@MikeQ respectfully disagree. Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser were powerful influences on the Swords and sorcery genre that informed D&D's origin, and they were very much "use your wits" style adventurers. WoTC era D&D has imbedded a far more video game era approach ... in a case of strange recursion, as I see it. The original reward of 1 GP = 1 XP incentivized using wits as well as (sometimes) battle. (It isn't and wasn't an "either-or" proposition)
@GcL The funeral follows the death of the person. Sometimes, people need to use simple and clear words rather than trying to get clever.
@Long Well, I guess they hand waved encumbrance.
@Long Since one can cast Tenser's Floating Disc as a ritual, if one is a wizard, some of the heavy lifting gets taken care of that way.
@KorvinStarmast I wonder if that was influenced by attempts to use D&D as a basis for video games? (Baldur's Gate & Neverwinter Nights coming to mind offhand)
I am about to start running a new game in 5e and I hate all of the ways of determining ability scores.
I have always felt that we play RPGs at least in part for the opportunity to pretend to be more than we are in real life and no one wants to play a character who's just average. So I feel like...
@Shalvenay somewhat. The attempts to make text based dungeon crawls on PC's in the 70's led to rogue likes led to games like Diablo and Baldurs gate led to ... recursion
@KorvinStarmast yeah, BG and friends were evolutions of that lineage. I'm just not sure if trying to adapt the D&D ruleset for that purpose was the wisest move
Is there some official mechanic in any class, feat, spell or magic item that allows someone to use strength for ranged attacks? As an example (but opposite) The Monk gets the feature Martial Arts which allows the Monk to use dexterity instead of strength.
Can you use Prestidigitation to replace bathing and washing your clothes while wearing them?
I'm so sorry, but this was brought up and had 30 min discussion in game and inquiring minds want to know.
@JohnP well, your phone works and is in one piece, more than can be said for mine ATM (it's on the healing bench, waiting for me to get a big block of time to throw at some soldering work)
other than that, pretty decent. pondering the interesting question of "if you stabbed a boar with a halberd, would they go on up the shaft or would the rest of the halberd-head stop them from doing that?"
Our D&D 5e podcast, Planeslip: Echoes of Creation, is chatting with the community! With our resident wizard busy relocating, Dred, Vic, Comet, and Fae are sitting down to have a friendly chat with you, the audience! Tonight, given some recent developments with the Twitch platform, we have some questions for you, the viewers...
See you all for our Q&A in about 15 minutes, at 11 pm CDT (midnight EDT)! https://www.twitch.tv/events/a0oPjHXVT_y5cIpQ_164lw
Concept for a magic system in Fate: to manipulate something, you must fully understand it--not just intellectually, but on a level that affects you emotionally. By default you may only use magic to manipulate things you have a dedicated character aspect about how understanding that thing influences you. You may attempt to manipulate other things, but have to take consequences reflecting how understanding the thing has altered you.
This system concept is about exploring how getting close enough to something (or someone) to be invested in it, to have empathy with it, that gives you power to influence it while also being influenced yourself.
Skills don't do that. Skills are not a way to represent how something has changed the character.
I tend to see the word understanding to be distinct from emotional connection, but that's probably one of the examples of how our basic assumptions radically differ. As for magic based on emotional connection, sure, that's an interesting paradigm of spellcasting.
Sure, "understanding" can be purely intellectual or effectual. That's why I made clear that it's about how understanding influences the character, which is a thing aspects do.
Skills only exert narrative pressure when they're activated, and they only push outward from the character who has them. Character aspects exert pressure both ways, at all times.
If a skill is involved, it's a generic magic skill that requires a character aspect or consequence representing intimate connection as part of its use case--just like it's difficult to use Drive when you don't have a vehicle.
Yeah. I'm particularly imagining a form of telekinesis that requires sharing the experience of whatever you're moving, but I don't think it's limited to that.
eg, if you have healing powers you can easily heal people you have a strong connection to... but to heal a stranger you have to take a consequence that represents sharing not their physical pain, but something important about their mental state.
