Search results

Right. People are talking about broad learning being good, and it is. It does help you be better. So does narrow focus, though. Focused repetition and mastery of a skill also helps you be better. Neither way is objectively better than the other, either. It's simply a matter of which way you...

Never mind.

Int is one of the best mechanically in my game, because the lore skills play prominent roles when I run. Low int scores really hurt. Also see Investigation which is one of the most important skills for an adventurer. And charisma is the strongest stat out there.

Why is it hard? Success is guaranteed since there's no time limit.

And that right there is taken out of context, both within that very post(since you cut out the context) and taking into consideration the dozens of posts directly to you contradicting your claim there. You fail miserably at context dude. (waits for you to ignore context again and demand that I...

Yeah. I love me my Undermountain. It's a dungeon and a location. :)

I don't know. AI seems to be able to hallucinate rules as well as a lot of players I've known over the years.

Not really. Moving 10,000 one pound rocks from one side of the road to the other takes a lot of effort, but a toddler could do it. It takes a lot of effort, but isn't at all hard to do.

Ever since 2e Undermountain has taken the cake for me. Since we're 5e specific, Waterdeep: Dungeon of the Mad Mage.

Do you know what context is? Because from your responses to me the answer is no. Hint: It involves...................multiple posts. :eek:

You were never told that. Your "proof" quote completely ignore the context of the conversation and all the other stuff I said to you.

And I'll point out how WotC never taught the younguns how to run high level, so there's a good chance they had a bad experience and stopped, or never started in the first place. High level has to be handled differently. Basically they sabotaged high level, saw not many people playing high...

Just hit point loss that is described involving skill, rather than physical damage or getting lucky. Parrying a close call that if not parried would probably have killed you. That's a hit for damage, but the hit point loss represents skill hit points.

There are some setting specific mechanics, but those aren't from the default rules. With the exception of maybe Planescape, since those exceptions are planar effects. Of course those effects are still present even if not playing Planescape, so those aren't really setting specific. What about...

I actually think the reverse is true. Setting is not defined by the mechanics. If it was, then Greyhawk would only be usable with the 1e rules since it would be defined by those mechanics. Instead setting defines the mechanics. Let's take elf. In the Greyhawk setting defined elf as +1 dex...

I just don't think that's a decision that will ever have to be made. We humans just don't change that quickly. They can go for both demographics today, and in 30 years when the current batch is the 30 year old group, they can go for both groups then as well.

Yeah. My Forgotten Realms never had a Sundering or Spell Plague. Yet it still has all the stuff in each edition and I have had no issues with that at all, despite not going out of my way to explain any of it.

I disagree. They are abstract only in the sense that they aren't specified until you use them, but all uses are sim. A giant scorpion attack that scratches you and inject poison simulates that experience. A sword swing that is parried a fraction of an inch before going through your throat...