Search results

I believe that if you have 2 skills and 1 does everything the other does and more than you don’t actually need 2 skills.

Can you name one thing someone proficient with nature should be able to do that someone proficient in survival shouldn’t be able to?

What’s distinct about them?

If anything medicine should have been a tool proficiency, maybe a Physicains Kit. The tools of physicians are stiches, surgical tools, antibiotics, ointments, other medicines and knowing when and how to use them safely. That at least covers diagnosing and treating. Then to make it really...

Kind of feels like survival and nature should be one skill.

I wouldn’t say widely, but you seem to mostly be restating what my post stated? Is that intentended? I’d suggest just focus firing in 99% of situations. Not sure why interception style matters? And while it is a bit better on lower AC characters, permanent AC normally stays within ~3 points...

Correct. This is being factored in. Possibly. There's still the question of focus fire potentially being better. In any case, this is not currently being factored in and would improve the defensive numbers especially for the higher accuracy scenarios.

One small note, i broke mine into categories but didn't fully rank them within each category. Shouldn't have much if any impact but just wanted it noted. To be even more accurate you could take the median skill rank of each of my categories and apply it to all skills for that category. Again...

So I did a similar comparison with sap and a shield vs no sap and no shield. 1 incoming attack ~45% damage taken 2 incoming attacks ~61% damage taken 3 incoming attacks ~67% damage taken 4 incoming attacks ~69% damage taken The corresponding EHP values (probably a bit more comparable to DPR...

I looked at SAP Mastery and I found the following to be good estimates of it's value in the following situations. 1 incoming attack ~62% damage taken 2 incoming attacks ~81% damage taken 3 incoming attacks ~87% damage taken 4 incoming attacks ~90% damage taken Note: These are rules of thumb as...

I think anyone could see from a mile away that Sigil was most likely doomed from the start. The concept just was never going to be a big winner.

IMO. Creating more problems than they solve is usually the goal of management. Because it’s hard to justify their jobs in they can’t point to something they improved.

There was one for 5e, but I think the guy running it closed it down due to expense. He posted some threads on it here.

What kind of goat do you have? …Oh you don’t have a goat? It’s honestly amazing humans can communicate at all.

Source please?

3-D always had the usability issue. Not for players so much as DMs. Much harder to design a 3-D encounter than a 2-D one. Players would have a big learning curve for 3-d as well.

For this encounter I think you could have set the characters in an arena with the wererats, rolled initiative and the characters would have still all died. The tactics didn’t help, but I don’t think anything realistically would have.

Yea but even with best play I don’t think it’d have mattered.