You might come away from the healing with an interest in a hobby they're passionate about... or a fear of something they've been traumatized by.
The consequence doesn't have to be bad, it just has to fill a slot. It can be good! And so long as you have it, you can continue to use magic on the target.
Use telekinesis to fire a gun, and get lingering a sense of what it's like to be a deadly weapon. Summon a storm and spend the next week tingling with barely-contained energy.
That's where it gets mystical! A lot would be left up to the players for the specifics, that's why it's Fate. But generally I'd draw on traditions that are sometimes grouped together as animism: the idea that everything has some kind of identity/life, even if it's not one we understand objectively in comparison to our own.
@BESW The 'what's it like to be a deadly weapon' made me immediately think of the Drell Assassin from Mass Effect 2, whose name I had to look up - Thane Krios.
What does it mean to have an emotional understanding of a gun? I'd love to play a character who does gun magic because he has that empathy with his tools.
Hm. So if the inspiration here is anmism, then that'd mean a controllable thing must be somewhat concrete, yeah? No abstractions, or personifications of concepts?
I'd be open to the idea, but I think that'd get into drifts of the original concept.
Maybe better drifts! But I feel like with game design it's useful to do one narrow thing and then drift it to other narrow things rather than making one big all-encompassing blob.
That Mutants and Masterminds question is an interesting one. The rulebook says that generally equipment and devices have unlimited use and replacing things only requires time and resources, but mecha are part of the separate Gadget Guide so they don't necessarily follow the same general rule.
The problem is that RAW I'd interpret that the character can just get a new identical mecha or build a new one using the same points total as the original one had, but if that's the case then it means if your mech is low on health it's better to let it be destroyed than repair it and I don't like that.
....from my own sense of how that sort of narrative should be handled, and without knowing much about M&M, I'd probably put the points into an earmarked-for-mecha-building-only fund so the player can rebuild for free OR make something new inspired by what the defeat taught them.
And I'd probably give them maybe +15% more points than originally went into the destroyed mech.
The Seeking Spell/Fireball question is interesting too, because yes, you would be able to use the feat when trying to send a Fireball through a narrow passage (because it meets the requirement of rolling a ranged touch attack) but since the "intended target" of the spell is the narrow opening, Seeking Spell would apply but not do anything the spell wasn't going to do anyway.
Does anybody with more stack experience happen to know if there's a better way to phrase my question about what GM types are there (analogous to player types)? Or an answer that wouldn't fit the stack but would be OK in chat?
Hey vicky. The question is finely worded but GM styles are so fluid and ever-changing in response to players that it's difficult to narrow down a useful list.
It's easier to categorise player archetypes because the way they interact with the game is generally guided by codified rules and the GM's input. The GM doesn't have the same rigidity because in a sense they supercede the ruleset when they need to.
I mean... most player-type categories I've seen only work for the specific kind of game the creator plays, and the more diverse games a theorist plays the less likely they seem to be to try and make neat little boxes for players.
So yeah, I guess I agree that style categories are created and constrained by the rules environments in which they emerge.
And I think the GM does the same; Rule Zero is non-neutral because the rules exist and define the environment against which the GM may choose to exert defiance.
I know that even when I exerted "rule zero" control in D&D 3.5, I did so within the confines of how the game manuals described my role and responsibilities and the examples they gave of GMs exercising extra-systemic authority.
The principles of the game influenced my GMing style even when the specific mechanics did not.
And there's one now! Hi, @trogdor, we're talking about trying to categorize, or at least describe, GMing styles.
@Sirv Off the top of my head to describe my own variety of GMing styles, I might make a "GM alignment" graph with axes for control, preparation, and intensity.
