My latest thought was to run it in Fate Core or Fate Accelerated. Set it in The Incredibles universe, shortly after the events of the movie. Basically, now that superheroes are back in the spotlight, a bunch of old supers are coming out of retirement to start hero work again. I would expect arguments about missing the kids' soccer practice because you were stopping Dr. Volcano from blowing up Mount Rushmore or something, and how you'll make it up next week, and when was the last time we went on a date, oh no Meteora is going to cause a comet to crash into New York, time to call a sitter.
Although now that I'm thinking about it, this theme could work fine in D&D too. A bunch of retired adventurers having to get back in the field for some reason, but who's going to run the farm/tavern/smithy/city guard/etc if they're out there killing dragons or whatever.
And it's not even like all fantasy portrays magic as overcoming any odds: Conan the Barbarian defeats his magic using antagonists mostly by force of his own will and certainly is the archetype of the big buff fantasy warrior.
I would argue that the great bulk of fantasy, if you include legends, does portray magic as generally superior to anything except, occasionally, a good and pure heart.
Conan is an exception.
Bear in mind I'm not excusing Simmism, just trying to find its roots.
Also note that Conan typically defeated Wizards because A) magic usually made you evil and/or insane, Conan was a wiley mofo as well as good at hitting stuff, and C) magic was limited to maybe a few tricks per person with some material requirements, IIRC.
Therefore, it was entirely plausible for Conan to be beating even the most experienced mages to death with a chair leg after catching them completely off-guard.
D&D Wizards are way OP in comparison; they get a moral center, a grip on reality, ALL the tricks and a few ways to negate any element of surprise.
OTOH, for another comparison, Black Company wizards are broken as fuck (they get like d12 or d20 HP/level)
One of then ran around without a head for a while, and she wasn't even a necromancer
), and the Black Company pretty much wipes out every non-aligned major wizard in the entire world. They have their own wizards, but they aren't very good.
Yeah, I've heard of that setting, but never read any of the fiction or game books.
Apparently, from what I've heard, Wizards in that are strictly NPC evil Demi-gods?
Quoting that Syndrome line as argument reminds me of people saying the Harry Potter books teached anti-Christian values because a villain said "There is no good or evil. Only power, and those who are too weak to seek it."
Hitting the broken computer does not fix the broken computer. Fixing the broken computer, fixes the broken computer.
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Yeah, I've heard of that setting, but never read any of the fiction or game books.
It's worth reading if you like fantasy. Easily my favorite series.
Apparently, from what I've heard, Wizards in that are strictly NPC evil Demi-gods?
A substantial number of them. The Black Company has a couple illusionists who are moderately competent, and a bit morally questionable (cheating at cards, black market dealings, etc) but not really evil.
The one thing the series does well that would be perfect for DND is having a good spontaneous magic vs. magic items / enchantment balance. Magical flying is ridiculously awesome, but only done by flying carpets in it. This also leads to one part I think is particularly cool, when a couple members of the Black Company disguise themselves and saw through* a flying carpet just enough so it collapses at 200 feet in the air.
*They are technically called carpets, but it has a wooden structure built on the bottom to support more weight. It's not exactly Aladdin.
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
So does anyone else doubt that D&D 5e will ever be published in actual, final book form? I am getting that vaporware feeling from this whole open playtest debacle. At this point I don't think that WotC -- or, rather, the team at WotC responsible for D&D -- has the organizational competence to bring a new edition to market.
While retrofitting my cleric for compliance with the latest playtest packet, I had a chance to look over some changes made in clerical magic.
Cure/Inflict series has been smooshed into one 1st level spell, that's variable in effect by casting it in different slots. Also it does as much damage at level 1 as it used to do as a level 2. OTOH, the healing components scale well, but the damage does not. Inflict is now ranged, where only Cure was previously.
This has a few effects:
'preparing' two spells (inflict and cure) lets you do variable scaling damage and variable scaling healing to both the living and undead, as you see fit. Instead of having to prepare 2 separate spells for each level to get that kind of range, you now have 2 for all levels and can prepare other 'utility' spells instead.
Cleric Cantrips remain 'at-will,' and while they have changed to do lower initial damage, they all now scale with level. They don't seem to do half damage on a save, but their continuous scaling damage, decent range (or short range and some excellent benefit), and the fact that they work off of saves as opposed to 'to hit' seems to mean they actually do their job more often than something some plebian might do like 'swinging a sword.'
Everything seems to be saves now, with no actual magical "attacks," but this seems to work in the caster's favor again, in the same way as having the ability to target different NADs did in 4e, combined with a usual lack of of save modifiers and how easy it is to get high save DCs.
