Arivia posted:

Actually, I'm right because that has been stated policy for the FR for literally decades, with other products building off of the canoncity of the Baldur's Gate novels (their inclusion in the Grand History, for example.) Would you stop running your mouth about poo poo you don't know?

Arivia posted:

Mearls is the lead designer for the entire edition. He's a very bad one; he's certainly not doing his job; but he is involved in every product that comes out. Including OotA.

Arivia posted:

The problem is that you don't seem to understand the complicated cross-setting publishing history of D&D, the Realms, and so on. Which is fine! It is more than a little messy. But if you don't get it, then you need to shut up and listen to people who actually put in the time to understand it. Learn, stop spouting off. Zuggtmoy was Gygax's creation for his own history of Greyhawk. She was included in 3e's core products, which had Greyhawk as the assumed default setting. She is not part of the Forgotten Realms.

Lolth, in contrast, was fleshed out as a planar entity not linked to Greyhawk itself. She was significantly included and worked upon by many people (including Ed Greenwood) when she was included in the Forgotten Realms, not just dropped out of nowhere.

Ogremoch and Entemoch are invoked in Siege of Darkness as part of the shared planar content that 2e AD&D had. That doesn't actually mean they're part of the Forgotten Realms - they're a part of a generic shared D&D narrative.

Content from the wider multiverse in 2e, whether it was planar (Planescape) or from Spelljammer, or whatever, was never specifically part of the individual settings it attached to. The individual settings always had primacy over the larger connections, else Dark Sun and Ravenloft and the rest of them wouldn't work at all.

You don't understand context. You're terrible at actually reading relationships between concepts. Please stop talking until you practice your critical skills. You are the worst poster in this thread by far.

AlphaDog posted:

No you didn't, you just repeated your bullshit a few more times.

Admiral Joeslop posted:

Another player will be running something from that Yawning Portal book soon, the one about a mountain or something, I forget the name. Level eight, and he's thinking for magic items: one very rare, two to three rare, handful of uncommon.

I plan to go with my Warforged Fighter. Eldritch Knight with some cool spells like Shield. For items, I'm thinking +2 Maul, Belt of Fire Giant Strength (25 Str) and at least a Cloak of Protection. Probably magical armor too, I don't remember rarity on them.

Stats end up at: Str 25, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 16, Cha 8. Point buy, putting nothing in Str and just relying on the belt. I become a useless puppy if it ever gets removed. One ASI into Wis and Dex, Resilient (Wisdom) and Great Weapon Master. Great Weapon Fighter from class. I have 20 AC with the cloak, plate and my race, and hit with +12 or +7 when using GWM. What other magic items besides the maul, belt, cloak and armor should I be considering?

Pham Nuwen posted:

I want to make sure I understand how the proficiency bonus interacts with saving throw proficiencies and skills:

I rolled a Bard, so he's proficient in dexterity and charisma saving throws. This means that if I have to make a dexterity saving throw, I add my proficiency bonus (+2) to my Dexterity bonus (+2) for a total bonus of +4 on the saving throw, right?

Similarly, for skills, because I know the Performance skill, I can add my +2 proficiency bonus to my +3 Charisma bonus when rolling a Performance check, right?

quote:

Do you gain additional skills as you level? I haven't seen it in the rules yet but I only got the PHB a few hours ago.

Pham Nuwen posted:

I want to make sure I understand how the proficiency bonus interacts with saving throw proficiencies and skills:

I rolled a Bard, so he's proficient in dexterity and charisma saving throws. This means that if I have to make a dexterity saving throw, I add my proficiency bonus (+2) to my Dexterity bonus (+2) for a total bonus of +4 on the saving throw, right?

Similarly, for skills, because I know the Performance skill, I can add my +2 proficiency bonus to my +3 Charisma bonus when rolling a Performance check, right?

Do you gain additional skills as you level? I haven't seen it in the rules yet but I only got the PHB a few hours ago.

MonsterEnvy posted:

I repeated it because your dislike of me, means you won't acknowledge I am correct. Plus other then saying I am wrong you have not even done anything to disprove me.

MonsterEnvy posted:

But she is a Demon Lord, which had always been cross setting things.

AlphaDog posted:

I'll be as clear as I possibly can for you.


This statement is not true. Demon lords have not always been setting-agnostic in D&D. You have been provided with enough information to understand that. But never, ever, back down, right?

AlphaDog posted:

Edit: Some Demon lords may have been generic from the get-go, I don't know. Zuggtymoy was not generic. She was specific to Greyhawk from when she first appeared in the early '80s until a 3rd ed setting change (ret-con, whatever) in the mid 2000s.

Again, that word "always" is what makes your statement wrong.

MonsterEnvy posted:

Yes she was. She first appeared in a greyhawk product. But she was no more specific to Greyhawk then any other Demon Lord.

MonsterEnvy posted:

Like them being setting agnostic is a trait of the game.

AlphaDog posted:

First appeared in the early 80s, did not appear outside Greyhawk until the mid 2000s. Was not always generic no matter how often you repeat yourself.

quote:

Zuggtmoy, Demoness Lady of Fungi, dread and fell ruler of the 222nd ghastly plane of the Abyss, aspired to establish her rule over a portion of the world. With the aid of Iuz, she formed the Temple of Elemental Evil and for a time wrought death, destruction, and great suffering. Then the forces of Good fought a campaign against her, and she was surprised and bound during the intaking of the Temple. The opposing clerics and magicusers confined her somewhere beneath the ground, reputedly with the aid of one or more deities.

