Search results

"This suit of armor is reinforced with adamantine, one of the hardest substances in existence. A razor made from it can even shave a dwarf."

No. You don't get to tell me what I suggested. You asked for examples of a mechanical consequence, and the only thing I "suggested" was that here is an example of one possible mechanical consequence. By the way, why are you fighting so hard to avoid responding to the second possible...

The thing is, it's not even suboptimal. If the goal is to rescue the princess, stopping to rest and let her die is about the least optimal choice you could make. Optimization is not just about combat.

A lot of people play for the social situation and to be challenged. For many it is very enjoyable to meet and overcome challenge and adversity. It is incorrect to remove challenge from the purpose of play, because there are many purposes for playing D&D. It's perfectly fine for you and your...

So I've imagined all the times my players pressured themselves into moving on, because it was possible there would be some sort of consequence that they came up with on their own? All of those times never happened?

That's some politician level of word twisting there. I never said anything about "should" with Oathbreaker, and I never mentioned the death domain cleric. You asked for an example of a mechanical consequence, so I provided two. You've blatantly twisted the first beyond belief at this point...

The Death Domain cleric, yes. The Oathbreaker is DM applied to a PC paladin. It's in the 5e PHB. Breaking an oath =/= villain. It can be a villain, but it can also be someone who made a large and tragic mistake and seeks to atone.

It's in the DMG for a reason, and that reason is that the DM applies it to the PC, not the player. It's not a subclass meant for players to pick. It's a consequence for narrative action or narrative and mechanical action. Since you wouldn't respond to it in the other post. Here's another...

You need to back that up with some facts, because I've taught a bunch of folks who came to D&D from video games and zero of them were like that. 🤷‍♂️ It's almost as if they understood the difference between a sit down roleplaying game and a video game. I blame both Critical Role and their...

If the players have agreed to play their character in a roleplaying version of the game, then they will not ignore narrative consequences. For example, a good party isn't going to rest and let the princess die just because they aren't at 100% resources. That would be bad faith play for a good...

Yes, and it's not the only board game with narratives. Runebound is another one where it's both a board game and a narrative is happening. And Arkham Horror.

It wasn't empty. It was open ended deliberately. Unless the group has agreed to play a boardgame instead of a roleplaying game when they play D&D, narrative consequences will almost always matter in some way. How will depend on the party and the details of the scenario. The consequences...

I have a few of those. The Stormlight Archives one and another that I can't remember. They were fun, but not so much fun that I wouldn't rather play D&D or a better board game.

I really don't know how you got there from "a few tweaks," but okay.

There were supposed to be two, but my morning brain forgot to type in Lords of Waterdeep. :p

I rarely reply twice to the same post, but since you've already seen my other response... There are two exceptions to the D&D adjacent board games that I forgot about. Tyrants of the Underdark and Lords of Waterdeep. They don't play in anything like a D&D like manner, the way Gloomhaven and...