Search results

Is it intended that player's are limited to the PHB and Basic Rules for trinkets, and that the Elemental Evil Trinkets and Curse of Strahd trinkets are verbotten? Not like trinkets ever have much bearing on the game, but still.

lolwut I think you've misunderstood the SRD. It's a designer reference, not a player one, and it's filled with gaps and holes (e.g. references to abilities and spells that are not in the SRD), and there are things in the Basic Rules that aren't in the SRD. I'm not sure in what sense you believe...

There's Kender, lovecraftian stuff, space stuff, and tons of places that aren't on Toril. There's not, like an official Dark Sun sourcebook or anything, but it's pretty clear they're not overly policing this stuff lore-wise. That said, if someone's been taken down for not being Faerûnian...

Surprise? They don't even enforce the Forgotten Realms requirement right now.

I couldn't think of a more lawful neutral post. I refer you to the great Don Norman: EDIT: now that doesn't mean Kalani can fix that. Skerrit might not even be able to fix it. BUT WE NEED TO STOP BLAMING PLAYERS. Players aren't in charge of designing a comprehensible rules system or organizing...

I'm curious how this goes. Death House doesn't feel like it'd be particularly fun if you've already read it. Much of the magic is in the discovery.

If you read Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide and You! it makes explicit exceptions for DMG races. Kalani's right, it's just that her rationale was wrong.

WARNING LINKS CONTAIN SPOILERS woops here's the crest: Strahd's Crest I wasn't going to post the letter because I figured it was too much verbatim copypasta, but is Wizards really going to C&D me for it? Probably not. Here it is: Strahd's Letter

Oh, one other thing that I think is important: for Ravenloft, I think it's extremely valuable for players to have a reason to get back to Faerûn. They need some kind of connection: kids, wealth, oaths etc. Usually players play murder hobos with tentative connections to the world around them, but...

WARNING LINKS CONTAIN SPOILERS I'm putting together a DM's Kit for my personal use; it's a bit tough to share because of copyright stuffs despite it being free; but I'm thinking this list of Things To Find is arguably fair use. I prefer handing out cards to players when they find stuff and let...

This is a pretty good start. You might also want to mix in a little monk, since vampires traditionally bring speed and power without weapons. Plus the Way of the Long Death subclass lets you suck your enemies blood when you reduce them to zero HP, and the Way of Shadow gives you a bunch of...

I don't mind this, but it might be better as a fighting style rather than a feat. Versatile Style When you attack with a versatile weapon wielded in one hand, you gain a +1 bonus to the attack roll. When you hit with a versatile weapon you are wielding in two hands, add +1 to the damage roll.

If you have photoshop, you can import PDFs and extract the image data pretty easily.

This sort of attitude and strawmanning is really unnecessary. Literally nothing you said is in Pauper's post. It's fine to disagree but there's no need to be a jerk.

Obviously the DM should use the tools available to be properly informed. Here's a list of those tools: (this space intentionally left blank) You have misrepresented my statement. I said a DM has to make a judgement call on what is the most fun for the table, and that to ensure no one player...

This depends a whole lot on what a reward does. If a reward is nifty and small, I wouldn't make a big deal about it. If the reward was far above what seems reasonable for the character's level (like a flying mount, or a legendary item), I'd want to know the source. If the source was shady and...

Sarcasm appreciated. It's not so much screw the players as "these are the sort of things you need to compromise on to reap the benefits of OP." It'd be nice if the AL had this, but it's far from required.

Unless you're credited as one of the authors, any statement of author intention is made up unless you can cite somewhere an author said it. YMMV balance-wise, but to say it's intended one way or another without proof is dishonest.

I'm considering the following house rules for ranged combat to make it a bit more balanced risk/reward compared to melee. Would love feedback: Puts your guard down: Using a ranged attack when an enemy is within 5 feet of you does not grant disadvantage, instead it provokes an opportunity...

Citation needed.