|
Ryuujin posted:My anecdotal experience in AL games in my area is that basically no one has ever silvered their weapon, and far to many of the official adventures, not just the little modules but the full on books, throw things that are immune, or at least resistant, to nonmagical weapons. Sometimes these could have been harmed by silver weapons, but sometimes they could not even if we had them. There are things that are immune to nonmagical weapons that are not adamantine, and until recently non magical adamantine weapons didn't exist at all. I feel you, and I think this may get at the heart of the issue at hand, so I'm going to propose a question: Is it the fault of the system for not giving, say Fighters, an ability similar to monks where they just make their weapons act as if +1 magical? Or is it the fault of the players and/or DMs and/or adventures for not pointing towards the existing printed solution to every resistant to non-magical attack creatures? In my mind, they printed the answer to this back in 2014 in the first printing of the PHB. Silvered weapons are listed in chapter 5 under the Weapons subsection and have been this whole time. I'd grant the point about the Clay Golem and adamantine weapons, but I'd also hold that as an exception and also a higher level creature which requires a very different conversation to address. If players don't know to silver their weapons, I'd put it on the written adventure writers for being fuckups and not including the details about that such that melee fighter types would have the tools necessary for the adventure. It's not a system problem, per se, it's an AL problem, both in curation and their lovely treasure system.
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
What's the mechanic for using flour in game?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
koreban posted:I feel you, and I think this may get at the heart of the issue at hand, so I'm going to propose a question: It is if they also tell dms they dont need to hand out magic weapons. koreban posted:In my mind, they printed the answer to this back in 2014 in the first printing of the PHB. Silvered weapons are listed in chapter 5 under the Weapons subsection and have been this whole time. I'd grant the point about the Clay Golem and adamantine weapons, but I'd also hold that as an exception and also a higher level creature which requires a very different conversation to address. In the phb it says some creatures that have immunity to magic are susceptible to silver but not all. Take for example the cr 2 specter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:What's the mechanic for using flour in game? You scatter it in the air as a gently caress you to invisible opponents. Afaik there was no real mechanic for it in 4e or 5e, but it plays at most tables under the logic of "that makes sense".
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:You scatter it in the air as a gently caress you to invisible opponents. Yeah I was wondering what the heck the roll would be. But that's kind of what I'm getting at - if AL vets are saying to take it, won't the DMs of AL shut that down as not raw?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Yeah I was wondering what the heck the roll would be. But that's kind of what I'm getting at - if AL vets are saying to take it, won't the DMs of AL shut that down as not raw? technically flour isnt raw, its processed
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:technically flour isnt raw, its processed 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
koreban posted:I feel you, and I think this may get at the heart of the issue at hand, so I'm going to propose a question: I would say that is absolutely the fault of the system. The base class itself doesn't necessarily have to have that ability, maybe, but even the Eldritch Knight archetype of the Fighter doesn't make their weapon magical when they do their very magical sounding Weapon Bond, that lets them bonus action summon the weapon to their hand, but specifically doesn't make the weapon magical at all. There is no Barbarian archetype that makes their weapon magical as they rage, no Rogue archetype that lets their weapon harm things immune to non magical weapons, etc. The closest any of them get are the spellcasting archetypes which can hopefully, maybe, pick up Magic Weapon and then hope they can keep the Concentration up. And that is absolutely something the Barbarian is not going to be able to do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:What's the mechanic for using flour in game? If you suspect there's an invisible creature in a room you can toss it in the air and it will outline the creature, or you want to test for airflow around a false wall, dust a room you intend to return to and see if there are footprints when you come back, leave a marker or trail somewhere, trade a starving peasant for information, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
resistance to non-glutenous weapons
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Mcmccarthy posted:It is if they also tell dms they dont need to hand out magic weapons. Are you referring to the AL treasure token system? If not, where does it say not to give out magical weapons? If you're referring to the previous conversation about magical +1 weapons not being required to hit creatures, you're conflating the math with the narrative and assuming a logical step that no one took. quote:In the phb it says some creatures that have immunity to magic are susceptible to silver but not all. Take for example the cr 2 specter. quote:Silvered Weapons The Specter on p.279 of the MM doesn't say it's resistant or immune to silvered weapons, just to nonmagical attacks, which means that silvering your weapon will work against it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
Some people may question what the definition of the word "some" is; that is, all people
Name Change fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Oct 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
