Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9018282" data-attributes="member: 6801228">And that isn't confusing to me at all. Like, legitimately, this concept of being supernaturally good at a skill makes perfect sense to me as someone who has studied various mythologies and traditions. But, if you really need an explanation, then go back to the explanation about the two different types of magic in DnD. There is directed, formed magic that we typically call magic, then there is magical background radiation that allows for things like dragons and giants. But frankly.... to me this doesn't need a further explanation. It is just a level of skill that can be reached.Sure, and if that ever happens in a high level game, you are free to describe it however you want. However, the most powerful single attack I could quickly find is the Tarrasque's Bite, which does 4d12+10. Maximum damage of 58, critical of 116. Even that, a maximum damage critical from a CR 30 monster would struggle to drop a high level character to negative max hp. It just doesn't ever happen. And, again, you could just.... not describe it as a decapitation.So vague promises of something better. But that doesn't tell me anything. You want them to succeed automatically more. How would you do that? "Fixing skills" doesn't tell me anything.So what spells? I asked this before, and you listed a bunch of spells that you said don't "just work" and included in that the fact that anti-magic is a thing. So if not all spells "just work" because of anti-magic... what spells do just work? And for being a spell that can fail, Fireball, Polymorph, hypnotic pattern, fly, all of these seem to be powerful options people like to take and people don't consider "too fair" to their enemies.So all your problems would be answered by saying that stolen memories take the form of a small pearl in the Rogue's hand? Like, that's all it would take to answer this "problem" of how to answer the Rogue's questions on what happened when someone stole them back. Sure, we need mechanics to the ideas we are throwing around, but they aren't ludicrous things. They aren't nonsensical things. These aren't antics or looney tune's logic. Just like with the decapitation thing, you are forcing an issue to exist by forcing the description into a realm that you then declare is nonsensical. Just stop making it something nonsensical. Peter Pan had his shado sewn to his feet by a small British Girl. Wendy wasn't some powerful sorcerer using arcane magics to bend reality, and no one goes around harumphing how Peter Pan is too nonsensical and ruins their suspension of disbelief. It just... works. It just makes sense within the context of the story.</blockquote>

Verification