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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7102357" data-attributes="member: 6704184">I've only seen 6 as a conscious decision, and 7 is nearly impossible to convince some DMs of, no matter how explicit the PHB is. Active houserule in most cases I've seen it. Are you really seeing people claim it's RAW?And take a regular movement! or move, super jump, dash! It's pretty great. The encounter one seems like a built in guidepost, not an actual rule, to me. Some of these seems strange, and about rulings rather than the rules as written. WHy would the drowning rogue's ally need anything other than what they've seen to jump in after the rogue? At most I could see requiring an Insight check, and even then only if the rogue is prone to wild gesticulation and random actions...but still, the other character saw the powder fly in his face, saw him yelling and panicking, and them jump into a lake. If I saw that IRL, I'd jump in after my friend, after telling someone to call emergency services. If I weren't a good swimmer, I'd call and yell at the nearest fit person to jump in and get him. Obviously something is very wrong. Metagaming also isn't mentioned at all in the rules, so it's off topic. Also, why would you not be able to cast a spell at a creature flying overhead? As for keyholes, if they're old fashioned enough...yeah, makes sense. At most I'd impose disadvantage. Until we got the DMG, I was doing this. After that, I houseruled it. I also allowed the tinkerer in the current campaign to make potion flasks that have easily popped off stoppers, with a flick of the thumb, so anyone can drink a potion quickly, and Rogues can do it as part of another action. Mostly, I see stuff with the action economy, and people assuming spells work like they did in past editions. And my group uses knowledge skills like they were in 4e, but I encourage that.</blockquote>

Verification