Search results

Can you see me if I'm on the other side of an opaque wall? No, so I can hide behind a wall, or a wide column, or a large statue, etc. Does the rule really need to explain that? It's clearly an exception. See p. 4 of the Basic Rules, "Specific Beats General": "You can't hide from a creature...

Yes, but... you're the one that asked him to replace the word "jargon". Faced with your abitrary restriction to replace a commonly understood English word, Mistwell came up with a less desirable alternative that still worked. Getting on his case for abiding by your restriction is hardly sporting.

Yes, but it isn't the same as 4e, where a "hard" task required a DC 15 check at one level, and the same "hard" task would require a DC 25 check if the character attempting it were higher level. Difficulty for most things scaled with character gains, so you weren't actually getting any better...

It's missing because it's unnecessary. Page 42 was only required due to scaling difficulties. Bounded accuracy means you only need to remember 10/15/20 (maybe 25/30 on the outside), and those DCs will work throughout the life of a character. A couple of other things from 4e: - Monster design...

If you think that's bad, look at the names for Japanese-derived monsters. Tanuki is the name for a raccoon dog, and also the name for upright-walking, shoe-wearing talking spirit raccoon dogs. Kitsune refers to foxes, and also to magic-wielding talking multi-tailed fox spirit creatures. Same...

Well, I'm glad someone does! ;)

Oh... my... god. Now I have the idea for the most frightening adventure... EVER. Players, meet... Bozo the Lich.

Actually, dire wolves *are* just giant wolves (which is what they actually were, more or less); worgs are intelligent giant wolves. They're separate.

Those are mostly giant animals now. The dire wolf was a real thing; there were never dire bears, dire apes, dire wolverines, dire camels, dire penguins, etc. 3e misapplied the term by using it generically for any extra-large, mean animal. I'm glad they've undone that. Here's my nitpick...

Uh… who's treating combat as a tactical tabletop disconnected from the rest of the game world again?

Yeah, that feels like an oversight. The tarrasque has always regenerated like crazy, right? That's part of its schtick. I mean, the crapton of hit points is certainly going to help... Yes, but to make a DC 30 Con save, the tarrasque has to roll a natural 20. Did they mean to make the DC that...

Tarzan not included in the list in the list of ERB's suggested works, when the main character is the epitome of the barbarian class? (Athletics, nature skills, lack of armor, and especially the frenzied bouts of rage -- it's almost like ERB was a D&D player who traveled back in time to write...

How many rogue "subclasses" did the 4e Player's Handbook contain? Two. How many did the 3e/3.5e PHB contain? Well, there really weren't any, so… one? And you're disappointed that the 5e PHB contains three rogue subclasses, the combined total of the previous two editions? There's only so much...

I don't know that that's even necessary. I've already played decent fighter/mages -- mountain dwarf wizard, multiclassed war cleric/wizard -- without a special subclass. With proficiency/attack bonuses being leveled across classes (so attack bonuses don't fall behind), the wizard's higher hit...

Yeah, what's with that? That's certainly not what I imagine when I think of Platinum. Still, the models look great. I may have to get that Tiamat.

No one's talking about Mike's mention of official conversion guides for previous D&D editions? I find this much more exciting than whether one version of fighter will do slightly more damage than another. :p I know there's been talk of conversion guidelines before, but I don't recall it being...

The 5e sorcerer can cast any of a limited number of known spells using daily slots; that mechanic is identical to the 3e sorcerer (and the 5e sorc adds built-in metamagic and bloodline features). The 5e wizard prepares spells from a spellbook to cast with daily slots, the same as the 3e wizard...

It wasn't presented as a serious objection; I was actually agreeing with Mistwell's main point, which some seem to have missed (including Mistwell!). However, calling advantage a +5 bonus isn't really accurate, and I was just pointing that out before stating my overall agreement. Thus, nitpick.

That doesn't address the point, which is that offered the option to drop two points on ability scores, you can drop those on dump stats; "requiring" that they later add two points to their main stats isn't a counterbalance. If you want everyone to take a feat at 1st level, it'd be easier to just...

One nitpick: Advantage is worth +5 at most; it's effectively +1 to +5, depending on the base odds of success. But yeah, War Caster looks really good for certain character concepts, but it's certainly not an auto-pick.