Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9464322" data-attributes="member: 7034611">not really, because they are not following the guidelines anyway, so you cannot really say that they are working for them eitheragreed, but that doesn’t mean no one should be criticizing anything. The encounter building rules are not 5e’s strong suit, not to mention the assumption of how many encounters there are in a day. Virtually no one has that many, and this nonsensical decision throws the entire balance offI am not comparing it against their marketing pitchI agree, 5th level spells are really the maximum, and even then I’d limit it to oneI would not go quite that far either, but adjudicating a result (or an action taken by a monster) because there is no rule that prescribes the exact outcome is a ruling to meif you replace the last word with ‘specific result’ I’d agree, but depending on what exactly you consider to be a procedure that might work too (ie roll die and if result is X then the outcome is Y)It’s when the DM has to make a decision rather than follow a clear rule when I would consider it a rulingdepends on what you consider comprehensive I guess, you can cover a wider scope but at less detail in the same amount of words, but you cannot really cover the wider scope at the same level of detail without needing more wordsIf you want to prescribe the result to ‘pin the DM down’ and remove their ‘empowerment’ then you need that detailbut it is pretty open when it comes to the action declaration of the monster, D&amp;D is much more restrictive / prescriptive in what the monster can do</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mamba, post: 9464322, member: 7034611"] not really, because they are not following the guidelines anyway, so you cannot really say that they are working for them either agreed, but that doesn’t mean no one should be criticizing anything. The encounter building rules are not 5e’s strong suit, not to mention the assumption of how many encounters there are in a day. Virtually no one has that many, and this nonsensical decision throws the entire balance off I am not comparing it against their marketing pitch I agree, 5th level spells are really the maximum, and even then I’d limit it to one I would not go quite that far either, but adjudicating a result (or an action taken by a monster) because there is no rule that prescribes the exact outcome is a ruling to me if you replace the last word with ‘specific result’ I’d agree, but depending on what exactly you consider to be a procedure that might work too (ie roll die and if result is X then the outcome is Y) It’s when the DM has to make a decision rather than follow a clear rule when I would consider it a ruling depends on what you consider comprehensive I guess, you can cover a wider scope but at less detail in the same amount of words, but you cannot really cover the wider scope at the same level of detail without needing more words If you want to prescribe the result to ‘pin the DM down’ and remove their ‘empowerment’ then you need that detail but it is pretty open when it comes to the action declaration of the monster, D&D is much more restrictive / prescriptive in what the monster can do [/QUOTE]

Verification