Final thoughts: In view of the changes that just happened to all the non-caster classes, I am pleased to see right-thinking changes like this coming back to the system. Having stupidfighters be useful was doubleplusungood, and I for one, welcome the turn of our caster overlords. Soon we shall see the triumph of the MasterClass, and we shall quietly relocate all players of martial classes to resettlement zones, where they may learn to shower.
If my role play is hindered by rolling to play, then I'd prefer the rolls play right, instead of steam-rolling play-night.
0
Options
oxybeEntei is appaled and disappointed in youRegistered Userregular
the core issue is the saves themselves.
in all editions but 5th, your saves were it's own stat, sometimes modified by your ability scores. this allowed for the scaling of the save based on level: higher level monsters were better against spells. you could still jack up the DC but unless you min-maxed the fuck out of it, in a casual game it won't get out of hand... monsters had a chance to succeed.
in 5th ed, monsters stats tend to be bound by the same range as the PCs, so the while the DCs keep going up while enemy's lowest saves will probably always be around the +/- 1. pinpoint that one and the game gets easier as since you level up both your casting stat and spell attack bonus go up. even then the best a monster can hope for is a +5 barring some rather special ones, so +5 VS DC 20 at highest.
but as i said: casters get a wider array of choices to pick at when casting their spells. a fighter, rogue, monk, barbarian, etc... only get to attack AC, which is entirely based off either gear or both gear & stat. this generally means that a fighter is often trying to hit a DC of 14-16ish most of the time if his enemy is decently geared up with ok stats, you generally need a 12 or so to hit these guys with the number needing going down.
fighter types can often get a +10 at best, with out magic gear at least, with enemy ACs topping off in a possible range of 20ish (fullplate/mithral&20dex + shield).
sigh.
sighs all around.
you can read my collected ravings at oxybesothertumbr.tumblr.com
A good buddy of mine did, and I respectfully requested that if he saw Mr. Kurtz, then a shot in the balls for "Tales from the Table" glorifying asshat DM-ery would be appreciated. I offered to pay bail, and explain on his behalf that I was the one who had requested/instigated the violence, and inform the judge with all due gravity that Mr. Kurtz did indeed have it coming.
The result:
Motherfuckin' traitor.
Leper on
If my role play is hindered by rolling to play, then I'd prefer the rolls play right, instead of steam-rolling play-night.
A good buddy of mine did, and I respectfully requested that if he saw Mr. Kurtz, then a shot in the balls for "Tales from the Table" glorifying asshat DM-ery would be appreciated. I offered to pay bail, and explain on his behalf that I was the one who had requested/instigated the violence, and inform the judge with all due gravity that Mr. Kurtz did indeed have it coming.
No, I don't like them. Yes, I think the whole thing is a collection of great examples of why many DMs should be ashamed of themselves.
But I don't know Scott, and I'm not the kind of person to seriously advocate internet vigilante violence--certainly not over something that stupid. Flaming bag of poop at his booth, maybe.
If my role play is hindered by rolling to play, then I'd prefer the rolls play right, instead of steam-rolling play-night.
oxybeEntei is appaled and disappointed in youRegistered Userregular
flaming bags of poop are a time-honored tradition predating internet vigilantism and is justified retribution due to slights, actual or perceived, in most civilized countries.
you can read my collected ravings at oxybesothertumbr.tumblr.com
oxybeEntei is appaled and disappointed in youRegistered Userregular
a mix of both really. while they do call out playtesting the next edition in one comic (where they introduce Darby the D&D newbie), the only real call to mechanics revolves the wizard rolling a 1 to hit with his sleep spell.
you can read my collected ravings at oxybesothertumbr.tumblr.com
-Weather Badge
0
Options
gaming_librarianTurn your face to the sun...Registered Userregular
Can someone here explain the way Next is handling selecting backgrounds and schemes, etc., when building your character? I've confused myself I guess while reading this thing and comparing it to the last packet. Once you choose your race and class, is it mandatory then to select a Background? Like, I don't really see the point, as they just seem like suggested skill sets to choose with an awkward role playing-ish thing attached like "you can be best friends with a guild of thieves or knight somewhere yay!". And the Specialities seem like suggestions as well, and that is its intent I suppose. Practically speaking, though, if I were to build a character from scratch, it's be like this: roll abilities (I always do this over array, just personal choice), pick race and sub-race (adjust ability score accordingly), then I could just pick 4 skills to be trained in as long as I meet the pre-reqs, then pick a feat I like, and I'm done...right? Are the pre-built specialties there to provide a way of gaining feats whether you meet the pre-reqs or not? I'm confusing what grants feats and what grants skills, I suppose.