Control = who makes the decisions about what's going on and how things are resolved? Me, or the players, or some combination thereof? In D&D I was very much in control of the world and the action resolution; in Roll For Shoes I try never to say anything about the story that's not a question to a player--but I'm still asking questions that are deliberately designed to lead players toward certain things.
Preparation = did I think carefully about the game before we hit the table? Again, in D&D there tends to be a lot of prep. I also did a lot of prep-heavy Fate campaigns. Cthulhu Dark requires preparation. But I've done prep-less Fate, and games like Cozy Town and Lovecraftesque and Microscope demand no preparation.
Intensity = am I deliberately pushing for an emotional experience, whether it's horror or comfort or laughter? A lot of campaigns don't have an emotional goal beyond, perhaps, avoiding boredom. Other campaigns exist primarily to help us have a feel. Most campaigns fall somewhere in between, like a light-hearted game that isn't trying to be a comedy.
Systems like Don't Rest Your Head have specific, explicit emotional goals. Most don't.
Even fewer have advice on how GM style can support emotional goals.
...and some systems which DO have that kind of advice, especially horror systems (I'm specifically thinking of My Life With Master, but it's not alone), are worse because of it.
My regular group approaches everything, no matter what the setting or intended emotional impact, as a funny slapstick adventure full of sarcasm, puns and one-liners.
@BESW Is this a reference to that game not living up to its goals in some way? (I haven't played it, but I am superficially acquainted with some of its concepts.)
That being said, I agree that in some ways axes are more useful for describing a singular GM, though I think categories are never supposed to be used as exhaustive ways to describe anyone; rather, they are useful for demonstrating goals/interests/priorities that people pursue, and distinctions between them. E.g. I've seen a fair share of confusion from people not understanding that Storyteller-type players are significantly distinct from Method Actor / Roleplayer type players.
@vicky_molokh No, its advice is highly effective at creating discomfort at the table... by advocating for the GM to violate player boundaries when acting out the role of the Master with the player's character.
(And, of course, without any kind of safety tool in place.)
@BESW That seems like one of those deep-immersion horror techniques, so given the kind of audience it seems to cater to, this looks like making the game better at its job. Based on how you describe it.
Not all swimming expects swimmers to wear water wings.
Some people like extreme sports etc. Obviously this isn't for everyone.
No. Even the most intense of experiences requires safety precautions.
Don't be dismissive of safety tools by conflating them with training devices that aren't needed by experts.
This is why many of the best safety tools in RPGs come from the BDSM community; they understand and embrace the principle that no fantasy is so important that it justifies preventing escape.
Sometimes the show must not go on.
If MLWM included safety tools like establishing no-go boundaries before play, check-ins during play, and aftercare techniques to follow the game, then yes, you'd be right. ....And I wouldn't have mentioned it as a bad thing in the first place.
I agree with this. If you're restricting player agency to the point where they're being forced to do things they don't want to, and it's not making for a fun game, why would they continue playing and what was the point of them being there in the first place? If the DM is controlling players they'd be as well playing solitaire.
I actually had a quick chat session with my group following a discussion about applying BDSM techniques to tabletop roleplaying where I made sure everyone was comfortable with what we'd done so far and asked if anyone had any subjects or topics that might end up being triggering if they encounter them in-game.
The only iffy moment we've had so far was my wife getting upset by the cradle with an empty shroud in it in Death House, but she was emotional that day for other reasons and wouldn't normally have been bothered by that. I still apologised and made her a cup of tea though. ^_^
@BESW I'm not dismissing them, I'm pointing out that not all activities and not all people are the same. Some people stay safe. Some go swimming between distant islands with no such tool, because they want things to be more real. You seem to be dismissive of the latter people and their needs. I acknowledge the former people's needs.
I'm not a participant in extreme sports nor in particularly extreme roleplaying, but I accept that such people exist and it's not my place to tell them to stop.
It's a fine line because although I recognise that there are many people in the world who love doing "extreme" versions of things, I think that in a lot of cases they prefer the illusion of danger (where the safety measures are there but not particularly visible) rather than having literally nothing stopping you from actually dying while doing it.
