Search results

A featless game would get me to play something besides a Variant Human and I'd exclusively stick to the full caster classes like Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard so I'd have interesting things to do.

This is definitely one of the more confusing rulings in a game filled with awkward natural language, and one of the reasons why I've stopped paying attention to the Sage articles. It's a punch; unless you take like a dozen levels as a Monk, it won't even be as good as a longsword. In a game...

If you want something that works well, then your best bet for a good quality conversion is to take the time to do it yourself and tailor it to your group. I've never played Zeitgeist, but 4E and 5E are such vastly different games that I can't see any generalized conversion document working well...

The game isn't designed to be gridless (don't believe there are any rules for it, everything has super precise measurements, there's rules related to positioning, etc.), just like third and fourth edition, but it can work. I wouldn't object to playing in a gridless game, but I wouldn't care...

So your players say it's easier to hit monsters than other editions. How do they feel about that? Do they like it? Or do they find it makes things too "easy"? Maybe you don't need an overall AC increase, but use this as an opportunity to make combat a bit more unique and give the opponents...

If it's a brand new player who has never played any edition of D&D before, I'd try to run them through their own session as a level 1 character just to learn the game. D&D is stupidly complicated and they don't need the burden of leveling up and making lasting mechanical choices while still...

I think it's okay because D&D has (outside of 4E and maybe Basic?) never been known for being a balanced game. I think the typical D&D fan cares more about the "feel" given by their interpretation of the rules rather than the actual rules themselves. They don't care that even a level 20...

Would there have been any way to do some acrobatics or climbing to get around the brambles?

Maybe people want CR to be a system that can accurately detail how tough monsters are, thus help build an appropriate encounter for their group. It should be a tool that helps make the game easier to run and isn't so easily broken by "someone played a caster" or "oops, turns out Thugs and...

CR is just about as wonky and meaningless as it was in third edition. Plus a lot of enemies tend to be more "rocket-taggy", super offensive and weak defenses while still being piles of HP. Not too fun. I've found the alternate way to create monsters and encounters below much better...

So is Linguist, Dungeon Delver, Observant, etc. equal or better than a Barbarian's Spirit Seeker and Spirit Walk? Or 90% of the classes' spell lists? Or the half dozen things the Rogue gets? Or are they consolation prizes (that you have to take instead of combat feats) for the class being a...

It's a shame that people who do like that have no good alternative in 5E, though. And that it is very odd to make a class specifically for people who seemingly don't care about the game more than "I hit with sword". People who say that the fighter can't do anything outside of combat are silly...

I thought that Champion was widely considered one of the weakest choices because crits aren't powerful and remarkable athlete is anything but. Maybe that's just D&D players in my area thinking that. As for the second point, I kinda mean the class itself. Anyone can take those feats, but...

Personally, I think there's two things that make Fighters lackluster. First, they are mechanically boring and don't seem to do anything over classes can't do just as well, better, or in addition to other things. Champion is one of the worst subclasses in the game, Battlemasters get their best...

Just wanted to add my two cents of anecdotal experience here. In general, specific powers/abilities seem to give almost a guarantee (3E Glibness's +20 Bluff) or actually do just plain work (4E Rogue's level 22 Hide in Plain Sight). Yes, using them takes up some resources and can't endlessly...

I have no idea why people are blaming WoW for this. If this was back in the 3E days, would we blame Diablo? Balancing player choices is hardly new with video games, let alone D&D. People typically like to have equal amounts of agency in games and don't like it if they're overshadowed. If I try...

I prefer to say I'm disappointed in 5E, not that I hate it. It doesn't do anything particularly well, but it isn't outright bad anywhere either and does have a few neat ideas. I liked a lot of playtest stuff more than what we got (martials were a lot more fun, monks were neater, sorcerers had...

Every edition of D&D with feats have had tons of poorly written or poorly designed feats, either because they were necessary for game math to work (4E's Expertise feats), outright bad (3E's Toughness), or just hilariously broken (3E's Natural Spell). I just roll with it and take the bad parts...

Wow... A lot of people here take super extreme measures against cheaters or lucky rollers. OP, maybe you should approach him and the other players to see if the group has a problem with the power and luck discrepancies here, or that his character is too good and making it hard to balance...

Seems like you have the setup for a cool idea right in the opening post. If you're using stuff like Greek gods, why not say your character's a demigod (whether she knows it or not)? She's may not be skilled, but just so damned strong that normal weapons crumble in her hands, so she just uses her...