Search results

Okay. You made it sound like any clever roleplay couldn't reveal what you didn't find with a perception roll. I see perception as what you see just standing there looking around. You might or might not notice the small gem sticking a little bit out from behind the jar on the desk, but if you...

Survival would not tell you about what is dangerous to eat or touch. It's about natural hazards like recognizing unstable rocks or quicksand, hunting for food, making/finding shelter, etc. Any overlap would be much more limited. Survival would let you know not to eat any mushrooms, because...

So if the outline of the trapdoor was possible to be seen in the rug and the perception failed, you would not allow the PC to lift the rug and find the trapdoor? But if it wasn't possible to see and the investigation failed and the PC wanted to lift the rug, you'd allow it?

I don't agree. The differences are distinct enough and we already have too much blending of skills. Getting rid of one more wouldn't be a good idea.

That's a house rule, though. lore is explicitly Nature. By RAW, nature is used to know about that fruit. If you look at the skills, Survival would let you know that there is quicksand in front of you and help you avoid it. That's it. Nature would let you know if there's likely to be more in...

That's excellent roleplaying. People very rarely sit silently while one person does all of the talking everywhere they go. Everyone likes to talk and interact, even those with low charisma scores. Critical Role does it very well. They all talk and interact with people, but often there are...

Depends on how you run the skills. For me perception is to notice things right out of the gate. You walk into a room and look around, do you see the trapdoor outline under the rug. If no and you search the room, you roll investigation. During your investigation you might lift the rug and...

I get the appeal of a system like this, but it really wouldn't work for me. I'm one of those DMs who looks at 1) who the person(s) being intimidated are, 2) who the PCs are, and 3) the circumstances of the moment. Going with number 1, Obolg the Fearless, champion of the king, will not be...

A ton. Survival tells you nothing about plants, terrain lore, animals, the weather, and natural cycles. Survival is for things like hunting, avoid hazards like quicksand, etc.

I suppose if you were supernaturally fast. Like 5x faster than a normal human, you might be able to untie your pouch, fish around for the right potion, pull it out and drink it inside 6 seconds. Something else you are overlooking is that a combat round, while played out in consecutive turns...

You realize we're talking about how long it would REALLY take, not about the rules, right? Only heavy crossbow loading takes anywhere near as much time as a potion really would take. Again, we weren't discussing the rules.

Thank you for proving my point. Half of the 6 second is just drinking the thing. That leaves 3 seconds to open a tied pouch, find the potion, and pull it out. There's no way. That's fine, though. This isn't about realism. Drinking potions in combat is unrealistic fun, so we do it. I don't...

Yep. A pouch you will have to untie, unless you've lost all the potions because you left it open, then find the one you are looking for, then pull it out, unstopper it and drink it. That ain't happening in 6 seconds.

It takes significantly longer. You have to open your pouch, pack or whatever that is closed tightly enough so that stuff doesn't fall out in combat, climbing, etc. Then you have to find the potion, and god help you if you have multiple potions in that container. Then pull it out, uncork it...

15 and few appendices I believe.

It had the basic MM monsters as well. There were the base monsters, and then by setting. So you hade MC 1-2, which were the base monsters. Then MC 3 was Forgotten Realms. MC 11 was also Forgotten Realms. Some settings had multiple releases.

Mine isn't on there!!! I like setting specific and general monster books. Not a huge fan of monster specific. My favorite monster book isn't really a book. It was the 2e Monstrous Compendium binder(s).

So you're saying that you disengage and aren't fighting when you do it. That's different. Not fighting=/= fighting. If you are engaged, say with a D&D monster right in front of you trying to bash your face in, you aren't drinking a potion without leaving yourself wide open to be killed.

If you want to die, sure. You aren't standing still just moving your arm a little to fence with someone.

I see very little difference between the two. You aren't fishing through your backpack, finding a potion, pulling it out and drinking it in 6 seconds, either. All while the enemy is trying to claw your face off.