Search results

I second the choice of Mephits, their special abilities make them a bit more interesting (some of the more than others) and they also have variety.

Honestly? As a player, it's a minor nuisance, I never lack interesting things to do (quite the opposite, I lack the time to do them all). If I was the DM, I have certainly spent too much time preparing so cancelling bothers me a bit if it's done at the last moment, because before next time I'm...

You absolutely do not "necessarily need" either. This sort of "problems" are only problems for people who make them a problem, for example because they pretend the only way to play the game is to include everything officially published or part of core at least. In your games, you don't own these...

I like the idea. I don't care if it doesn't address the healing automatically getting you out of this. One thing that scares me though, is that (if I am reading it right) without something or someone to actually give you HP back, the only path forward is towards certain death. If the party is...

Not that I personally care about this, since I am playing 5.0 and don't see the need for class tags at all: if I want an NPC to use a magic item which requires attunement, they just do, as non-player creatures don't need to follow rules the reason of which is primarily to balance player...

It can be interesting for players who want more control and tactical choices. I would keep the things separate and independent, so you can use any combination: 1) rolling AC and save DC is very easy, you could replace the base 10 in AC with d20 and the base 8 in spells DC with 2d8 if you want...

Three for in-game use sheets, but I don't see a limit for additional sheets. By in-game use sheets I mean those that contain the information you need in the middle of active adventure time, particularly combat but also exploration and investigation. These require character stats, all abilities...

I like formulas more than having to consult tables, so not the OD&D/AD&D versions for me. I also don't like Turn Undead to end up being just another damage, so not the 4e version either. That leaves the 3e and 5e versions... I'm fine with both but maybe the 3e version feels a bit more unique...

I really don't think that the reason is that "monster creation is an art and not a science". Stronghold design is even less a science, and adventure/campaign design is A LOT LESS a science than monster creation! But they are still featured in the DMG. I think the most reasonable explanation is...

I don't think such a change is backwards nor it is forward.

Having a statblock doesn't make you a playable race either.

It's a promotion to fully playable race. Dwarves, Tieflings, Dragonborn etc. did not have an entry either in MM 2014 either. Fully playable race must not be inherently evil in 5e.

Adults all MSc and PhD. Kids, we shall see.

The original explanation of CR in 2014 DMG was of an indication of warning when higher than PC level, that the monster could cause immediate or substantial danger. Explicit examples referred to dealing maximum damage in a single turn enough to kill a supposedly full-health PC, or having...

Oh gosh... I haven't played 3ed since 5ed, but maybe around a year or two after 3.5 came out, my group switched back to 3.0 and we had a few years of fun with various house rules. I probably still have them somewhere but I would need to figure out where. Most of them weren't rules changes but...

As a player or DM? I am completely uninterested at the moment about trying new systems, so I wouldn't spend time familiarizing with one in order to run a game. If I want to DM a gamae, I have BECMI, 3.0 and 5.0, and that's enough for me. As a player, someone else is going to care for the...

Exactly. To me "general nature" tells me that as a DM if the spell detects traps in the area, then I am allowed to reveal some hints but I should not tell them the exact location of the trap (I read it as telling neither the trigger location nor the target location, should they differ). Then...

It is cheaper than creating new content. Not really. No more than usual. I doubt about Planescape. Planar references however are common in many adventures already. Sure. I have always been a huge fan of planar adventures, but I think the planar content in the DMG was already a bit too much...

Are you telling me that WotC is changing some creatures' types so that the PCs can not easily coerce goblins and bugbears into bed, while being just as effective as before at coercing humans and elves into bed? 🤔

nope nope nope nope nope nope ...sorry, got carried away. I meant, when I am a player I am open to whatever our DM wants to use. I'd rather judge the results than the sources.