But there are also people who are quite happy with the literal threat of death so you do have a point.
And I really really think the sports metaphors aren't helpful, because that's a field where safety tools are in wide use and death-defying stunts tend to involve people having to sign "I will not hold you responsible" forms if they involve more than just one guy in the middle of nowhere. RPGs are team activities in a community that is either unaware of safety tools or bombarded with ridicule for using them.
I'm not dismissing no-lines mountain climbers if I criticize football for not putting proper head protection suggestions in the manual.
@BESW I understand that it's not theoretical. It is similarly not theoretical for me that I hurt my teeth by a bad jump (short-term, trivial hurt) and my back with cumulative technical errors (medium-term, noteworthy hurt) in my pole vaulting days. But that doesn't mean all vaulters must be provided with helmets, nor should the burden of enumerating all possible bad consequences be on those who offer training/participation/etc.
And I most definitely did not sign a waiver (in fact the culture of signing such waivers sounds like something produced by the North American frivolously-litigating environment).
You're comparing people deliberately seeking out risky behaviours in games, with someone making a game that advocates risky behaviours without warning that they are risky or providing any way to reduce the risk.
Given that the RPGs can include the same sorts of things that real life can, I'm treating them as potentially having the full plethora of nasty stuff real life has.
It's actually been quite fun. The most hilarious line our group has ever uttered in an adventure: "If you want to expose your genitals to a vampire who's on fire, be my guest!"
Even funnier than the time the wizard in my Titansgrave adventure rolled deception to convince a bandit that an attack had killed him.
At one point Strahd revealed he'd been disguised as Ireena the whole time and attacked the party with the "patrons" in the Blue Water Inn (Seeming used to hide zombies) as a test of their abilities. The dragonborn fighter, after a few rounds of combat, did an action movie vault over a table and swung his hammer right at Strahd...who just caught it by the handle, gave him a look and shoved it back at him.
The cleric then did a 45-damage crit to him with Guiding Bolt so naturally Strahd congratulated them on being "competent", healed fully from it which scared the hell out of them, and noped out of there as a bat. XD
@MikeQ It turns out that the D&D 5e PHB has a list of Inspirational Reading at the back. I haven't read most of them, but at least The Lies of Locke Lamora is more trickery than force (though both are involved there). The others I've read mostly justify your claim.
Curiously, that list also contains the complete works of H.P. Lovecraft.
@vicky_molokh About GM types there is little, AFAIK. The threefold, darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/threefold , is about GM decision making (though it can and has been extended beyond that). Other than that, there are different named styles of play, which covers some of the same ground as a GM style classification. Then there are monikers like "monty haul" or "killer gm", which are not very useful analytically.
There is a unique longbow in the Waterdeep: Dragon Heist module (p. 201), whose description includes:
This unique weapon can be used only by a Medium or larger creature that has a Strength of 18 or higher. The bow shoots oversized arrows that deal piercing damage equal to 2d6 + the wielder's ...
@Thanuir Yeah, the latter two terms I've read, but they seem to be distinguishing between two extremes in within a much narrower approach/type. I have even thought of them as examples but ultimately decided against them because they indeed seem to carry very little insight.
@vicky_molokh That seems like a general issue of dealing with people.
@vicky_molokh a stackable version of your question: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/153563/… might be: "There are generally accepted archetypes of player styles (cite). Are there archetypes of game masters? If so, what are they?"
One group I played with some years ago, back in 2nd edition, had, as part of their character generation/background process, an explanation of what event caused that character to gain the experience points that pushed them from 0th level to 1st level.
For example the Ranger I played in that campa...
@JohnClifford I dunno, it depends on how they go about it. Like, if they gave the characters the stats of a Commoner, the characters wouldn't be that much weaker than ordinary level 1 PCs.
