Search results

I really like the idea of the E campaigns. It almost feels like the books we read. In those you rarely see the inexperienced PC become the uber-God-like PC. I just wish I could convince someone to do it. I, obviously, haven't done it nor do I truly know much about it, but I would think it would...

Sorry, I should've responded to your post directly, but I stupidly thought I had covered it with others. Your argument is the best I've seen so far. However, I still have problems with it. 1) Inconsistency. A normal double move allows you just to move. You can do nothing else that is not...

Ignore this, I was addressing the wrong person.

I have to disagree with this. There has to be a consistent framework. For example, you can take a full round action, a move + standard, or a standard + move. Now the actions may be different based on the situation, but the framework is consistent. I think what dirty's trying to get at is: what...

They've got bad ADD (boy, we've never heard that, have we?) then consider a sandbox approach. That is, have your first adventure ready, but be prepared (slightly) for them going off and doing their own thing. Basic new DM stuff: Don't let your players browbeat you. When you say something...

I don't see that as an exception. The 'drop to the floor' action is a free action. The Bluff check is a variable action, and the full round is based on general interaction. I read it as if you spend the round bluffing then it's a full action. If you don't then it isn't. If no one chooses to...

Good point. I don't think anyone here would argue AGAINST a DM being consistent. I don't do standard initiative, but simultaneous initiative. (Argument for doing it on one's turn: ) How much does it matter that it's not an immediate action? Is requiring the player do it on his int really that...

Re: the stray cat When I first GM'd I used to be more effusive in my descriptions. "Among the people gathered around, you see a tomato seller hawking his wares." Next thing I knew, the PCs would be interrogating the tomato seller to see if he's some sort of spy. Or they would side-track...

Oh, no, if someone can provide a valid or 'realism' argument (besides purely gamist) I have no problem with keeping it in. And, as I mentioned, I do allow a different withdrawal: step + move action, not just a double move. I can't tell you how many house rules I've changed at player's behest on...

(Presuming 3.5) I didn't think you could polymorph into an outsider. That said, back to the proper plane (per Dandu's post).

A Bluff check "encompasses acting, conning, etc." We've always gamed "playing dead" as a Bluff action vs. Sense Motive. I, personally, would allow a Perform check if the PC wanted (also opposed by a Sense Motive). First, "drop to the floor" is a free action. The Bluff check rule: "A Bluff check...

I wish I could tell you - it's bugging me. I thought about it, and I think a player pointed it out to me when looking at various elf types. So while I remember it saying something like "they don't sleep ... they trance ... and are aware of their surroundings" it might have been in that specific...

I, personally, don't buy a CdG as a 'battle'. I might give the PC a move silently and modify the listen accordingly, but that's all house. Wouldn't the Cleric dumping his armor be perhaps an even lower DC? And it takes awhile (1 min.) I could wear some jingling shirt and slowly walk to try to...

Really what? Yes, really, elves don't sleep. That's core - straight from the PH p. 15, right column, 2nd paragraph of Physical Description. Word for word of what you have. I thought everyone knew that. That's from 1e onward. Yes, really, I don't recall 'trance' ever being defined. Yes, really, I...

I don't know if this counts as a cool thing PCs have done, but it was a cool event. In a D&D style world, the party was chased down by a huge army of bandits. Remember the rule: "You don't have to outrun the bad guys, you just have to outrun the Dwarves." So all three Dwarven fighters were...

I fall into the sexist category. I don't like guys playing girls because they generally suck at it. But I don't bat an eye at a girl playing a guy. BTW, in 2e, the group was making rude jokes about a female player's cycle (she was eating it up) and said female characters should get extra...

That's what it is for me, too. As usually a GM/DM, I use character building as a tool for the world creation (many of my worlds are/can be created on the fly). I might have some amorphous idea, and then a character says "for my background, I ..." Then, suddenly, my world changes. Am I the only...

Believable? Ok, let's play a game of tag on the playground. If I go 1 min. w/o you tagging me, I win. You move 50, I move 30. You graciously let me go first (or I win initiative). Real Life: I run around the jungle gym. You follow, easily catch up and get a swat at me. You may or may not hit me...

EEK! They still have those? (I don't do Psionics) I hated those in 1e.

I would think the easiest thing to do is to take the sample lich in the MM (p. 166) and adjust from there (add 2 HD, etc.). However, the samples can sometimes be underpowered.