Backgrounds are a preselected list of skills and a minor RP-related benefit. You can pick your own skills independent of your Background choice.
Specialties are a preselected list of feats. You still need to meet the prerequisites for them. You can pick your own feats. There is no benefit to picking a Specialty over just picking the feats you want.
Backgrounds are a preselected list of skills and a minor RP-related benefit. You can pick your own skills independent of your Background choice.
Specialties are a preselected list of feats. You still need to meet the prerequisites for them. You can pick your own feats. There is no benefit to picking a Specialty over just picking the feats you want.
I'm not sure this helps you, but the designers are just as lost as you are.
Yeah, I'm gettin' that vibe.
0
Options
oxybeEntei is appaled and disappointed in youRegistered Userregular
yeah, it's pre-bundled packages but it's not immediately identified as such. the second paragraph seems to imply the mechanical importance of the Background "Choosing a background is one of four key decisions you make about your character, providing you with important story cues about his or her identity."
yet the bottom left paragraph then states the listed skills are only suggestions. and as such the only thing really differentiating one background from another is trait, as the only meaningful difference between having been a Charlatan or Knight is the ability to live a double life or give stern glares to disapproving nobles
what lops around to full retard is that the skills themselves are NOT identified in the "Backgrounds & Skills" package but the how to play one where it describes your ability scores.
look, if you're not gonna codify and describe skills in the section that mentions skills, don't label that section skills and proceed to make a laundry list followed by telling the reader to open up a separate section/pdf to see what those actually do.
go "when choosing your background you can pick four skills to be trained in. skills represent formal training, natural aptitude, dedicated practice, etc... in a variety of tasks ranging from riding, doing acrobatics, sneaking, knowledge in a body of lore or even playing an instrument. this is mechanically represented by rolling your skill die in addition to your ability check related to that task."
then describe the skill die and be done with it.
you can read my collected ravings at oxybesothertumbr.tumblr.com
-Weather Badge
0
Options
gaming_librarianTurn your face to the sun...Registered Userregular
look, if you're not gonna codify and describe skills in the section that mentions skills, don't label that section skills and proceed to make a laundry list followed by telling the reader to open up a separate section/pdf to see what those actually do.
go "when choosing your background you can pick four skills to be trained in. skills represent formal training, natural aptitude, dedicated practice, etc... in a variety of tasks ranging from riding, doing acrobatics, sneaking, knowledge in a body of lore or even playing an instrument. this is mechanically represented by rolling your skill die in addition to your ability check related to that task."
then describe the skill die and be done with it.
Thank you. As usual, if Wizards would just use freaking clear language and just say what they mean in these documents, people could actually test this game consistently. As it stands, I feel like I need a decoder ring and a Navajo Windtalker to translate some of the "mechanics as written" to me, as well as navigate the blasted documents to see if I can solve the puzzle of the rules in order to maybe play the game. Your above statement would save about 2 and a half pages of unnecessary, muddled language if they'd say that, then just slap the skill list right there. I showed this packet to my wife (who is an editor), and her reaction was similar to that of some poor soul who had been exposed to nightmare writings of Lovecraftian design. I'm sure the grognards think it's just fine as is, since D&D ISN'T FOR BABIES. /iconic
0
Options
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
guys, there hasn't been a legends and lore released yet this week. i'm scared.
guys, there hasn't been a legends and lore released yet this week. i'm scared.
Well, see, at first they thought it would be to their advantage if they posted it early, but then that would put their editors at a disadvantage in order to ensure anything not relating to wizards had been removed. These effects cancel each other out, though, so they'll just have to post it when it feels like real D&D, and not just some fluff piece about a video game, ya know?
0
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
So does anyone else doubt that D&D 5e will ever be published in actual, final book form? I am getting that vaporware feeling from this whole open playtest debacle. At this point I don't think that WotC -- or, rather, the team at WotC responsible for D&D -- has the organizational competence to bring a new edition to market.
Look, if Duke Nukem Forever can make it to market...
...although at this point 5E will probably make DN4E look like what fans wanted it to be...
look, if you're not gonna codify and describe skills in the section that mentions skills, don't label that section skills and proceed to make a laundry list followed by telling the reader to open up a separate section/pdf to see what those actually do.
go "when choosing your background you can pick four skills to be trained in. skills represent formal training, natural aptitude, dedicated practice, etc... in a variety of tasks ranging from riding, doing acrobatics, sneaking, knowledge in a body of lore or even playing an instrument. this is mechanically represented by rolling your skill die in addition to your ability check related to that task."
then describe the skill die and be done with it.