koreban posted:Are you referring to the AL treasure token system? If not, where does it say not to give out magical weapons? If you're referring to the previous conversation about magical +1 weapons not being required to hit creatures, you're conflating the math with the narrative and assuming a logical step that no one took. Uh that is not how that works. Only magical weapons do full damage, it doesn't specify silver weapons at all so nothing special happens with silver weapon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
koreban posted:The Specter on p.279 of the MM doesn't say it's resistant or immune to silvered weapons, just to nonmagical attacks, which means that silvering your weapon will work against it. Now you're just taking the piss, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
koreban posted:Are you referring to the AL treasure token system? If not, where does it say not to give out magical weapons? If you're referring to the previous conversation about magical +1 weapons not being required to hit creatures, you're conflating the math with the narrative and assuming a logical step that no one took.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:resistance to non-glutenous weapons the quasi-elemental plane of bakers yeast
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Some people may question what the defintion of the word "some" is; that is, all people I look forward to another wonderful 100 pages of earnest discussion about it
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
koreban posted:Are you referring to the AL treasure token system? If not, where does it say not to give out magical weapons? If you're referring to the previous conversation about magical +1 weapons not being required to hit creatures, you're conflating the math with the narrative and assuming a logical step that no one took. They don't NEED to hand out magic weapons. Cool that you accused me of not paying attention to the argument though. I can't find it in the dmg but it was very much a part of advertising and hype around dnd next that you wouldn't need magic items or whatever. But this doesn't excuse it because if you are going to have a bunch, it is a bunch, of monsters in the monster manual with resistance or even IMMUNITY to nonmagic weapon damage you need to be straight up with the dm. Nowhere does this explicitly get mentioned as a potential problem. I just got out of a 2 year campaign where we capped out at level 16. We had loads of magic items thrown at us but only 3 were weapons. None of them were a greataxe and this bummed the newbie barbarian. Yes this is anecdotal and partly my dm's fault but could have been solved by telling my dm straight up that they should probably allow the players to have a magic version of their primary weapon by level 12. edit: beaten on some stuff
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
dreadmojo posted:I look forward to another wonderful 100 pages of earnest discussion about it Some people may agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Some people may question what the defintion of the word "some" is; that is, all people Wights(CR3) and Wraiths(CR5) are susceptible to silvered weapons, Ghosts(CR4) and Spectres(CR1&2) aren't. Having higher CR creatures with the silver vulnerability and not the lower CR ones is weird and I couldn't find anything on it through the errata or Sage Advice index. I don't think anyone playing outside of AL would say that the silvering shouldn't work in those cases. If you play in AL, sorry, but no one disagrees that it's completely poo poo so there's no argument to be had there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Mcmccarthy posted:They don't NEED to hand out magic weapons. Cool that you accused me of not paying attention to the argument though. I can't find it in the dmg but it was very much a part of advertising and hype around dnd next that you wouldn't need magic items or whatever. This is TYOOL 2018, they're not advertising the game in the same way they did in 2013/2014. There are, what 14 or 15 books in the set now? Do you hold all companies to their market promises they made 5 years ago, or just this one? And to that, it was pointed out earlier that this edition does not have the "immune to all damage except for +1/+2 or better magical weapons" that previous editions had. This edition has blanket resistances or immunities, but you can have a weapon with a magical effect and no magical bonus to hit or damage that still counts as magical for bypassing those restrictions. quote:But this doesn't excuse it because if you are going to have a bunch, it is a bunch, of monsters in the monster manual with resistance or even IMMUNITY to nonmagic weapon damage you need to be straight up with the dm. Nowhere does this explicitly get mentioned as a potential problem. I just got out of a 2 year campaign where we capped out at level 16. We had loads of magic items thrown at us but only 3 were weapons. None of them were a greataxe and this bummed the newbie barbarian. Yes this is anecdotal and partly my dm's fault but could have been solved by telling my dm straight up that they should probably allow the players to have a magic version of their primary weapon by level 12. Your DM is bad. Sorry. He absolutely should have handed out a magical greataxe to the barbarian and the fact that he didn't is pitiable to your barbarian player. I hope you all gave him feedback to that point and that he learns and grows as a person to someone who wants to both have fun and help others have fun at the table.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
I feel like 99% of people would say that the silver weapons don't work. Since the silver weapons don't work. But hey I could be wrong. I have also had DMs who let weapons do half damage to lycanthropes because they didn't realize they had immunity rather than resistance to nonmagical weapons. Also there are no where near 14 or 15 books, at least not done by WotC who have done what 1 maybe 2 since the initial 3. If that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