@vicky_molokh I'd suggest that if you want to pursue the "GM characterizations" question (which I think could be really interesting--thanks for bringing it up!) that you bring it up on meta, too. I can imagine some good workshopping here, a question posted that this small group thinks is pretty workable, and then five fast POB or "too broad" close-votes coming in. Then we're into a war: do five people here reopen? Do another 5 come and close?
Sure, I'm just saying that a DM isn't necessarily sadistic in wanting that, but I also agree that 5e is not really the right system to support that narrative mechanically.
@JohnClifford I've had brewing on a back-burner for quite a while a set of tables to do traveller-style 0-->1 chargen for 5e. (Monks and bards, it turns out, make things hard. I may have to just scrap them.) (cc: @KorvinStarmast; if I ever get that sorted out we should incorporate it into our T&D hack!)
I'm doing a sort of similar thing with my upcoming Fate Core adventure where the group is going to start out as regular people who are costumed vigilantes but after the first session there'll be an accident that gives them superpowers.
@Rubiksmoose I'd love to try it, but so far every time I got promised one, the story never ended up reaching the 'hero' stage. It's always either the campaign ending early, or, in one case, TPK.
@vicky_molokh Eek. Yeah that is one of the big risks of it. Not only is there plent opportunity for your "0s" to get snuffed out tragically before their time, but it takes a long time (IRL) to also get up to "hero" at least in traditional 5e.
I'd also be open to trying something like it.
And, in fact, long ago my group talked about it for PF.
@Rubiksmoose I have GMed campaigns going from 25 points to 415 points (GURPS 3e) and from 150 to about 300 (4e), which is probably reasonably hero-esque, but those are campaigns that took about a hundred (IIRC) and 227 sessions (not counting microsessions) respectively.
@vicky_molokh I mean in an ideal world. But getting busy adults together and staying together over a long period of time I think can only be seen as an achievement.
@vicky_molokh The four distinctive styles that I have seen most often that I can give a name to are Reactive, Challenger, Author, and Coach (generally positive jin connotation) and power tripper in some trad games (which is with negative connotation). There are bound to be other styles. As BESW pointed out under your question, RPG theory is still somewhat 'in the wild' for all of the work the denizens at The Forge (and others) tried to do in arriving at a unified theoretical baseline ...
@Rubiksmoose When I did the 0 to hero story for my party last year, I had to homebrew a renown system and treated levelling as training that the players received as a consequence of their higher renown\
default D&D 5e definitely isn't the best equipped in my experience
Yes and no. GMs are players in the sense that everyone involved is playing a game, and the intent is for everyone playing to be having fun; else the game isn't satisfying its purpose. I've seen a few articles that have to labor on the point that the GM is a player too.
But, mechanically, the GM is more like a Referee than a player. You'd probably get raised eyebrows if you referred to the referee of a volleyball game as a "player". None of this discounts the first part, it's just a more complicated relationship they have with the game.
The main point of contention was whether Mage Hand is corporeal enough for a Mimic to stick to it and/or indicate that the object is a Mimic, and whether it would be able to pull away from it.
@JohnClifford Are you referring to mimic or the other one? Tim Grant's answer is a great way to rule it at the table. Jim B's is waaay at the end, with only a few votes on it.
> Shadows Weave around a weapon of your choice you are holding. Until your rage ends, your weapon deals psychic damage instead of its bludgeoning, slashing, or piercing damage, and it gains the light and thrown properties with a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet. If you drop the weapon or throw it, the weapon dissipates and reappears in your hand at the end of your turn.
So..... Barbarian wields a Greataxe, has this applied to their weapon.
What happens when a weapon is Heavy, Two-Handed, AND Light?
Hmm, that Extra Attack question is a good one. I suppose the question that needs to be asked is, do restrictive effects of an action take place retroactively? Like, could I not attack with a net if doing so would mean I had made more than one attack? It doesn't say you can't use it if you already attacked, only that using a net is the only attack you can make. But if you already made an attack before that, the proviso would kick in after it had been eliminated via paradox, no?
