Search results

Like having a good alignment? Because otherwise you're just deliberately murdering people for, at best, convenience when you have an effective alternative... Having characters in the game world react to how the game world behaves is the opposite of meta, since meta is reacting to things that...

The problem is that half-assedly adding rules for it based on personal experience with people of questionable fitness and adaptation isn't adding realism. It's more of the same stuff like the current rules that say that the average adventurer can't complete modern tourist hiking trails without...

Because presenting a single instance of personal experience is a widely known informal fallacy. Humans are really bad at recalling things accurately, let alone at presenting a balanced view of a field that doesn't just cherry pick the bits of evidence that support their view. You even admit to...

... all of the time. The problem is that if inflicting nonlethal harm is so easy that you can always do it... why do you ever kill anyone? Simply because it's inconvenient to take prisoners? As for narrative control? There's a mile of difference between deciding that you have an accident, and...

Then you might need to read the exhaustion rules again. I can't see wearing armor for a day making you die. Everyone repeat after me: using the exhaustion track for anything except simulating death by dehydration or starvation is stupid, because the effects are irrelevant and overly harsh. Why...

I agree with Saelorn's stance somewhat: it seems morally undefensible to simply kill opponents if knocking them out is risk-free and has 100% effectiveness. Unfortunately that means that you have to deal with the logistics of taking prisoners and returning them to town for justice...

Right... so I'm not sure what you were playing here, but it sounds like you were playing on an open-plain-thats-full-of-concealment-with-no-terrain with foes that were all slower-moving than you and could never succeed at perception checks, alongside some characters who were optimized to be...

I find that most of the rules for mundane activity end up being distinctly unheroic. As in - following them gives you results that are below what you expect of real-world ordinary humans. Almost as though the designers didn't do any actual research and simply spit-balled numbers.

You think that you are removing something from the character when you do this, but you're actually not. The armor thing is totally irrelevant: the dex based character may as well not have heavy armor proficiency for all that they use it. Similarly with the melee weapon vs ranged weapon. It's not...

Hiding to avoid damage all the time is stupid. It just results in damage being focused on other characters. Since the rogue is one of the most durable characters (uncanny dodge, evasion, battlefield mobility), he's better off wasting enemy actions than simply being a non-target. Hiding to...

I think that the sensible thing to do is to just describe what cataclysmic events caused the person to miss when they rolled a 1. You don't need to add mechanical punishment. After all a 1 is always a miss. You could literally be a master archer standing 5 feet from a barn, roll a 1 and miss...

The only requirement is that it cannot be whispered. Also, most of the spells that explicitly note what is needed for the somatic and material components could be done unobtrusively. Is it really impossible to hide "pointing at someone and whispering a message"?

Sure, and I'm not going to make him waste time and resources playing "guess the correct noun" either.

As a DM, I don't want my characters to fail at things they try to do purely because of semantics. If you see a wand fly by, and you want to dispel whatever magic is making it fly, cast dispel magic and tell me what you're trying to achieve, and I'll have it shoot for whatever is appropriate, be...

The thing is that all the high powered folks have to worry about opponents who can appear out of nowhere and meteor swarm them (or worse). So in my mind, society is split into the low powered guys who nobody really cares about, and therefore get to get on with their lives, the high powered guys...

Ditch alignment and you're golden. Creatures have their default attitudes (which are broadly described by the alignment of their species sometimes, but about half the time alignment is just drawing battle-lines) and then have their own quirks, behaviors and views on top of that. Fundamentally...

What makes the secret such a big deal anyway? The king might get tetchy. I can't see elves being the sort of individuals who are going to rebel just because the guy who might take over the throne in 400 years time is illegitimate...

I can't say how your paladin should behave. All I can say is how I would play it. Covering up the lie is betraying the honesty, courage, honor and duty components of the devotion oath. So I would do the quest (partially in deference to the DM, and partly because it will help in future). Then I...

Actually I think that's a very good ruling. I actually like that the spell requires the copper pieces to remain on the subject's eyes.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a cheat". If you don't actually have a logical argument, then don't make an argument. Don't try to substitute ad-hominem attacks in place of logic. Meanwhile: * The rules refer to the mount taking actions, and do not mention the rider spending an action to...