Search results

An animal intelligence monster will only attack under those circumstances you mentioned anyway(as well as protecting its territory) So, If the PCs don't encounter them, then the animal intelligence monster had no reason to attack.

I'm not sure. Let me think about it.

I know this question wasn't for me, but,,, In my game, monsters with animal intelligence or lower will always fight to the death. Very intelligent monsters, or significant NPC bad guys will always have an escape plan. Whether they are able to act on those plans, depends on the circumstances...

Similar reason. Hedging your bets just in case one or more of them fail, or change/limit access to the data.

Hardback is yours forever. Digital can be taken away from you at any time.

So Disney should do to D&D what they did to Star Wars?

Yes, I absolutely play the monsters to win. Think about it. It's at least 3 to 1 in terms of people thinking strategically, and the DM needs to think for multiple monsters, whereas the players (typically) only run one. And mechanically, the odds in favor of the players to begin with..

Given Disney's poor track record with a number of it's movies recently, I would be concerned about any Executive meddling damaging the game. IMO, they would not be the right company to take over D&D.

The ability to ad lib as the players do stuff you didn't expect or plan for.

It's not the worst thing in the world, but it isn't fun. It happened to me once. My PC beating back the bad guys pretty effectively, so the DM altered the rules mid game so that a spell could reach my PC and knock him overboard. ..and of course there was no way for me to climb back up.

Ever since the infamous "we all won" statement, I don't put much stock in what they say.

If it's a temporary measure to restore the ideal, then yes. How many times have we seen the Prime Directive broken/ignored?

I don't want my PC to be overpowered, as being able to steamroll everything in your path gets boring real fast. I want my character to be useful, and have a variety of options. I'm not a fan of one trick ponies, but certain abilities are just superior to others, and I find myself using them...

I don't mind the Federation having a dark underbelly. No institution is perfect, as we've seen in all Star Trek shows. To maintain the ideals of the Federation, sometimes you have to do what needs to get done, and it should always always be considered a last resort that idealistic realist despise.

No, we are arguing that the other monster types are cool too, and deserving of special attention.

I think shifting ASI away from species was a lame move. If you want to play a mouse, that's great, just deal with the fact that an elephant is stronger...

I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when the film and concept were greenlighted. These folks seem to have no idea what Trek fans want. It's like they are going out of their way to damage the IP.

Maybe I'll watch the trainwreck when it comes to Netflix.

Are you under the impression that a 3 foot tall humanoid can be intrinsically stronger than a 7 foot tall humanoid?

Why should any species be there considering now they are essentially skins.