@Xirema I would think the intent, if not only by the flavour of the effect, is that the heavy two-handed weapon would become a light one until your rage ends.
@Xirema So if the blue team and the orange team are playing volleyball, the players are both the teams and the GM is the ref? Or the players are the orange team and the GM is the blue team and the ref?
Heh. I saw the title of that question and immediately thought "Oh Gael L is back" (not a bad thing in any way, I just know this particular user loves net-user and has asked a lot of questions about it in the past)
The net item has a special property which says:
When you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to attack with a net, you can make only one attack regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make.
Similarly, the Loading property says:
...you can fire only one piece of ammunit...
Well, okay, slight drawback: the Astral Arms Bonus Action attack is only one attack until level 11, after which it becomes 2 until level 17, after which it becomes 3. So below level 11, it's not as good as Flurry of Blows.
@JohnClifford Pretty much every option that requires use of a Bonus Action is balanced around the assumption that each character will never get more than one in a turn. For some characters, that might not be such a big deal, but for others.....
@Yuuki I think we're okay on that front. BA spellcasting specifically says "the only other spell you may cast is a Cantrip with a casting time of Action".
@Yuuki Yeah it does, but I think the language following it would still restrict anything else because a bonus action spell is still not "a Cantrip with a casting time of Action"
So a Way of the Astral Self Monk, at level 17, can get 6 attacks per turn, made using Wisdom as their Attack and Damage modifiers, and whenever a creature dies near them, they gain 5 (their Wisdom Modifier) Ki Points back. The feature that lets them do this costs 10 Ki points and lasts 10 minutes.
They do have to be within 10 feet, which is a non-trivial restriction.
But also, it's not that hard to find at least two enemy creatures within ten minutes of a single combat session—and if you can't, it probably means you're in a low danger area where it wouldn't be that hard to take a Short Rest to get those points back anyways.
@JohnClifford Not sure if you removed that comment or if someone else did, but the reason it should have been removed is because of our Be Nice policy which extends to non-users and users alike
@JohnClifford Yeah, I was mid-commenting on it when it disappeared. No worries though; I'm sure many of us (including myself) have made such comments in the past; but even in jest, we try to avoid name calling :)
To be fair I didn't actually call anyone a name, I made a general comment mocking how they interpreted something. Still unfair of me, I'll admit, jest or no. The deletion was apt.
Thanks for taking the time to comment @DavidCoffron, and thanks @JohnClifford for taking the deletion/advice with grace. I did remove it for the reasons above and David beat me to the comment.
Honestly today is my first rep-cap in a long while. I've been slacking xD
@Rubiksmoose I've definitely been noticing it more, but it might be because the tag seems out of place as I'm used to scrolling past pathfinder, so my brain notices the pathfinder-1e more
@JohnClifford I've got a draft of a Fate... thing... where you spend the first part of the session responding to RP prompts about your character doing ordinary everyday things, and in the process of play you discover each of your character's aspects and approach rankings as well as establishing their role in the local community. Once you've got all your approach rankings set, something threatens your community and your character is granted supernatural powers to protect it.
It's a transformational game, where approaches mean your character's attitude and personality still shine through even when they're acting in contexts that are totally new and unusual for them.
Though rather than everyday ordinary things, they'll be dealing with mundane crime as vigilantes and their actions/choices will determine the Aspects I use to develop their superhuman abilities.
@JohnClifford Oh yeah. I've even had someone ask me to come over, they did something (didn't tell me what they were doing or why they asked me to come over) then a minute later, thanked me for solving the issue.
We had that where I apparently fixed a bug, then the boss is like "this is still happening for me, look!" and then made about 20 attempts to recreate it to no avail.
There are two types of people, when dealing with PC issues. 1. They Click on everything. This is especially frustrating when you're trying to identify what the errors are, what they did when the error occurred, etc, and they close all errors, try and recreate the problem by clicking on new things and it's just chaos. 2. They don't click on anything, because they want to document everything.
