Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7661136" data-attributes="member: 6677017">I'm perfectly fine with that...except that there are several specific examples and rules statements which cannot be reconciled. In other words: they said too much already to say, "however you do it is fine," because however I do it is going to be contradicting something that is already written about it.The problem is likely that they had a basic concept of how they wanted it to work, and didn't realize they weren't all on the same page with each other (or even consistent individually!) when actually writing up and referring to the rules. Hence: mess.Agreed.I love 5e, but I don't see why people disagree with this point. It sells as a game, not as "an inspirational product for enhancing your own storytelling fun." I buy a game, I want it to work right out of the box.This. Absolutely.As a DM, I'm going to be coming up with a coherent set of rules regarding Stealth, Surprise, detecting threats while traveling, etc; and I'll be making it available to my players in order for them to understand how it's going to work in my game.As it is now, if I were making any character where Stealth is intended to be a big part of the character, I would have to talk to the DM first and see how he is going to run it. Otherwise I would risk ending up with a character who can't even do what I thought he could after thoroughly reading all three core books.If finding out that DM interpretation of a critical system is so different from yours that the character you created is no longer fun for you to play isn't a reflection of ineffective rules presentation, I'm not sure what is.</blockquote>

Verification