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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5841240" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't see anything wrong with looking at the character sheet first. And I don't see any big in-principle difference between looking at the equipment list or looking at the class features or looking at the skills or powers. These create different aesthetics, and produce a focus on different elements of the fiction, but I don't find doing wacky stuff with improvised equipment inherently more exciting than (for example) tricking the enemies into a situation in which the PCs can bring their combat training to bear with maximal effectiveness.I guess I'm not especially into the "carrots, rubber dice and hamster" aesthetic. I've just reread the REH Conan story "The Scarlet Citadel" and the only equipment that figures prominently is a sword (used in the conventional fashion), a torch (likewise used only as a light source) and some keys (stolen from a jailer). Doing wacky stuff with carrots doesn't figure prominently in LotR either, unless you count Sam's cooking efforts in Ithilien.A recent session in my 4e game did involve the sorcerer trying to boost the speed of his flying carpet by drawing on the power inherent in a bottle of pure elemental fire - with explosive results when his Arcana check failed. But I tend to see this as comic relief rather than the mainstay of action resolution.This is interesting, though seems to me different from wacky equipment oriented action resolution. It sounds a bit like Ars Magica-style spontaneous spell creation extended to the martial sphere.</blockquote>

Verification