Search results

The expectation that someone (or everyone) at the table will refrain from being a dick should not require a lengthy discussion. Or any discussion at all, really.

My favorite solution for problems like this is not running published modules. Just let 'em try to "read the module" when I'm running an unpublished never-before-seen Jack of All Tirades original adventure!

This month in UA: half-baked over-powered munchkin-bait! In other words, typical D&D psionics rules; a tradition going all the way back to 1st edition AD&D.

Have you considered using retro-phrenology?

I haven't got to 11th level yet, but the Mystic Arcanum class feature worries me. How useful is a 1/day spell that can't ever be changed? (I'm running a Tiefling BladeLock, currently 8th level, and it's going quiet well.)

Seriously, it's time to find a new gaming group. These people don't sound like any fun at all. This is supposed to be fun, right?

I've also used Hypnotic Pattern to good effect, but it's not exactly an all-purpose spell. I'm playing a Warlock (Two Wizards in the party and I'm the only one with this spell!) so I have to use it sparingly and save it for targets with low Wisdom saves. I mostly use it on Beasts and Vermin, but...

Wow, that's extremely harsh, and will likely ruin all his fun. I like it.

Amen.

Yes it is. I would never use it lightly, unless I was absolutely certain that it was appropriate, and that it wasn't being applied unfairly. Now, having got that disclaimer out of the way, I can tell you this: He's cheating.

This is mostly good advice, but seriously, "wuss"? Where I come from, calling someone a wuss would get you invited away from the table for a brief discussion on acceptable behavior.

Yeah, this is where I'd call him out for being a complete <edited> tool. Or have a pack of umber hulks claw their way through the floor right under his character, drag him offstage before anyone can react, and proceed to take his character on a one-way "solo adventure." Or both.

If you want to get really meta, ask yourself what the villains and/or monsters in the adventure would do if they got to read the whole thing in advance. (You know, like that scene in Spaceballs where Dark Helmet looks at the script.)

WHO SUMMONS THE JACK OF ALL oh wait... jack of all trades? I thought you said Jack of All Tirades. Never mind; carry on! I voted for bard.

Except it's not "wacky" to explain that "Yes, you need to have a hand free to load a crossbow." "Wacky" is either: A) assuming you can do it with exactly zero hands or, B) assuming that everyone knows this and not pointing it out in the rules. This isn't a Sage Advice problem, it's a PHB...

I'm not buying this sheath/unsheath in the same round business. Arguments based on the idea that "the rules don't forbid this, therefore I can do it" are the reason the hand crossbow errata was necessary in the first place. Here we go again; the shenanigans never end. And this is why I'm not a...

There was also a Sage Advice article on this topic which clarified the issue: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-spellcasting

My irony meter is a smoldering ruin. Please tell me more about not being superior.

The item was protected by a powerful curse. Thunderstorms now occur everywhere the PC's travel. And they get disadvantage on saves v. lightning. But hey, don't explain any of this, just let them figure it out. Start off each game session with "It's raining again." End every session with "And...

Actually yes, some people are just plain stupid. They're not being "goofy", it's not a lack of social skills, it's not a personality quirk. They're think-headed. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Slept in the day IQ points got handed out. And tantrum-boy sounds like a classic case...