Yes. I created a 1st level Elf mage in 2E Forgotten Realms. He was old feeble and not too bright as far as wizards go. He was 1 year away from where the aging rules to force the character to be retired. His name was Doderdum Gibb, stuck in the 1070s, and only knew 2 spells, color spray and dancing lights. He lasted all of 20 mins and died when he was eaten by a Tanar'ri after he cast dancing lights and tried to disco passed it. Groovy, far-out man.
And thus* the meme of Charisma being a dump stat is born. :-D
Constantly. I remember right around when people started really coming to terms with the idea that they were mortal beings (I don't remember when that would be, 12?), people started making long-lived characters as proxy to their own fears about death. IIRC a whole lot of grey elf thieves got started with starting age of 105* showed up. When 2e came out, the whole roll for max age** came in and it started up again with elves who magically rolled 380+ on 4d100 for their 350+4d100 max age***.
I recall that it took me longer than it should have to figure out that "d%" was shorthand for d100. I can only presume they wrote it that way as a space-saving gesture, for which the unintuitive nature of it makes that benefit seem less than worthwhile. To this day I still come across people who think it means you multiply a character's listed maximum age value by a given percentage value, and that's how much lifespan they have left.
I think you're conflating the paladin's native protection from evil ability with the circle of power created when they wield a holy avenger.
I wonder if they had memories of schools and parents forcing lefties to write with and use their right hands.
I've rarely encountered players trying to substitute a roll for interaction, unless I was deliberately abstracting the interaction for time reasons. The point of reaction rolls isn't to remove the role-playing, it's to let the character be more likeable and charismatic than the player, just as they may be stronger and more dextrous. I still normally require players to talk and interact, even if the dice have a say in how will the NPC reacts. Good or bad arguments or sales pitches can give modifiers to the rolls. Unexpectedly low or high rolls can be good fodder for DM improvisation of WHY the NPC reacted so, and reduce predictability and staleness of play. I love reaction rolls and morale for that reason.
Yup. We wound up with DMs specifying in our campaigns whether it was allowable or whether we had to start at Young Adult or with the book-defined random ages.
I have had a system for this since the 1e days- roll 1d20 and 1d12. If the d12 is higher, you're left handed. If the numbers match, you're ambidextrous. Otherwise, you're right handed.
I did for while, but switched to a "your starting stats include your age adjustments" philosophy to avoid players' taking advantage of the rules.
You're right that he's using the wrong name, and the circle of power is the dispel magic circle a paladin gets when he's got a holy sword held unsheathed.
Really? In our 5E games people love to stay close to the Paladins, at least from 6th level on, because of Aura of Protection. Add the Paladin's Charisma bonus to ALL your saves as long as you're within 10' of him? ! Yes, please! And depending on your Oath it probably gets even better at 7th? Hoo baby.
5% chance of ambidexterity, and 27.5% chance of being left-handed. That's a dark, sinister world. (Yes, I've made that joke twice, and I don't regret it.)
Is it? I'd think it'd be 5% if it was two d20s, but lower with a d12 and a d20. You eliminate any chance of a match on 40% of the d20 rolls. So wouldn't it be 3%?
