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="Painfully" data-source="post: 1089380" data-attributes="member: 601">I stand corrected (finally).  Thanks to Macbrea and Pagan for clarifying the "rules."  That's exactly what I was looking for.  It was the end of a long work day when I posted and I just couldn't focus on the rules enough to keep it straight in my head.  What can I say, except the new player caught me off guard.  I don't even think of two-weapon fighting unless I'm thinking of a ranger.  It's just so uncommon in my games.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I do feel that a half-orc barbarian standing invisibly behind two halflings grants a fair bonus/penalty total in the end [off-hand attack penalty, plus invisiblity bonus, vs a flat-footed touch AC on each halfling; and don't forget size modifiers to halfling AC, and the half-orc's grapple checks].When talking to the new player I kept reminding her to "freely ignore all the numbers" which were being very technically and correctly explained by a more experienced player.  Keeping the description of her character and background story visual, and letting her know that she could let her character do anything a storybook character could do was more important.  She's been quite a refreshing change from the power gamer/rules lawyer type of players at my table.  I hope they don't contaminate her with the concept of metagaming any time soon.Thanks again to everyone for posting.</blockquote>

Verification