AlphaDog posted:

It might be now, but not always, as evidenced from the above.

FRINGE posted:

Hmm. Iuz you say?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iuz

MonsterEnvy posted:

Iuz is a demi god not a Demon Lord. He is indeed a greyhawk thing.

AlphaDog posted:

Can you at least go for internally consistent stupid arguments? Iuz appears in 3.5's Complete Divine, which is not a greyhawk book, so by your own logic he has always been setting agnostic, it just took some time for him to appear elsewhere.

MonsterEnvy posted:

He is explicitly called out as a Greyhawk Deity. And he is still not a Demon Lord. This is consistent.

AlphaDog posted:

What are the key differences between a God and a Demon Lord that mean that one is inherently setting agnostic and the other is not?

MonsterEnvy posted:

Demon Lords since settings were a thing appeared across them if the Abyss and planes were a thing.

MonsterEnvy posted:

Gods did on a case by case basis.

MonsterEnvy posted:

If a setting features the Abyss the Demon Lords come with it by generic D&D. But Gods of other settings don't necessarily.


Anyway I am tired of this argument. And have made my point. Zuggtmoy is a generic D&D villain not a greyhawk one and at this point has appeared in generic D&D products for over 10 years. Even if you don't agree with me that Demon Lords were always setting agnostic, the fact remains she is setting agnostic now and this is not a new thing.

AlphaDog posted:

Demonstrably false in the case of Zuggtmoy, who appeared in only one setting for more than 20 years. "Because it's always been like that" is a good enough argument for D&D stuff if it has always been like that.


Repeating it again still doesn't make it true, you've just made the same stupid point again without supporting it.

Saying "even if you don't agree with me it's still true" doesn't make it true.

"For over 10 years" isn't the same as always.

"It's like that now" isn't the same as "it's always been like that".

MonsterEnvy posted:

Here is were the entire point of my argument comes from. Demon Lords, Demons and the Abyss have always been a generic D&D thing and appear in lots of its settings. No matter what Zuggtmoys first appeared in what I am trying to say is that the adventure calls her a Demon Lord and says she lives in the abyss ruling a named layer. The fact that the Abyss exists in settings other then Greyhawk and always has since settings were a thing, means that Zuggtmoy being a Demon Lord that lives in the Abyss comes with it into that setting. It does not matter that it took 20 years for her to show up in a generic product. The fact that she is a Demon Lord that dwells in the Abyss means she counts as generic D&D. Because the Abyss and Demon Lords are generic D&D.

MonsterEnvy posted:

Even if you want to be a Pedantic rear end in a top hat and continue trying to argue that it was not "always" true. Right now and and for a pretty long time it is a fact.

AlphaDog posted:

You're admitting that it wasn't always true?

AlphaDog posted:

But the same thing isn't true of gods, which also live on outer planes, such as the Abyss? Why not?

MonsterEnvy posted:

Do you even understand my point?

dwarf74 posted:

MonsterEnvy is an idiot, but arguing about the purity of the forgotten loving realms of all things is stupid. It's stolen poo poo from greyhawk from the outset, because everything did since nearly everything in AD&D was greyhawk. From spells to monsters to artifacts to demihuman gods, alignment languages, and so on.

AlphaDog posted:

No.

The crux of your argument is that because the outer planes have always been a generic part of D&D, the demon lords which live on the outer planes and some of which appear in more than one setting, have always all been generic parts of D&D. Right?

You can't have that point and say that Gods, which also live on the outer planes and some of which appear in more than one setting, have not always all been generic parts of D&D.

MonsterEnvy posted:

If they don't have representatives in a setting then they pretty much don't exist for that one.

Ettin posted:

Noxin of Shame posted:

This thread is as gently caress

Off topic (thankfully): In my campaign, there's a glass cannon half-orc barbarian with an AC of about 12 or 13. We're level 6 going on 7. What's a good item that can make her less squishy?

Noxin of Shame posted:

Off topic (thankfully): In my campaign, there's a glass cannon half-orc barbarian with an AC of about 12 or 13. We're level 6 going on 7. What's a good item that can make her less squishy?

Noxin of Shame posted:

This thread is as gently caress

Off topic (thankfully): In my campaign, there's a glass cannon half-orc barbarian with an AC of about 12 or 13. We're level 6 going on 7. What's a good item that can make her less squishy?

Nehru the Damaja posted:

If unarmored defense isn't doing the job, why not just wear medium armor?

Noxin of Shame posted:

Off topic (thankfully): In my campaign, there's a glass cannon half-orc barbarian with an AC of about 12 or 13. We're level 6 going on 7. What's a good item that can make her less squishy?

Nehru the Damaja posted:

If unarmored defense isn't doing the job, why not just wear medium armor?

AlphaDog posted:

Yes this. If you're hitting AC12 with Unarmoured Defense, your dex mod has to be +0, +1, or +2, so throwing on half plate will immediately bring you up to 15, 16, or 17 depending.

How did they end up with only +2 or +3 between con and dex mods though? If they used the array and went STR 15, DEX 14, CON 13 then those scores would be 17, 14, 14 after picking half orc, and unarmoured defense would get them to AC 14 before any ASIs. Point buy could easily get them to a similar place.

e: Barbarian is the one class I can see going 15, 15, 15, 8, 8, 8 with point-buy. How bad would that screw you on saving throws though?