I did have a Support Form (cribbed from t'interwebs) that included questions such as: Describe your problem. Now, ACCURATELY describe your problem. Speculate wildly about the cause of your problem. What were you doing at the time of the problem. If "Nothing", why were you logged in? Do all your devices at home flash "12:00"?
3. They don't click on anything, because they're petrified they'll irrevocably break something, even when the screen presents them with either cast-iron crystal-clear instructions or only one option to use.
And a lot of people get "White Coat Syndrome". They're ok working away at stuff, but once an "Expert" arrives, they can't find their ass, with both hands and a map
Or the opposite where they know exactly what the issue is "Oh this PC needs updates, and a new Graphics driver, and could do with some more RAM". Ok, and when was the last time you ran an antivirus? Cos I'm seeing 3 trojans already.
(My mate actually has a form of WCS ... every time he went to the Docs, he recorded High Blood Pressure. Couldn't find a cause. Took a machine home, did checks .. all fine. Back at Docs, high again! Seems he gets stressed visiting docs!)
Need to choose my ranger's subrace, ability and animal companion: subraces are Wood Elf and Pale Elf; abilities are Marked Prey and Wounding Shot; companion can be Wolf, Stag, Lion, Boar, Bear or Antelope. Answers on a postcard!
Wood Elf gets Distant Advantage, which gives accuracy, deflection and reflex bonuses for enemies more than 4m away. Which seems like it'll be handy for a Ranger.
This question is meant to be an extension of this question on planar travel, this question on lower-level planar travel and this question on using blink and banishment to enter the Ethereal plane.
Based on how I read these, by using blink and banishment, my character can get to the Ethereal Plan...
(Rolemaster) I started thinking how to do a "Ranger" differently, so thought "Wandering Monk", which led to Animist, which led on to Healer. Still got a few Outdoor abilities (Herbalist), no weapons. Hopefully I'll roll a Pet Bear on Special Items table! D
Now I need to assign my stat points. Start with 10 might, 10 con, 11 dex, 11 perception, 10 int, 10 resolve, with 15 to spend. Apparently might and perception are highly recommended for Ranger and Dexterity/Intellect are recommended. I'm not used to rangers that don't stack dex! XD
Healer needs 3 "Prime" stats (out of 10), so I had to put Empathy as major Dump Stat! His bedside manner is "How did someone as supposedly clever as you get wounded so stupidly?!?"
Only touched minecraft in a support capacity ... getting it to work for customers ... one kid wouldn't stop showing me his impressive stuff, and new finds, while i'm trying to fix his dad's PC! :) Looks fun, tho
I am about to start running a new game in 5e and I hate all of the ways of determining ability scores.
I have always felt that we play RPGs at least in part for the opportunity to pretend to be more than we are in real life and no one wants to play a character who's just average. So I feel like...
Is there some official mechanic in any class, feat, spell or magic item that allows someone to use strength for ranged attacks? As an example (but opposite) The Monk gets the feature Martial Arts which allows the Monk to use dexterity instead of strength.
Can you use Prestidigitation to replace bathing and washing your clothes while wearing them?
I'm so sorry, but this was brought up and had 30 min discussion in game and inquiring minds want to know.
Is it possible to create a passwall through the Stone Golem body with the Passwall spell?
There is a unique longbow in the Waterdeep: Dragon Heist module (p. 201), whose description includes:
This unique weapon can be used only by a Medium or larger creature that has a Strength of 18 or higher. The bow shoots oversized arrows that deal piercing damage equal to 2d6 + the wielder's ...
In a recent question there was some confusion as to whether or not Thieves' Cant is a language, a class feature, or both.
Which is it?
The net item has a special property which says:
When you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to attack with a net, you can make only one attack regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make.
Similarly, the Loading property says:
...you can fire only one piece of ammunit...
