Search results

Didn't even have to think: Manual of the Planes. I don't use most of 2024 (and almost certainly wouldn't like it if they made one for it), but that's my standard in any RPG. Whichever book they have that expands the setting to tell me all about the other worlds or dimensions in it is the book...

I'm very conscious of the balance between the various classes dependency on short rests. I've found that the full "adventuring day" only happens in dungeon exploration. It doesn't happen when you end up with one or two random wilderness encounters. It doesn't happen when you are about town. And...

Thanks for the feedback! The point is to make something a little more powerful than the 2024 counterspell, that evokes the concept of the 2014 counterspell without its issues. Do you have any suggestions for tweaks or alternative mechanics?

For those of you with experience, how do you think this setup would work for my (2014) game? 1) Use 2024 counterspell rules. 2) Also make a 5th-level spell that is basically the 2014 counterspell, except you always have to roll (no auto-success), but you have advantage on the roll if cast in a...

Reading through some of this thread has convinced me to adopt the 2024 version. I don't think the 2014 version has actually ever come up for us yet (our higher level games have been self-contained theme adventures, and there weren't much in the way of high-level PC casters, and I never thought...

That did point me towards the answer! (Thanks!) In this case, I don't think it's taking into account the petrifying effect at all. The Medusa's hp and AC give it a defensive CR of 4. There is no debate there, thats how it works. The attack routine also gives it an offensive CR of 4. So, if we...

I think the simple fact that people tend to start at low level has more impact on the overall dynamic than it is given. If "choose the starting level" was given prominence in all DM guidance about starting new campaigns, and a reasonable number of official campaigns started above 9th level...

Sorry for perhaps being a complete idiot here, but how is the single pie graph supposed to work when the Basic line entirely overlapped the other line? Wouldn't you need to superimpose it to make it "work"? At least I'm looking at it and not getting how 60+ years is supposed to fit on a 50 year...

I watched that video and found the details very interesting. What I'm trying to figure out (and I'd love any assistance) is exactly how they are valuing spell effects over 2nd-level. The way spell levels should be valued for monster math is using double the multi-target value--because that's...

I matched out the effects of the different fighting styles and upgrade feats for different classes, took into account drawbacks (free-hand access, investment required, number of magic items required for equal effects, etc), and here's what I decided. I keep the rules as-is except that I allow...

While I use it extensively, one negative for me is that they sometimes update products you buy with significant revisions to the original text, not just rules errata. For instance paragraphs, and even columns, in some 5.0e books have been removed or replaced for various reasons. So anything on...

I don't think I would let any single casting of a spell force a creature to make more than one concentration save per turn. That seems to not be intended in the overall way the rules all fit together, even if the strongest interpretation of the rules would make it work that way with eldritch...

Another quick question. Did it seem like the AC/Attack Bonus/Save DC shifted with the hp and damage? Ie, replacing those lines on the table would more or less approximate what they seemed to be doing with 2024? Or are those just for the hp and DPR? I'm considering trying to make some line graphs...

I just want to point out that the quoted posts tell us the absolutely critical information in interpreting why WotC monsters stats seem "off" compared to the table in the DMG but actually correctly (mostly) follow the rules in there. To my everlasting frustration it seems that many people...

I just want to point out that none of that stuff is Forgotten Realms specific. The Forgotten Realms multiverse is the same one that Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and now in 5e even Eberron exists within. In fact, many of the names appeared first in Greyhawk sources. Just one of those little pet peeves...

Interesting. I'm considering whether to use that rule, and that's making me lean towards at least giving it a try. I'm not terribly interested in people carrying camel-backs full of healing potions to use all the time, but I'm very interested in seeing those potion miscibility rules potentially...

Did drinking potions as a bonus action have any appreciable effect on battles? And were you applying that to all potions (per DMG rules) or just healing potions, since you started before the DMG was out?

Thanks! As far as methodology, did you run both versions (2014 and 2024) of the same creatures through the creation rules?

Thanks!

In 3e a +1 to hit was considered equivalent to a +2 damage. Does it not work out that way in 5e? Because by that metric a rare (+2) weapon is worth about 6 damage, while that +2d6 vicious is worth 7, so definitely close to rare than the 9 damage for very rare.