Thank you. As usual, if Wizards would just use freaking clear language and just say what they mean in these documents, people could actually test this game consistently. As it stands, I feel like I need a decoder ring and a Navajo Windtalker to translate some of the "mechanics as written" to me, as well as navigate the blasted documents to see if I can solve the puzzle of the rules in order to maybe play the game. Your above statement would save about 2 and a half pages of unnecessary, muddled language if they'd say that, then just slap the skill list right there. I showed this packet to my wife (who is an editor), and her reaction was similar to that of some poor soul who had been exposed to nightmare writings of Lovecraftian design. I'm sure the grognards think it's just fine as is, since D&D ISN'T FOR BABIES. /iconic
Yeah, if memory serves, this was an issue with the early D&D products - hence why Munchkins and Rule Lawyers were things, the unclear phrasing and slip-shop editing made the rules unclear and hard to interpret in places. Notice how Munchkins of today typically rely on combinations of rules, tweaking options and "creative" applications of rules, instead of weaseling around word usage? That's because rulebooks of today are formatted and edited, just like textbooks, with careful detail paid to how rules fit into a whole.
Hitting the broken computer does not fix the broken computer. Fixing the broken computer, fixes the broken computer.
But First: Even if you don't give two shits for 4e, (philistine) there's a wonderful example of what these Tales should look like in our very own 4e thread.
Roleplaying the Roll
I want to say something snarky here, but I really shouldn't. Yes, a wizard wouldn't have to roll, and wouldn't fail, blah blah blah. It's nice to see somebody maintain a good attitude in a game when things aren't going well for their character. Summary: System may not have supported failing forward, but the player sure as hell did.
Third Time's The Charm
I was right about to say "holy shit, two non-failing DMs in a row!" And then I got to the last line. Summary: My houserule just like all the other house rules is special because I require a 1 in 8000 chance instead of 1 in 400. Someone managed to nail that roll and that crazy story (you've heard a billion times before) happened again. Also I kill characters because I'm in charge and the stupid players need to know that.
Anything is Possible!
Nice story about improvised actions and how much fun they can be for everyone. Summary: P1: Nothing on our character sheet says we can do anything useful yet! P2: Let's do something that would be cool and is not on our character sheet! DM: Roll that beautiful bean footage! P1: Success! All: BOOYAKA!
Critical Thinking
This is why some people's 'house rules' never get put in books. They're shit. They should never be published, and likely never will be. Unless you're working on Next. (zing!) Summary: One DM's illustration of why finding two shovels 5% of the time is totes a great way to balance out stabbing yourself in the eye 5% of the time, y'all!
Mr. Kurtz:
I see the assassins have failed.
Angie's List is apparently not appropriate for all contractors.
Leper on
If my role play is hindered by rolling to play, then I'd prefer the rolls play right, instead of steam-rolling play-night.
More Tales From the Table... Critical Thinking
This is why some people's 'house rules' never get put in books. They're shit. They should never be published, and likely never will be. Unless you're working on Next. (zing!) Summary: One DM's illustration of why finding two shovels 5% of the time is totes a great way to balance out stabbing yourself in the eye 5% of the time, y'all!
Gawd, spel chick plz!
0
Options
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
Posts
MHRP would be perfect for that.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
I used the personal pronoun did I not?
OTOH, for another comparison, Black Company wizards are broken as fuck (they get like d12 or d20 HP/level)
Apparently, from what I've heard, Wizards in that are strictly NPC evil Demi-gods?
Quoting that Syndrome line as argument reminds me of people saying the Harry Potter books teached anti-Christian values because a villain said "There is no good or evil. Only power, and those who are too weak to seek it."
and then you made a generalized statement about "no one"
It's worth reading if you like fantasy. Easily my favorite series.
A substantial number of them. The Black Company has a couple illusionists who are moderately competent, and a bit morally questionable (cheating at cards, black market dealings, etc) but not really evil.
The one thing the series does well that would be perfect for DND is having a good spontaneous magic vs. magic items / enchantment balance. Magical flying is ridiculously awesome, but only done by flying carpets in it. This also leads to one part I think is particularly cool, when a couple members of the Black Company disguise themselves and saw through* a flying carpet just enough so it collapses at 200 feet in the air.
*They are technically called carpets, but it has a wooden structure built on the bottom to support more weight. It's not exactly Aladdin.
Cure/Inflict series has been smooshed into one 1st level spell, that's variable in effect by casting it in different slots. Also it does as much damage at level 1 as it used to do as a level 2. OTOH, the healing components scale well, but the damage does not. Inflict is now ranged, where only Cure was previously.
