Search results

No. It doesn't. It enhances setting consistency by ensuring that a particular threat is experienced how it should be, within the world. Because our abstractions of power and danger are flawed. The world isn't. We should adjust our abstractions in order to accurately represent the threat a thing...

There is no such thing for Fighters. They just do get better at things because the rules say so. You are now inventing post hoc explanations to justify why the mechanics would be the way they are. Numerous times, you have rejected this kind of reasoning as utterly unacceptable, as incompatible...

Given I literally quoted the thing you used as the basis of previous arguments, I don't agree. At all, in fact. So, what was wrong with the New Simulationism definition, that you should reject it now when it is inconvenient to you?

An absolute statblock is universally true. A goblin is this one set of data, always. The abstraction is the one and only abstraction valid for capturing what "a goblin" is. It is absolute. A relative statblock is...relative. it represents what a goblin means in context.

Fighter 6: Ability Score Improvement Fighter 14: Ability Score Improvement Fighters are literally better at improving their physical and mental capacities than any other profession. Rogues are slightly better, as they get an additional ASI at Rogue 10. No diegetic explanation is given for this...

No. The concept remains exactly the same. It is the abstraction which changes.

"6. If your abstractions do not match your fictional world, de-abstract until they do." You are demanding that the fictional world hew to the abstraction, rather than the other way around.

It wasn't a request for perfection. It was pointing out that the specific thing you speak of is, in fact, part of the current system and I've never once seen you complain about such a thing before today. I don't--at all--demand perfection in simulation. I am perfectly comfortable with imperfect...

And yet they do. They literally do. In 5e as much as any WotC edition--indeed, moreso! You change the nature of your physical being every time you hit not just an arbitrary point of growth overall, but an arbitrary point of growth within one specific discipline. Consider a character who gains...

Should it not, then, be a top priority to fix this issue at a design level, since doing so at the GM's end is a Herculean task? Should it not be a top priority to fix something so important and widespread and aggressively in-your-face? Indeed, should it not be a top priority for the simple...

Agreed. And while I certainly recognize that there's a major element of taste in that for some things, I think the major dividing line for a lot of people will be whether or not something violates their visual intuition of whether things work or don't. We see things that can't fly outside of...

I don't think it's anywhere near that ambitious. Remember that the skill challenge and the combat have completely different goals. The skill challenge's goal is merely to survive and/or escape. It's the Fellowship running from the Balrog. Is that incompatible with Merry later getting the first...

And yet it is--very much--part of the expected experience for D&D-alike games that one grows so great in power that things which were previously a major threat become so trivial, you swat them away like flies. For goodness' sake, BECMI went there--but did so with ridiculous unreachable levels...

Certainly not, since the claim isn't true. It's often repeated though. Keep in mind, Lanefan is of the opinion that a creature cannot ever have more than one, singular, statblock. Unless it's a PC, then it can have a statblock that changes over time as a result of context. I mean, I would say...

Though, as noted, these things still have strokes based on the leading-edge vortex. (Didn't see this message earlier, otherwise I'd have added it to the previous.) That's really the issue here. The leading-edge vortices face the wrong way for these wings, and these wings aren't the right shape...

No, but having your limbs and tail pointing the normal way would. It's like...imagine someone built a car, with all of the seating, windshield, mirrors, safety features, etc., all pointing one direction....and then the engine, steering/driving tires, and brakes pointing in the opposite...

It's the age-old problem of sieges. If you have the resources inside--or can get them through unblocked routes, such as a siege only by land when the defenders have ports--then the attackers have to actually breach the defenses, which is often a Herculean and unenviable task. The attackers then...

We see objects without wings flying all the time. Bullets. Missiles. Etc. And the idea that a creature can simply move by willing itself to move, while not real, doesn't actually conflict with any basic intuitions of how things physically function. Wings on backwards directly contradicts...

6th: eyebite (have used myself, quite effective), Tasha's bubbling cauldron (for more support benefits) 7th: finger of death of course, but also crown of stars and power word pain 8th: maddening darkness, dominate monster (does 8 hours really make that much difference?), or befuddlement if you...

I just...do? It's completely obvious to me which picture came from 3e and which came from 4e. The details, the style, just make it completely obvious. It's like asking how one can tell the difference between a pencil sketch and a painting. I can tell because pencil lines are different from...