Search results

Removing them would be my second choice. My first choice would be to make them actually short. True, but XP for killing monsters was excised 22 years ago. EDIT: Although TBF I do not have a 5e DMG. Did they add it back? I kinda agree with the general sentiment, but if any of my players had...

Sunday: Cancelled because of music festival.

Every edition except 3.0 (quickened spells, haste, time stop), 3.5 (quickened spells, time stop), 4e (minor-action spells, move-action spells, action points), 5e (bonus-action spells, time stop again)? Apart from using the word "segment" that sounds a lot like 2e initiative. I am not a 1e...

That may be the only change, but it is a vast change. IME it is the difference between short rests happening and....not happening. Obviously not. Nothing is "necessary". And so you want to keep them away from those who like them? True, but it would do it while making finesse weapons largely...

The first three words were pretty straight-forward - things we fought. Eldritch blast was because I, with the GM's permission, had reworked my character to include some Warlock levels, so I had something better to do than resort to acid splash when I was running low on spells (or was worried...

Thursday: More giants. Drakes. Eldritch blast!

That is what I would have voted for if I spotted the poll before Friday.

The latter. Just being Epic has no impact on levels prior to 10th. That said, the officially published Epic extension of Mystic Theurge does not implement the guidelines in the ELH, and is strictly worse than just alternating Wizard and Cleric levels or whatever. I would strongly recommend...

I do not have much useful to add, unfortunately. I agree with @MoutonRustique(Real); 4e never decided what "controller" actually meant (aside from "stuff the wizard did" - which in previous editions was not particularly limited). I have being trying to come up with a defining feature for them...

In my experience, "too much" gold makes a lot less difference then "too little". I once played in a campaign where the GM accidentally gave us several million gp at 11th level - it was a very large dragon hoard, and he thought we would only be able to cart off a small proportion of it before...

@MarkB, I just spent way too many posts going round and round on this with Parmandur. I have no interest in doing the same pointless dance with you.

Well the only confusion on my end is why WotC would want to make such an obviously daft change, and why you are so determined to defend the indefensible. Not that I will see any further defences you wish to make. Yes, exactly. If the best thing you can say about the rules change is "it won't...

One last try before I give up: Whatever "already existing structure" there is in the 2014 edition cannot possibly be there to prevent auto-success nat-20 naughty word, because nat-20 auto-success naughty word does not exist in the 2014 rules. Even if there are things DMs can repurpose for that, he only...

That may well be true. It is also completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. Hence the goalpost moving.

If Wikipedia is to be believed, it was six years between A Feast for Crows and A Dance With Dragons, and five years between A Storm of Swords and A Feast for Crows (compared with two-ish years between the first two volumes). Martin had slowed down significantly before the TV series even started...

I cannot see any compelling reason why the answer to this should not be "yes". Ardlings in the world could run the full gamut, and the player could choose whichever they like for their character. No. That way would lies madness at the table (well maybe not madness, but it would be annoying and...

Bring those goalpost back! The 2014 rules DO NO ALLOW A WIMPY WIZARD TO BECOME AN OLYMPIC CHAMPION. Purely by RAW and simple arithmetic. No guidance or DM busywork required. That is the whole point: This change either create stupid results in cases which uncommon, but given 5e's maths not that...

Normally I would agree with you. But if the rule's only possible effect is introducing "truly wacky edge cases" that is worthy of comment. Under the 2014 rules, simple arithmetic does the job automatically so the DM does not need to. If you want to do it anyway, that's up to you, but when I am...

So you are saying this change will never actually come in to play because the DM will have to do more work to prevent it? Then why make it in the first place? :confused:

As I feared, the party did not survive fighting the roper. We called the session early due to one PC being killed outright by the roper's first attack (it critted and then rolled above average for damage), and the other was rendered unconscious trying to retrieve his body. So we had a bit of a...