|
Madmarker posted:Hey bit of a rules question but anyway I thought of taking Inspiring Leader on my Tiefling Glamour Bard at some point. Anywho, how does that interact with Mantle of Inspiration? (I know temps don't stack) Yes, they still technically gain the temporary hit points, they just don't stack.
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
Poops Mcgoots posted:Until an epic rogue comes along and steals your connection with the spell, at least.  Yep that would suck ... although in the flavor text it says the Thief of Legend always gives the things back in the end. But still, haha, that is the coolest character thing I think I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
DKWildz posted:Some of these are hilarious: lol every time you cast magic missile a bunch of flabbergasted old dudes appear behind you
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:lol every time you cast magic missile a bunch of flabbergasted old dudes appear behind you "Your technique is ALL WRONG! Your pronunciation .. RUBBISH!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Sometimes the way Jeremy Crawford tweets it seems like he is a canon or rabinical lawyer interpreting an ancient, contentious work. Like I expect him to say, "When you see the word 'object', you have to realize that in the original Aramaic the word was objectia meaning 'item that can be manipulated', therefore one must interpret that the true intent of the writer was blah blah blah..." Rather than, you know, the guy who wrote the stuff a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:Hey bit of a rules question but anyway I thought of taking Inspiring Leader on my Tiefling Glamour Bard at some point. Anywho, how does that interact with Mantle of Inspiration? (I know temps don't stack) They won't be able to. The precedent is Armor of Agathys; TempHP can only be replaced, and if you replace AoA THP with those of a different source, the damage retaliation ceases working. You're not really gaining TempHP if it's not replacing your existing TempHP buffer, now are you? But as I said on my Fast Hands + Healer post, that The Gate conveniently chooses to ignore to beat on his strawman, you should go ahead and run it through your DM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
Giodo! posted:Sometimes the way Jeremy Crawford tweets it seems like he is a canon or rabinical lawyer interpreting an ancient, contentious work. Like I expect him to say, "When you see the word 'object', you have to realize that in the original Aramaic the word was objectia meaning 'item that can be manipulated', therefore one must interpret that the true intent of the writer was blah blah blah..." Yeah completely, some of the rulings are pretty clear from the book and I can get behind, but others its clear that the wording or intent doesn't cover a specific case but instead of issuing errata or just a clarification he will stretch the meaning (sometimes in contradictory ways!) like he is delivering wisdom of a hermetical obscure master.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Reik posted:Yes, they still technically gain the temporary hit points, they just don't stack. Yay Conspiratiorist posted:They won't be able to. Well, unfortunately, my DM will probably go with whatever I say....I'm far more familiar with DnD in general and am better/more interested in rules than they are. I don't wanna run roughshod over them with favorable rules interpretations....I like optimizing, but I like being within the rules when I do. Welp.....hmmm guess I gotta think on it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Zandar posted:"using an object isn't necessarily Use an Object" is not an unreasonable stance that only a rules lawyer could take given wording in other areas of the game. It is though, lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Using an object is Using an Object unless it is explicitly a more specific action, such as attacking with a weapon or using a magic object.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
I always wondered about Life Cleric's Disciple of Life feature and if that interacts at all with TempHP. Probably not but like anything it seems like you could take the case to Table Court and see how it shakes out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Giodo! posted:Sometimes the way Jeremy Crawford tweets it seems like he is a canon or rabinical lawyer interpreting an ancient, contentious work. Like I expect him to say, "When you see the word 'object', you have to realize that in the original Aramaic the word was objectia meaning 'item that can be manipulated', therefore one must interpret that the true intent of the writer was blah blah blah..." 5e is the product of a religious schism everyone who said D&D is a cult back in the 80s was right but it's all ecumenical pissfights instead of unholy sacrifices
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:5e is the product of a religious schism it turns out the only thing that was sacrificed was our dignity
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
DKWildz posted:
 So less "I rigged the fight by stealing their favorite summon spell, what a nerd  " and more "That wizard was such a nerd, I stuffed him in a locker and stole his favorite summon pokemon card "
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
OutsideAngel posted:it turns out the only thing that was sacrificed was our dignity You assume we all had it to begin with