koreban posted:Wights(CR3) and Wraiths(CR5) are susceptible to silvered weapons, Ghosts(CR4) and Spectres(CR1&2) aren't. Having higher CR creatures with the silver vulnerability and not the lower CR ones is weird and I couldn't find anything on it through the errata or Sage Advice index.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
can lizardfolk get silver caps on their teeth to let them bite wraiths
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:I feel like 99% of people would say that the silver weapons don't work. Since the silver weapons don't work. But hey I could be wrong. I have also had DMs who let weapons do half damage to lycanthropes because they didn't realize they had immunity rather than resistance to nonmagical weapons. A good DM who threw lycanthropes at the players without realizing the damage immunity thing should absolutely modify the conditions to allow half damage and pull a couple of punches against the players to allow them to survive the encounter, and then give them the means of enchanting or silvering their weapons for any subsequent encounters. I would never suggest otherwise. A bad DM would randomly roll werewolves as enemies against a low level party and then shrug and TPK them when their attacks completely failed to damage the creatures. He'd follow it up by saying "I guess you should blame 5th edition for not telling me to give you magic weapons at level 1." quote:Also there are no where near 14 or 15 books, at least not done by WotC who have done what 1 maybe 2 since the initial 3. If that. A quick count of my bookshelf has 15 books published/released by WotC with the red dragon ampersand logo. That includes core, splat, and narrative books. Each book contributes to the overall canon, creature index, and rules interpretations. So while Tales of the Yawning Portal probably didn't add much to the existing ruleset, there's likely been a rule interaction or errata that came up as a result of the book that has mattered in some edge case forum debate like we're having here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Splicer posted:The game is fine, just ignore the game and play a different game and the game works perfectly! If you're having problems playing the game because you're playing the game that actually exists then obviously you are the problem. More than anyone else, you and AlphaDog need to watch that Crawford interview where he discusses the core design philosophy of 5e being one of a minimal framework of rules to allow for maximum narrative possibility because the two of you get so hung up on the RAW as Canon problem that I can't imagine you would know how to have fun with a TTRPG unless it had a specific written rule telling you to do so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
The encounter was not randomly rolled, and the DM didn't change it to resistance on purpose, they just didn't realize just how dangerous lycanthropes are. Just like the desginers didn't realize that lycanthropes turning people into more lycanthropes and then neither side being able to hurt the other at all doesn't work well. You have a "huge" list of books, probably mostly adventures. But how many of them are actually written by WotC? Hint. Very few of them. In fact during 5e WotC has been infamous on not producing product, 3rd party companies have been making those adventure books, and setting books, with some oversight by WotC perhaps but still the vast majority of the work is done by other companies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
koreban posted:This is TYOOL 2018, they're not advertising the game in the same way they did in 2013/2014. There are, what 14 or 15 books in the set now? Do you hold all companies to their market promises they made 5 years ago, or just this one? And to that, it was pointed out earlier that this edition does not have the "immune to all damage except for +1/+2 or better magical weapons" that previous editions had. This edition has blanket resistances or immunities, but you can have a weapon with a magical effect and no magical bonus to hit or damage that still counts as magical for bypassing those restrictions. In the year 2018 they still dont explicitly tell the dm to give out magic items and in fact you have people in this very thread who suggested that 5e could totally be played like that. In fact it was in this 2013/2014 period that my dungeonmaster started running games. Why should she expect the game to be somehow different now then it was when first sold to her? It falls into the broader problem that 5e doesn't actually have good support for dungeon masters, especially newbies. Just because you have dm'd long enough to be familiar with these tropes shouldn't excuse the 5e devs for advertising the game one way, and then designing it another. They haven't really talked about it either which might have fixed this problem. There are still not very good guidelines for how many and what kind of magic items to give your party and if you check other places like AL rules you see things like werewolves appearing before you can get magic items. This is bad. Also whats with the attack on my dungeonmaster man? That was kind of a dick move. She is a newbie and makes mistakes but her campaigns were pretty dope and at no point do i feel like she didn't want to help other have fun at the table. It was also partly the fault of me and the other couple people at the table who knew what they were doing. I was playing a wizard and the other players just multiclassed into hex-blade or whatever and didn't press the point. I hope you too can grow as a person, maybe into someone who doesn't dismiss valid arguments out of hand. koreban posted:
A good system wouldn't let a new dm randomly roll werewolves as enemies against a low level party. Mcmccarthy fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
edit: double post my bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
