Search results

I thought the DMG the best by far, mainly because there's a sense of intrigue and I'm not entirely sure what it is. In all cases, I think the monsters are better than the humaoid characters, whose poses are almost all kind of strange. It's definitely better than anything we saw in 4e, and...

If we go back to the other example way above (the one that pemerton gives about resolving a hostile encounter through a skill challenge rather than attack rolls and combat actions), that isn't a call that I would have made. It's probably one that I would have objected to as a player, even if it...

Au contraire! What if the player's attempts are actually irrelevant? And why is it wrong for the DM to have pre-defined results in mind? I think what you object to is simply your perception of malfeasance. Which is fine, but is not an objective commodity and not something you can read into in...

I didn't like it because of the reviews or box office numbers though. I liked it because I watched the trailer and thought it looked good, and then I went to the theater and watched it and found it enjoyable.

Have you ever heard of Ronda Rousey? Realistically, there are plenty of occasions of displays of hypermasculinity in combat circumstances. Usually, women are not involved because they aren't there, but it's reasonable to assume that they would at least do the same given the opportunity...

Being all this as it may, are we to take it that art should delve into the contrary? That is, that female characters depicted in D&D art should never be attractive, or should never be presented in a sexualized way, or should never have characteristics exaggerated? Because in fact, women are...

I don't think there's a difference there at all. The outcome is determined in large part by how the situation is framed. That's true, but I think the word "deserve" is misleading. I don't think it's about making value judgments on who deserves what (though if that's what a DM wants it to be...

Whether the DM thinks you have a chance or not is deeply embedded in the mechanics. If you try something that is impossible, he's the one who makes the call as to where that is. For example, if you try to cast Magic Missile on the darkness, he's the one who says that the darkness isn't a valid...

I believe that's exactly what I said. I doubt I ever have. Hard to do if you don't actually use such encounters. None whatsoever. If a player, say, wants to convince and NPC to do something by talking nicely, I've got a suite of options. I might: *Give them what they want and move on...

Well, an okay leader gets people to do what he wants them to do, but a really good leader gets people to want to do what he wants them to do. Which again, applies equally to DMing and non-D&D examples. A good boss makes his employees feel like their contributions matter. Generally, part of...

That's where good DMing, not just DMing, comes in. As the DM, your creative vision needs to guide everyone. You need to convey it. You also need to solicit communication from players, and you're the one who has to incorporate their perspective into your vision. Avoiding misunderstandings...

Well, someone decides it at some point, yes? I'd much rather have the DM be deciding things in real time than some game writer deciding them years beforehand.

Are you suggesting that there is a difference between choosing one mechanical framework and another, or one mechanical framework and none? Not that this distinction would be applicable to either of the examples under discussion, but I still see no relevance to making it. I think it's fair to...

I agree that this isn't an appropriate use of Take 20. Just because there isn't a penalty for failure while you're concealing the item doesn't mean there's no penalty for failure.

It's not bad. It's the least of the three core book covers they've released, in my opinion, but still better than 4e by a mile. I prefer the style of books looking like mystical tomes rather than showing scenes, but at least the scene here is reasonably well-rendered.

I enjoyed it. Not going to change your life, but I thought it was very apt at capturing the appropriate tone, one that feels reverent to cheesy movies of a bygone age but accessible to a modern audience. And it's been big at the box office, fairly well reviewed, and they've announced plans for...

It means that the rules exist independently of their operators. One can DM well, or not well, and it's still DMing either way. That may be. However, in practice I think it's not only possible, but far more likely, for a DM to fail because he doesn't exercise the power of his position. Even...

Not true at all in my experience. There are always going to be less players than there are possible characters, and thus there is always the opportunity for "what if"-type questions. It's part of the game. What I've seen is players being analytical, looking at what worked and what didn't, and...

Aenghus Well said. Context does matter, and a sensible DM is going to recognize these sorts of factors when making rulings. Thus: Probably true. It is, however, your mistake to make as a DM.

I don't think there is a formula. I think it's a de novo list of rankings. Just as they decided that hit dice (how good it is at being what it is), CR (how dangerous it is to default PCs), and LA (how good of a PC it is) are all distinct factors in a monster, the monster's adjustment for...