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Giodo! posted:Sometimes the way Jeremy Crawford tweets it seems like he is a canon or rabinical lawyer interpreting an ancient, contentious work. Like I expect him to say, "When you see the word 'object', you have to realize that in the original Aramaic the word was objectia meaning 'item that can be manipulated', therefore one must interpret that the true intent of the writer was blah blah blah..." When Mearls or Crawford comes across as implying that they're interpreting an So yeah, it'd be weird if someone said "My interpretation of the thing that I wrote down last year is X", but what's really being said is closer to "My interpretation of the thing is X and I wrote that down last year". The other impression I get from Crawford's tweets is that he probably has a bit of trouble disconnecting what he wrote for 5th ed from what he would have written if he'd had control of the project. e: Really Pants posted:5e is the product of a religious schism Yep. The game we got is the traditionalists' version. The authors coming across as interpreters of the one true original way to do it right is probably at least partially intentional. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Yep. The game we got is the traditionalists' version. The authors coming across as interpreters of the one true original way to do it right is probably at least partially intentional. I'm just holding out for the age of Iconoclasm. DKWildz posted:"Your technique is ALL WRONG! Your pronunciation .. RUBBISH!" Gordon Ramsays Wizard Nightmares is extremely my jam and is how all end game wizards should be imo. The Gate posted:People in this thread: DnD is a bad game because it has vague rules in some cases and too many in others use another system duh Okay I get that you are just insanely ignorant of any negative experience in this space but having people explain 'yeah there is genuinely a chance someone will say no to this' is an important point to bring up because this happens constantly, especially in D&D for some reason (either as a result of new GMs or old entrenched GMs would be my guess). Like I've just run into a game where I wanted to be warlord bard who uses his voice instead as his instrument, just a re-flavouring and had the GM say no to it. Given there are formats that are specifically designed to be hyper restrictive and locked down with AL, this is not some far reaching example.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Giodo! posted:Sometimes the way Jeremy Crawford tweets it seems like he is a canon or rabinical lawyer interpreting an ancient, contentious work. Like I expect him to say, "When you see the word 'object', you have to realize that in the original Aramaic the word was objectia meaning 'item that can be manipulated', therefore one must interpret that the true intent of the writer was blah blah blah..." https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1030261604837818368
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
kingcom posted:Okay I get that you are just insanely ignorant of any negative experience in this space but having people explain 'yeah there is genuinely a chance someone will say no to this' is an important point to bring up because this happens constantly, especially in D&D for some reason (either as a result of new GMs or old entrenched GMs would be my guess). Like I've just run into a game where I wanted to be warlord bard who uses his voice instead as his instrument, just a re-flavouring and had the GM say no to it. Given there are formats that are specifically designed to be hyper restrictive and locked down with AL, this is not some far reaching example. Holy poo poo. So much this. This is so loving important. I love my friends. But I've had to explain "Just because YOU are not an rear end in a top hat GM, doesn't mean rear end in a top hat proofing the wording more isn't important." quite a bit. Nothing is fully rear end in a top hat proof. But you know where you stand when a GM says "Tell me where in the rules it says you can buy a flashlight from the convenience store without paying character points!" then still shoots you down in a high powered HERO game where "You just loving HAVE mundane objects at this tier, gosh" is an explicit rule. While more nebulous concepts, let alone more hazy mechanics, can leave you wondering "Was I ACTUALLY wrong? Or is this just dumb?" ...Man, so much of my freaking out unashamed munchkins over the years is over the most mundane of things. Section Z fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 02:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1029173030646308864 You know, Crawford could be completely, absolutely right, and that we're all just dyslexic, but writing all this poo poo via Twitter would still be bad, because who the gently caress is gonna scan his feed just to get clarifications to a game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
I'm convinced the popularity of "2d6 weapons means you only get 1d6" rulings are a passive aggressive stab against 4th edition's "A weapon dice is the ENTIRE WEAPON, god. We call it roll #[W] for a reason" clarity. Gotta stick it to them uppity martials after all, they should be thankful they get a damage modifier! (shut up about all the ways for spells to get a damage modifier).
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Section Z posted:I'm convinced the popularity of "2d6 weapons means you only get 1d6" rulings are a passive aggressive stab against 4th edition's "A weapon dice is the ENTIRE WEAPON, god. We call it roll #[W] for a reason" clarity. The ability in this case is just to make Greataxes with their D12's more popular. As Brutal Crit will give 2d12 extra damage rather then the 3d6 extra damage of a greatsword.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:16
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:The ability in this case is just to make Greataxes with their D12's more popular. As Brutal Crit will give 2d12 extra damage rather then the 3d6 extra damage of a greatsword. "No see, it's good because it avoided getting poo poo on." is always the wrong direction to try and approach 'no, see, we made X more appealing!'
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
Section Z posted:I'm convinced the popularity of "2d6 weapons means you only get 1d6" rulings are a passive aggressive stab against 4th edition's "A weapon dice is the ENTIRE WEAPON, god. We call it roll #[W] for a reason" clarity. Speaking of which, this kinda touches on the whole "you can't out-heal damage" problem. Like, I think they were going with the thought that heals always add a modifier, and they Just Work™ (i.e. they aren't saved out of or resisted) but they didn't scale the math properly, for poo poo. 1d8+mod to one target (Cure Wounds) still doesn't stack up to 3d6 to everything in a 15ft cone (Burning Hands) just to compare 1st-level spells.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
If they wanted/intended the rule to work in such as to favor greataxes, they should say that. It's asinine to frame it as a semantic or a reading comprehension issue when it's rather a deliberate design choice (assuming it is).
