Search results

Only 3 PCs is great. Even 4 starts to be a lot. 2 is not quite enough, you don't have that "group" feeling. 3 means everyone gets to do a lot of stuff.

Hi, and welcome :) I haven't read the other replies, here's mine: 1) 5E is indeed a pretty cool rules system 2) I don't think it lacks options. 3) losing DEX bonus to AC: I think it's good that it was not carried over. Uselessly complex, IMO. Not that it doesn't make sense. Just that it's...

That's the gist of why I raise my eyebrows to this alleged problem so many people appear to have. As a DM, there simply was no magic item shop, nor were wands of cure light wounds available at every street corner. Problem solved.

Bearded, hair-chested, female dwarves: there is no substitute.

Especially in chainmail bikinis, admit it ;-D

Is it the players or the PCs that crawl in the mud? Because, if the former, we're talking extreme LARP ;)

Okay. We seem to have a dissimilar gaming style then in this respect then. To me, D&D is a RPG first and foremost, and as such I cannot imagine for one second a party of PCs agreeing to the kind of strategy you're suggesting, let alone the halfling accepting to enter the barrel. Our group simply...

Reminds me of the bag of rats trick. (I assume you're kidding, of course.)

FYI I played with my son this weekend and I used the "impenetrable sphere" option (no save). It was interesting in that they were swarmed by zombies and this power of course allowed them to flee the scene and make it for a safe haven. I wonder however if this is what I would use for more...

I would not opt for this solution because my intention is not only to nerf Turn Undead to make undead battles playable or not requiring DM intervention to adapt them to parties with access to Turn Undead; but also because I do not like the cinematic of the undead fleeing. I prefer the undead...

Thanks for the proposal. I like the idea of having a zone that repulses the undead, as noted above. I find your options a tad complicated (not that much, mind you, just in a game design sense): vulnerability, advantage on attacks and saves, some undead forced to flee but not others, end of...

I'm not too fond of the damage-only option. As for the undead cowering in place, I feel it doesn't address my desire to avoid a win button: the undead can be attacked one by one and dispatched easily, even if they get to defend themselves once they are attacked (individually).

Another interesting idea. I like the fact that it is an ongoing zone effect, as opposed to an instantaneous effect that possibly lasts for a certain time. I also like that the undead might be driven crazy by the discomfort they feel, choosing to swarm the cleric. With disadvantage of course...

Interesting option, and simple. GX.Sigma : how would you apply this condition? I see a few options: a) instantaneous effect when the cleric whips out his holy symbol. Then, sub questions: (i) save or no save? and (ii) limited area of effect (e.g. 30') or line of sight? b) continuous effect as...

I started playing with my won. If that isn't cool, I don't know what is :)

I hear you bud. I think it's a weird thing to say, really. Like, "I won't listen to you, and what I decide is the only thing that stands". In what spheres in life is one allowed to impose his will in this way? So yes, I agree, this inflexible approach is not what I hope for from a DM that I...

I believe he took up residence during spring break in his cottage by the lake of blood on the 335-th layer of the Abyss.

I'll start by reposting what I was toying with in the other thread. Option 1: From the Lightbringer cleric alternate Turn Undead in the Return to Castle Ravenloft module, turn undead can be used as usual or can be replaced by Destroy Undead, a power that damages undead in a 30-foot radius...

From this thread, I was discussing why Turn Undead is not satisfactory to me. You may or may not disagree but I'd like to leave this argument out of this thread (you can take it to the other thread if you wish). Here, I'd like to hear proposals or discussions on an alternate rule for turn...

No offense taken, although yes I did (erroneously) conclude that you were adressing my - and other's - point of view on limiting player access to certain content. My sarcasm was meant to be somewhat humorous, to get my point through. I hope that I, in turn, did not offend. This said, you ideas...