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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5069403" data-attributes="member: 2067">Perhaps you'll understand it better when  you understand that many DM's -- possibly even most DM's, certainly the more casual/newbie DM's -- don't have every feat and spell memorized. Asking that a DM has the ability to memorize about a thousand pages of rules seems to ask WAY TOO MUCH, IMO. It works for you, and that's fine, but that's not something I think the game should make a prerequisite for running a fun D&D game.What's easier than bull's strength giving you +4 strength which is +2 attack and damage (if using a melee weapon without Finesse or some other feat that modifies the ability used to hit)? Bull's Strength (Encounter): +2 to to your next melee attack roll. If you hit, +2 to your damage as well. Fire-and-forget. Why can't it simulate a fighting style? Just like the wolf does? Why can't this be how such creatures fight? Why can't it be that any naturalist in a D&D world sees that gnolls standing next to each other work in concert much more efficiently than even well-trained creatures of other species, having a keen awareness of exactly how to move to take advantage of their ally's position.The same difference that exists between a pack of humans and a pack of gnolls exists between a pack of wolves and a pride of lions, for instance. They have different natural capabilities.Well, the similar mechanics don't invalidate the varied stories. The whole "demon-worshipping fallen beast people" angle feels different from the whole "brutal nomads who take what they want and they want it all" angle.Not that it's THAT different, but still.</blockquote>

Verification