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If they wanted/intended the rule to work in such as to favor greataxes, they should say that. It's asinine to frame it as a semantic or a reading comprehension issue when it's rather a deliberate design choice (assuming it is). Section Z fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:30
|
|
|
Section Z posted:Or, how about. Don't gently caress over a weapon at all with a ruling that sounds like a 4 year old being petty? It's not really being hosed over. As this is one ability that the Barbarian Class has, (And Half Orcs) that give them an extra die of damage when they crit. Greatswords just are not as effective with it as Greataxes. And the Greatsword is pretty much better in all other situations. gradenko_2000 posted:If they wanted/intended the rule to work in such as to favor greataxes, they should say that. It's asinine to frame it as a semantic or a reading comprehension issue when it's rather a deliberate design choice (assuming it is). They did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
Imagine having to tell someone in fifth edition a greatsword and shortsword have the same weapon die.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1029173030646308864 as a guy who gets the rule he hinges his characters on, having a more consistent source for errata and explanations would help.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
Section Z posted:I'm convinced the popularity of "2d6 weapons means you only get 1d6" rulings are a passive aggressive stab against 4th edition's "A weapon dice is the ENTIRE WEAPON, god. We call it roll #[W] for a reason" clarity. I mean, at least this one is an idiotic rule that he's analyzing correctly, rather than an idiotic interpretation of a rule he's wilfully misreading.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
Reik posted:Imagine having to tell someone in fifth edition a greatsword and shortsword have the same weapon die. "Yes, ranged only thrown darts have the same range as a melee thrown hammers" "Yes it still costs 75 gold for a hand crossbow. I know it's only a 30 foot effective range, but it's 1d6 damage!!!" "Yes, the magic stone cantrip loses half the effective range if you actually put it in a sling, instead of just throwing it by hand for the same damage and twice the range." There are worse issues, but for some reason so many ranged/thrown weapons having an effective range equal to or less than walking speed is just... Why? More so every time I remind a friend complaining about cantrips with "Only" 120 foot range that literally everything but a longbow is notably worse off. Section Z fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
Thrown weapons in 5e seem pretty miserable. Other than the one specific magic item (dwarven throwing hammer?), isn't there no way to get a returning thrown weapon?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:Thrown weapons in 5e seem pretty miserable. Other than the one specific magic item (dwarven throwing hammer?), isn't there no way to get a returning thrown weapon? Most people have just homebrewed that same "returning" enchantment from the Dwarven thrower onto whatever weapon they want to be throwing ... or they bring over the Blinkback Belt from Pathfinder and use that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 08:35
|
|
|
Section Z posted:There are worse issues, but for some reason so many ranged/thrown weapons having an effective range equal to or less than walking speed is just... Why? More so every time I remind a friend complaining about cantrips with "Only" 120 foot range that literally everything but a longbow is notably worse off. I've got a Kender Rogue ready to go for this Dragonlance campaign, so of course I've wanted to use a Hoopak (slingstaff), something that hasn't made it back into 5E. As cool as it would be to use it, a rogue with only 1 attack with a 30 foot cutoff before disadvantage range means it might get one shot per encounter while closing the distance. At least when the DM and I were looking at it to build it in we gave it a 1d6 range / 1d6 melee (quarterstaff), although that still didn't really help for sneak attack. Ranged weapons as a primary rogue attack don't seem to fit well mechanically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 08:41
|
|
|
DKWildz posted:Most people have just homebrewed that same "returning" enchantment from the Dwarven thrower onto whatever weapon they want to be throwing ... or they bring over the Blinkback Belt from Pathfinder and use that. Splicer fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Aug 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 09:07
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:Thrown weapons in 5e seem pretty miserable. Other than the one specific magic item (dwarven throwing hammer?), isn't there no way to get a returning thrown weapon? Also I think you can use offhand attack to throw a melee weapon, but not a thrown-only ranged weapon. And that's before you get to the bullshit of when/how you can draw another to throw. It would make life so much easier if they just gave weapons individual rules - you could do away with the clumsiness of rules only by broad categories, and you could actually give spears and poo poo cool stuff to do
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 09:14
|
|
|
DKWildz posted:I've got a Kender Rogue ready to go for this Dragonlance campaign, so of course I've wanted to use a Hoopak (slingstaff), something that hasn't made it back into 5E. As cool as it would be to use it, a rogue with only 1 attack with a 30 foot cutoff before disadvantage range means it might get one shot per encounter while closing the distance. At least when the DM and I were looking at it to build it in we gave it a 1d6 range / 1d6 melee (quarterstaff), although that still didn't really help for sneak attack. wat? You get sneak attack on ranged attacks as long as you have an ally next to the target (or you get advantage on the attack somehow). I routinely move my melee dude around specifically to give sneak attack to the rogue. Ranged rogues are awesome, and actually a lot better than melee rogues unless you have a wanky magical melee weapon or something that somehow makes it worth it to be in melee range.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
If the weapon imposed disadvantage because it was out of range, that would remove Sneak Attack, right? The weapon in question has a pretty short such range.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
A ranged rogue is holding a longbow otherwise they're just a melee rogue with reach or a ranged sneaky fighter with only one attack.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
Splicer posted:A ranged rogue is holding a longbow otherwise they're just a melee rogue with reach or a ranged sneaky fighter with only one attack. If you're a non-Elf rogue (and particularly if you're using starting equipment) you're stuck with shortbow, but otherwise this is exactly the way to play it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 17:28
|
|