Search results

Thanks. Yeah. Maybe also a good idea. I like useful stat blocks. Thumbs up.

If the spell sticks. But this is basically what I said. An option. But a mixed party is more successful.

Funny thing: A fireball alone is not fantastic. But having 5 casters starting with fireball has a significant chance of ending a fight before it really begins. Lets assume 3 go through. 2 are saved against. That is 32d6 damage (average 112) right away. Enough to really soften up the...

Still disagree. Adding a trait that says: hobgoblin "weapon mastery: hobgoblins roll an extra weapon die with melee weapons" woul help me determine if a great sword would do 3d6 or 4d6 damage on them.

Depends on what you are calling transparence. I did not like that design in 4e and I don't like it in 2024. Especially when so much else is terrible in the hobgoblin stat block. That is no bash of 4e in general or the overall monster design. It is just a preference. Which I did like. So...

There is alreqdy enough room for a dex paladin. I think it needs to be either limited duration (like bladesong) or in line with other base AC calculations. They really took care that AC calculations don't stack. No reason to throw that guideline to the winds.

I have lost the hope that you can actually write stealth rules that make sense in any situation. Are 2024 rules great? Don't think so. Here is what I made out of it: Beat DC 15? Invisible. Even if only concealed by light obscurement or 3/4 cover. Beat passive perception? Unniticed as long as...

I do agree, that in some parts thebnew statblocks are problematic. My poster child is the new hobgoblin stat block. 2d10 one handed long sword damage. Or using a shield while using two handed weapons (already problematic in 5.14, now more so because reminders like one handed sword damage is...

Oh yes. Planes. My bad. Sorry. Ok. It makes some sense. I still don't like it too much though. It sounds as if something is missing.

Nope. This is nonsense. The multiverse consists of different planes. This is why it is PlaneSwalker. Not Planewalker.

Planes does not make sense either. A plane is one layer of something bigger. So the accurate term would be space?

Different material planes. So not a universe.

I really don't know what we are arguing about. I just mentioned the mass suggestion spell as written is busted anyway, with or without concentration. Adding conce tration is nit enough by far. It is more potent then geas in many ways. With geas you can take some damage and do something else...

Not worse than wall of force. Damages the ally. Does not work. But you can tell them to use all their disable spells on the boss that does not do damage. It effectively is better than any mind control spell. You could also tell them to polymorph themselves into a frog and jump into a small box.

No. It needs to go back to being a reasonable suggestion. It used to bw a charm person+. Not only can you influence them more easily, but you can suggest a reasonable course of action. "Stop fighting, and lets talk this out and get to an agreement" is reasonable. "Come here, hand over all...

Initially I thought we'd switch over completely. But with some missing rules and some missing updates to monsters and subclasses, there is still need of older books. Especially xanathar's guide and MMotM will see use. In some cases I might still use an optional rule of the 2014 DMG and if there...

As I said: orc traits are both not along the guidelines. My experience experience with orc guards were that they fought as CR 1/4 creatures instead of CR 1/8 standard guards. The cheat death ability allowed them to survive a well rolled burning hands spell. 2x2 temp hp allowed one orc to...

No. Not really sufficient. The DMG 2014 table was more useful. The guidelines on page 56 are lacking. They tell you to not do things (like changing str/dex/con or adding temp hp abilities). Orcs do have a don't die abilitiy and one that grants a minimal amount of tenp hp for example. What...

In 2014 if you were hidden, enemies have to search for you to know your location. Or just make a guess. You roll with super disadvantage (this is: if you did not correct correctly, you never hit) An only invisible creature makes noises and so you can always attack at disadvantage.

Oh. I actually failed my logic check, reading it again. It is only an implication, not an equivalency. With A = spell B = magic item C = rule that lables an effect magical D = is magical effect The rule just states A v B v C => D That does not imply not(A v B v C) => not D So it is a DM...