Search results

You know, he can't read that anymore (probably). And even if you disabled two way block, this is a rude thing to do. Edit: sorry. Did not see it was already noderated.

I am not sure that comparing him to the Queen is constructive.

Which I did not do.

Not forever. But you could have the decency to let their family bury them at least and let them mourn in peace. You want people to not be naughty words. So don't be one yourself. Edit: sorry. Did not read Morrus' post before I posted mine. Hope I did not break any rules.

Why do snake demons need breasts? Just asking?

I think hiding restrictions in a trait is counter intuitive.

I don't understand how draconic actions and exarch of tiamat work together. Are draconic actions only availavle after exarch of tiamat activates? It does not say so in the draconic action entry. Also is recharge breath weapon not a bad use of an action if it has only 1/3 chance to work? Edit...

Cure minor wounds on the paladin helps a lot to put him on the top spots.

Runable and fun? Yes. But too time consuming. Emphasized by the fact that adventures had too many encounters. Of we were young and played a whole day every week, we could have appreciated it. When you only manage to play a few hours per month, manageable and fun is if the combat is just done in...

Ok. I also did not have those problems. But this is how I interpreted the reason for the change back then.

High level druids that wildshaped had only a few hp. That messed with spells slike sleep or disintegration. It was probably never intended to instagib druids with full druid hp and some extra HP from wildshape at that level Take a level 20 druid: 150/150 druid hp transforming in a brown bear...

Both. Really depends on the kind of combats. And terrain.

Disintegrate should go through orc relentless endurance. So I am glad they reverted it. The main problem: druids in wild shape was fixed by using temp hp there. Death ward specifically also protects from instant death effects. So this still works. So probably the revision is intentionally.

No. That line explicitely states that you can't build a peasant railgun by exploiting rules.

I guess most people know enough about physics to make assumptions about a lot of things. And even if they are not totally correct, as long as the table agrees, no harm done. Do you really want the designers to have an appendix that explains how physics work? Maybe that would be beyond the point...

Probably. I guess if there is no specific rule, assume it works like it does in the real world. It is an exception based design. So only specific rules superseed common sense. And then there is even the DM guideline: rules are no physics. So if rules are not meant to specifically superseed...

Agreed. To the OP.

Yes to your question! Makes no sense otherwise. A (nick) dagger in the off hand should not allow you to bypass the bonus action requirement.

Or use 10+bonus. Often with disadvantage.

Which is a useless score...