Search results

In my games, the Cleric is not actively channeling a God's power. The cleric is tapping into the Divine power source. A god acts as mentor to the cleric if they swear oaths to them, but has no power to turn off the connection. Gods and mortal religious entities certainly don't advertise that...

What did they do? More crucially, why did they do it? What story beat did the player want to evoke? I would hope we're not assuming reactionary players who do stuff "just because".

We're just not going to agree on this. We've had this discussion before, going back to the "geniuses with 5 Int" thread, and I don't think our perspectives have changed.

In my games, I frame the next scene based on the current setup and the results of the resolution engine. Sometimes that framing ends up being consequential, but that's the nature of building out an ongoing story. I do not judge or evaluate. I extrapolate.

"X Int = 10X IQ" is from a 40 year old Dragon article, and doesn't represent the realities of modern neotrad play. Character concept is the core for all PCs and NPCs, stats and classes and such are simply things we layer on to give them a resolution engine. The stats imply, but they do not model.

Yours, maybe.

And to clarify, when you say consequence, you mean that you expect the GM to measure your actions and enforce a consequence on your character?

So just to be clear, in your games, the presence or absence of class and levels is something that can be determined by PCs and NPCs in the fiction, and can be discussed in-character without opening a metagame channel?

Are you asserting things like levels and classes actually exist in the fiction outside of a LitRPG style of play?

Relatively few characters mix both melee attacks and spell attacks, so I’d be inclined to price it out like a wand with maybe a 10-15% price increase. Since 5e doesn’t have that level of granularity within its rarity tiers, it’s be inclined to rate it the same rarity as a wand of the war mage...

This. It might be a problem of improper modeling, but it isn’t a gameplay problem.

Honestly, this feels like they shouldn't call different editions of D&D "D&D" because the game changed argument again, just under a different topic. Don't worry so much about names or the words being used. Worry about the context. What Intelligence means in 5e is different than what it meant...

I, personally, choose how to narratively justify my characters’ stats in 5e. But no else at the table has any standing to decide whether or not I’m doing it right.

The problem here is "matter" does a lot of work. I personally don't think "matter" should be "other players have the right to police how I declare actions for my character".

I've had centaur archers (classical!), but rarely use mounted combatants in 5e. The rules around using a mount are a bit "handwavey" and loose for an option that should be prevalent and quite strong, so easier to just not get involved with it.

Class that can take any class feature as feats. https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L7MxaZV26WwHwzaP-eD

Most questions about RPGs, especially trad-leaning ones, are ultimately questions about the division of authority between GMs and players, and how much and how the rules exist to facilitate those questions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

I'd argue that if the paladin character doesn't get near oathbreaker status at a few points, why did they bother playing a paladin in the first place? Oathbreaker isn't a status condition indicating bad play, it should indicate that you played your character to the hilt and paid the price...

That's the great thing about natural language; we can all be wrong simultaneously!