure now. I looked at the DMG and saw this on page 79. "Multi-class characters, characters with two classes, and bards check the matrix for each class possessed, and use the most favorable result for the type of attack being defended against." It differentiates bards from...

"Bards begin play as fighters, and they must remain exclusively fighters until they have achieved at least the 5th level of experience. Anytime thereafter, and in any event prior to attaining the 8th level, they must change their class to that of thieves. Again, sometime between 5th and 9th...

There are no rules for bards that are being used until after you have finished dual classing. There's no difference between your dual class fighter/thief who wants to EVENTUALLY be a bard, and my dual class fighter/thief who has no intention of being a bard. You have to be a dual class...

Let my 20th level spellcaster have 4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4 plus more slots for high primary stat and I'd be good with that. ;)

The dex would be 17. You specifically had to dual class before reaching bard, so you had to qualify to do that.

I totally agree with you about the 18 strength. If I rolled an 18 strength, fighter was the only class choice as far as I am concerned. With an 18 con, though, it would have depended. If I rolled a 12 strength and 16 intelligence to go with it, I was going to be a healthy wizard. +2 con to...

Then I would consult the gods with a commune spell. Or ask a wizard to contact other plane to get the information. Or Legend Lore. Or... There are other ways to get information once it is known to be out there. Lots of other ways. Those things can be gated behind things no sane player would...

Hmm. The problem with that is a full hour of combat with creatures giving enough XP to reach 14th level would indeed still give the party a long rest. A looooooooong rest 6 feet under.

It really was a bad ruling. Now that I think about it, I don't think it was initiative that he was talking about. This was the 5e version, so I think the question was about the invisible creature having advantage to attack its target. Since See Invisible didn't say that it took away the...