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="Garthanos" data-source="post: 4794003" data-attributes="member: 82504">It isnt a rational thing but it seems real.People satisfied by having 2 vividly visualized effects and are so less inclined to try for more.Where giving one description locks down some peoples imagination showing multiple can, I feel, free it up. As an inspiration aid, my idea is to write several alternate descriptors on the back of the at-wills power cards with blank lines at the bottom for adding more...Earlier this post I mentioned using scorching burst, described as a wall of fire rising from the ground at your enemies feet, player improvised doing it slower/more obviously and more avoidable to get the bad guy to move even though he didn't have a spell with induced movement... but these wont always work .. the enemy may a just take the damage being too brave or dumb to respond or get tricky and jump over the blaze or just move a direction more useful to it than you want in spite of where you attempt to herd them.One of the alternate descriptions I give for cleave has oil splashing from a held lantern by my enemy on to his ally for the damage against the second enemy.  The GM can incorporate and reward vivid appropriateness of  player description in this case they might give ongoing damage deciding the second guys cloak catches fire. And the fighter doesn't have an ongoing damage power... the oil might get in there eyes and obscure there vision a little or the cloak might be wet from the day before or the adjacent enemy is looking a different direction, ie it wont always work.. and unlikely the DM always has the bad guys carrying oil lamps or wearing flammable cloaks etc. ;-)</blockquote>

Verification