koreban posted:More than anyone else, you and AlphaDog need to watch that Crawford interview where he discusses the core design philosophy of 5e being one of a minimal framework of rules to allow for maximum narrative possibility because the two of you get so hung up on the RAW as Canon problem that I can't imagine you would know how to have fun with a TTRPG unless it had a specific written rule telling you to do so. A game with a minimal framework of rules is exactly my thing these days. A game with 3 ~300 page core books and several other books is not a minimal framework of rules, no matter how right it would make you if it were.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
Double post
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:The encounter was not randomly rolled, and the DM didn't change it to resistance on purpose, they just didn't realize just how dangerous lycanthropes are. Just like the desginers didn't realize that lycanthropes turning people into more lycanthropes and then neither side being able to hurt the other at all doesn't work well. There's big chain of posts on sage advice from people asking how to handle lycanthropy and such. I'm not going to wade into that mess today and just say that I'd be shocked if the monster manual didn't have a couple of problems like this stemming from it's release a month after the PHB dropped now that we've had 4+ years to find all the mistakes and ways to break the encounters. quote:You have a "huge" list of books, probably mostly adventures. But how many of them are actually written by WotC? Hint. Very few of them. In fact during 5e WotC has been infamous on not producing product, 3rd party companies have been making those adventure books, and setting books, with some oversight by WotC perhaps but still the vast majority of the work is done by other companies. I'm familiar with the adventures being subbed out to the 3rd party guys, but they're still being branded, marketed, released, and supported as first-party content. My understanding is that they are all subject to an editing pass by Crawford before being sent to the printers as well. I think in this case it's fair to point out that they're 3rd party developed, but they're basically first party books. The core 3 books notwithstanding, Volos, Xanathars, and Mordenkainen all look like first party developed books. I couldn't find any reference to the usual 3rd party sources in the credits and publishing folio.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
Koreban, for real, we all understand perfectly well that whatever problems come up will be sorted out by the DM and/or the group. Do you think that when I say something like "the intellect devourer sits at a CR that would make it a big problem if you were just following the encounter rules" that there's an unspoken "and nothing can or should be done about it except maybe to burn these books" at the end? Of course there isn't. The first step to solving a problem is identifying a problem. Someone constantly yelling that it's not really a real problem really because actually you could solve it doesn't help. We know it could be solved. We're solving it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Splicer posted:The game is fine, just ignore the game and play a different game and the game works perfectly! If you're having problems playing the game because you're playing the game that actually exists then obviously you are the problem. You're being kinda shouty. The 'problem' is solved by considering it for ten seconds and doing something obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:technically flour isnt raw, its processed N i c e
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Mcmccarthy posted:In the year 2018 they still dont explicitly tell the dm to give out magic items and in fact you have people in this very thread who suggested that 5e could totally be played like that. Matt Colville made a name for himself addressing this very situation. His content wasn't available in 2014/2015. But now it is, and it's a fantastic resource for helping new and aspiring DMs get into the mindset of running a game. I don't agree with 100% of his suggestions and I don't want to have to argue for two more pages about him in particular, but it's just one example of many where the community of players have stepped up to fill holes that 5e didn't cover well. quote:Just because you have dm'd long enough to be familiar with these tropes shouldn't excuse the 5e devs for advertising the game one way, and then designing it another. They haven't really talked about it either which might have fixed this problem. There are still not very good guidelines for how many and what kind of magic items to give your party and if you check other places like AL rules you see things like werewolves appearing before you can get magic items. This is bad. 100% with you on the AL poo poo. I dislike 99% of what it does. I think that the move toward allowing players to pick their magic items was a good one, versus making them compete for the items out of the adventure packs, which was what they did back when I tried AL, but they did it badly and I pity anyone who can only play via AL because it sounds miserable. As Gradenko pointed out, however, if you go 100% by the books, you should have over 100 chances to roll on a treasure table by level 6 toward getting a magical weapon. It's not an ideal solution, nor would it be the way I do things, but I also dislike that many classes just "get" their spells at level up and don't have to learn it or train it or in the case of wizards, find a scroll or spellbook to copy it from. I personally like having the narrative freedom to determine where and when and how my players get their magical weapons. Disclosure: usually by level 3, almost always in a narratively meaningful way, and almost always as a sort of signature weapon that grows alongside the player such that every couple of levels they can get it further enchanted or attach a gem to it or get it rejiggered by a legendary smith to gain additional power instead of trading it in every 2 levels for the next better drop. I would never expect the D&D writers to canonize my way of handling magical weapons, nor would I care for them to canonize a strict and specific progression that would negate my way of doing things. quote:Also whats with the attack on my dungeonmaster man? That was kind of a dick move. She is a newbie and