Search results

I mean technically they did. They say they still want you to use 'compatible with 5e' or '5th edition'. But it's no longer an explicit part of the license that you can't say 'D&D'.

I'd still avoid it using it on the cover, but it's probably fine to use it on a compatibility page. Really the only reason you couldn't under the OGL is that it was expressly forbidden as part of the license.

I chose the example I did specifically because it was player motivated. "Player A wants to do this. Players B through H are there because Player A is their friend and they want to help him. Player A is suddenly taken out of the equation due to something unrelated." Nothing to do with an...

I would argue that a lot of people were predisposed towards not wanting to like 4E because of the actions of the company. If only because there was so many cases of people's explanations of why 4E didn't feel like D&D being disconnected from the reality of the game. Though ultimately I don't...

It's also worth noting that the increases costs of printing and the prevalence of online storefronts make the market a very different place than it was in the 3E era. You don't have official D&D splatbooks sharing limited physical shelf space with poor cashgrab d20 games or weird stuff like the...

I think the biggest thing is that they wanted to maintain compatiblitly with 3rd party content, especially subclasses. When you change the numbers and levels of subclass features, it requires more effort to convert than just changing the first/second level to third. Having written and...

I mean the biggest thing is that there are cards that effectively take a player out of the game. If that happens to someone intricately connected to the current scenario you can completely derail things. For example, in the first Critical Role campaign if Percy had drawn from the deck and had...

It was Dancey's idea

Syderean is also excluded from the Black Flag SRD, which means the A5E remains the only 5e Aasimar in the CC.

I mean the notion of an alternate world from which Fairy creatures originate is hardly original to D&D. Even a lot of Feywild lore isn't exactly original to D&D, like Titania and Oberon.

Gosh I have booktuber brain.... I read this as 'combat involving sex' and was kind of concerned.

The warlock invocation 'Chains of Carceri' is also not in the new SRD, even renamed as far as I can see.

I notice that 'Feywild' as a proper noun is in this new SRD. So I guess that's not something WOTC seeks to protect as product identity.

I don't think we have anything to indicate what % of the planet the board game map depicts.

If I were going to port the Vale itself into the Realms/Faerun then I'd put it between Sembia and The Dales, near the Fallen Stars coast. That's where the map of Faerun most resembles the map from Conquest of Nerath, IMO. If I were going to put it anywhere in Realmspace I'd probably place it on...

How do you figure this?

Hrm. Some of these things might make for a good challenge run* but if I wanted a 1E feel then I wouldn't be playing 5E. *Gritty realism is one of those things that just feels ill-considered to me. Healing isn't the only thing a long rest does; the entire spell system is predicated on completing...

The same reason they play any game with character builds?

Okay but to be clear, you don't need to worry about that. For the purposes of publishing content, all you have to do is quote the citation that appears at the start of the CC SRD. Your own content can be released under any license you want, including the OGL, ORC, or no license at all.

It's not violence against humanoids. There are plenty of humanoids in the Monster Manual. The problem is attaching innate alignment to humanoid creatures.