Search results

I appreciate your analogy, and I'm not saying it lacks merit. However, there is a big difference between an open ladle of grease from the kitchen and a body wrapped in layers of moist skin. The butter is also a good point, but again, that's just a matter of perception. If you perceive the...

Yes, to be honest most of the people I know who like 3.5 like it just for reasons like this. Very few one shot kills, everyone can contribute on semi-equal footing, rules are clearly laid out with a minimal amount of ambiguity, you don't have to wonder if x can do y as it is usually stated as...

Eh..instead of Light vs. Darkness...Continual Light vs. Continual Darkness. Now I have to put up with Daylight that isn't really daylight and Darkness that will make a dark room brighter. Half of the damage spells wind up with your target saving for no damage it seems. Just bugs me

/Rant_On They seem to have tried to remove or reword every spell that had some unintentional use that would allow it to be cool and allow players to actually be creative. Now each spell has to fit into some cookie cutter mold of "it does this and this only." This isn't even mentioning the way...

From a Fire Safety Manual Classes of Fire 1. Ordinary combustibles: paper, cloth upholstery, trash, plastic, wood… 2. Flammable liquids, gasses and greases: kerosene, oil, paint, cleaning, fluids, cooking oil… 3. Energized electrical components: appliances, wiring…...

Sorry, I was vague...in 1st ed it could be cast on a torch or anything else for that matter. However, "we" (being my groups) never would have expected that torch to just burst into flames. Kind of like throwing a bucket of melted fat on a torch, it's not going to flare up, it's going to go out...

In previous editions it was a fatty substance (I think the material component was butter, pork fat, etc). And it was permanent. Natural fatty grease is flammable, so in 1st ed. we always treated grease from the spell as flammable. But not something you could cast on a torch...something you...

I guess I'm a bit lenient on this one. I would have reminded them. Because while the players may forget this detail in the excitement... The characters NEVER would have forgotten to loot the enemy. Especially not an enemy that appeared to be well equipped.

I'm currently only playing, but if you look at my history, I do both about equally.

If someone has a reasonable thematic reason to do it...I'll allow it. However, if their "thematic reason" boils down to "I want to do 1000 points of damage in a round" then my answer will always be no. And that's regardless what is in the books. Now, don't get me wrong. I have no problems...

Long ago I accepted that regardless what balance may exist in the game system, the ultimate balance comes from the players and gamemasters. If you play with people who want to unbalance your game, they will manage that no matter what you are playing. Myself? I feel the game is currently...

Hehe, hey...I said shouldn't "always" be charge over and hit the guy until he stops moving...why, session before last I jumped over and hit the guy until stopped moving. See...I'm a big believer in variety.

Agreed...it's not what you can manage to make the system do with a few loopholes and stacking of abilities. It's what the GM allows you to come to the table with.

Fair enough. For what it's worth, I do think characters that are without a means to engage in combat are going to find themselves left out of certain parts of the game. However, those characters who have no social ability may find themselves left out of other parts of the game. In a general...

No...all of this is... I'll make my point and drop it. With the introduction of a robust skill system, including a large number of social skills and many social class abilities....D&D very much worked to expand it's scope beyond "when do I get to kill something again" and on to the heady fun...

I've never hesitated to expand my use of D&D beyond "generic" fantasy. I'm sorry if you think I'm doing it wrong, but I've certainly had a lot of fun over the years, so have my players.

It seems that a number of people won't find my opinion to be of use, because I house rule things I don't care for...often. One of the things I don't care for is the cross-class skill system. Very few of the skills in my game are considered cross-class skills. If you want to be a barbarian...

I voted no, because it's never come up. But if someone really wanted to use Psionics, I would allow it.

Actually with all of the support material out for Published settings, I figured they'd have a strong lead. I kind of thought Homebrewers like myself were a dying breed.

I agree...darkness is annoying. For that reason, I don't overuse it. Once in 7 or 8 game sessions darkness might come into play. If my players want to cast it, they know what's coming. Usually they won't cast it unless they have a reason to believe they'll have an advantage (one person has...