makes mistakes but her campaigns were pretty dope and at no point do i feel like she didn't want to help other have fun at the table. It was also partly the fault of me and the other couple people at the table who knew what they were doing. I was playing a wizard and the other players just multiclassed into hex-blade or whatever and didn't press the point. I hope you too can grow as a person, maybe into someone who doesn't dismiss valid arguments out of hand. I mean, I could say you and your party were bad players for not having a conversation with your DM to let her know what was up, too. Neither of you seem to grasp the concept of the game being a social one where the purpose is to have fun. She wasn't allowing the barbarian to have fun and you guys weren't letting her know what she was doing wasn't fun. It's like a junior high school dance for being an awkward affair of people too afraid to make the first move or embarrass themselves. My advice would be the same advice I give my kids: the point is to have fun. If you can say or do something that helps you or the people you're with have fun, then you'll never regret finding the courage to say or do it. You'll always regret saying and doing nothing because you didn't have as much fun as you know you could have. quote:A good system wouldn't let a new dm randomly roll werewolves as enemies against a low level party. You shouldn't be randomly generating enemies except in specific game types where the DM and the players are on board with the idea of random enemies that may appear and the party runs the risk of having zero means of dealing with them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Koreban, for real, we all understand perfectly well that whatever problems come up will be sorted out by the DM and/or the group. Nope, I am on board with everything you said here, maybe except that you should burn the books at the end part. I agree that 5e is seriously flawed when approached from a strict reading avenue. I also think that it's a fantastic introductory system for people and has both institutional and popular momentum to draw more people into TTRPGs. More people is a good thing, and I like the prospect of having more gaming available as it increases in popularity going forward, so I wouldn't burn the whole house down with the bathwater.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
1) 5e tells DMs that magical weapons are “optional” (because of bounded accuracy) 2) 5e includes many monsters with resistance/immunity to mundane weapons, some of which are also not obviated by silvering weapons 3) 5e includes random enemy and encounter tables 4) New DM decides to run a 5e campaign, limits or forgos magical weapons (due to 1), accidentally TPKs his party because he doesn’t realize how much tougher that randomly rolled Specter or Ghost is now The question: Does the DMG sufficiently instruct a DM on the adjustments necessary to account for a party without ways of bypassing such resistance/immunity? Xanathar’s section on Encounter Building and Monster Selection (pages 89-90) sure doesn’t—it mostly comments accounting for HP, number of attacks, and saving throws. But the DMG might cover this—I can’t check at the moment. It certainly should! Relying on a new DM to realize on their own how much more difficult enemies with such resistances/immunties become in a no-magic-weapons campaign, or relying on the grizzled vets to impart this wisdom to new DMs, sure would be an oversight IMO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
So literally just got back from running the climactic encounter of Storm Kings Thunder. We went rather off the beaten track of the module but they got to fight Imyrith the Ancient Blue Dragon in her lair at the end. 5 fully rested 9th Level PC's with time to make intelligent preperations and spell selections were predictably dangerous. Even with HP boosted to maximum and intelligently played the party brought her down in just 5 rounds without a single party death. They enjoyed it though. It took 2+ hours to resolve the fight, which is way longer than I'd normally let a fight go but it was the climax and it was fun just to have a no-holds barred slugfest. I ended up using every Giant Lair which was nice, but only 1 was in a old-fashioned 'lets wreck this place and steal their stuff way'. I used 2 for Commando-style raids where the party were still under-leveled for a straight fight against Giants but strong enough to sneak in, pick a key fight or two and escape after achieving their goal. The rest were mostly diplomatic/roleplay encounters. All in all a fun campaign, it's not perfect and I strongly suggest (as is always good advice) letting the party follow plot threads that they seem most interested in and skip stuff or add stuff as appropriate but we had a fun year of play. Next week I actually get to play a game and we're going old-skool FASERIP. Woot! Deptfordx fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
koreban posted:Nope, I am on board with everything you said here, maybe except that you should burn the books at the end part. I agree that 5e is seriously flawed when approached from a strict reading avenue. I also think that it's a fantastic introductory system for people and has both institutional and popular momentum to draw more people into TTRPGs. More people is a good thing, and I like the prospect of having more gaming available as it increases in popularity going forward, so I wouldn't burn the whole house down with the bathwater. You can change the rules in any game. You can change the rules in monopoly. But that doesn't mean the rules as written should not function as written. koreban posted:More than anyone else, you and AlphaDog need to watch that Crawford interview where he discusses the core design philosophy of 5e being one of a minimal framework of rules to allow for maximum narrative possibility because the two of you get so hung up on the RAW as Canon problem that I can't imagine you would know how to have fun with a TTRPG unless it had a specific written rule telling you to do so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 23:38
|
|