This has a few effects:
'preparing' two spells (inflict and cure) lets you do variable scaling damage and variable scaling healing to both the living and undead, as you see fit. Instead of having to prepare 2 separate spells for each level to get that kind of range, you now have 2 for all levels and can prepare other 'utility' spells instead.
Cleric Cantrips remain 'at-will,' and while they have changed to do lower initial damage, they all now scale with level. They don't seem to do half damage on a save, but their continuous scaling damage, decent range (or short range and some excellent benefit), and the fact that they work off of saves as opposed to 'to hit' seems to mean they actually do their job more often than something some plebian might do like 'swinging a sword.'
Everything seems to be saves now, with no actual magical "attacks," but this seems to work in the caster's favor again, in the same way as having the ability to target different NADs did in 4e, combined with a usual lack of of save modifiers and how easy it is to get high save DCs.
Final thoughts: In view of the changes that just happened to all the non-caster classes, I am pleased to see right-thinking changes like this coming back to the system. Having stupidfighters be useful was doubleplusungood, and I for one, welcome the turn of our caster overlords. Soon we shall see the triumph of the MasterClass, and we shall quietly relocate all players of martial classes to resettlement zones, where they may learn to shower.
in all editions but 5th, your saves were it's own stat, sometimes modified by your ability scores. this allowed for the scaling of the save based on level: higher level monsters were better against spells. you could still jack up the DC but unless you min-maxed the fuck out of it, in a casual game it won't get out of hand... monsters had a chance to succeed.
in 5th ed, monsters stats tend to be bound by the same range as the PCs, so the while the DCs keep going up while enemy's lowest saves will probably always be around the +/- 1. pinpoint that one and the game gets easier as since you level up both your casting stat and spell attack bonus go up. even then the best a monster can hope for is a +5 barring some rather special ones, so +5 VS DC 20 at highest.
but as i said: casters get a wider array of choices to pick at when casting their spells. a fighter, rogue, monk, barbarian, etc... only get to attack AC, which is entirely based off either gear or both gear & stat. this generally means that a fighter is often trying to hit a DC of 14-16ish most of the time if his enemy is decently geared up with ok stats, you generally need a 12 or so to hit these guys with the number needing going down.
fighter types can often get a +10 at best, with out magic gear at least, with enemy ACs topping off in a possible range of 20ish (fullplate/mithral&20dex + shield).
sigh.
sighs all around.
Did anyone at the PAX panel tell them that 5E is bad and they should feel bad
Because that really should have happened
A good buddy of mine did, and I respectfully requested that if he saw Mr. Kurtz, then a shot in the balls for "Tales from the Table" glorifying asshat DM-ery would be appreciated. I offered to pay bail, and explain on his behalf that I was the one who had requested/instigated the violence, and inform the judge with all due gravity that Mr. Kurtz did indeed have it coming.
The result:
Motherfuckin' traitor.
Yeah NONE of that is unfair or creepy....
I apologize.
No, I don't like them. Yes, I think the whole thing is a collection of great examples of why many DMs should be ashamed of themselves.
But I don't know Scott, and I'm not the kind of person to seriously advocate internet vigilante violence--certainly not over something that stupid. Flaming bag of poop at his booth, maybe.
Despite the fact that it's not at all representative of D&D Next.
Or is that because it's not at all representative of D&D Next?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Specialties are a preselected list of feats. You still need to meet the prerequisites for them. You can pick your own feats. There is no benefit to picking a Specialty over just picking the feats you want.
Thanks. That's what I thought.
Yeah, I'm gettin' that vibe.
yet the bottom left paragraph then states the listed skills are only suggestions. and as such the only thing really differentiating one background from another is trait, as the only meaningful difference between having been a Charlatan or Knight is the ability to live a double life or give stern glares to disapproving nobles
what lops around to full retard is that the skills themselves are NOT identified in the "Backgrounds & Skills" package but the how to play one where it describes your ability scores.
look, if you're not gonna codify and describe skills in the section that mentions skills, don't label that section skills and proceed to make a laundry list followed by telling the reader to open up a separate section/pdf to see what those actually do.
go "when choosing your background you can pick four skills to be trained in. skills represent formal training, natural aptitude, dedicated practice, etc... in a variety of tasks ranging from riding, doing acrobatics, sneaking, knowledge in a body of lore or even playing an instrument. this is mechanically represented by rolling your skill die in addition to your ability check related to that task."
then describe the skill die and be done with it.
Maybe they're actually working on making the game better, so they don't have time to write mindless puff pieces.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Oh, this is good.
I needed a laugh to start my day.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Am I to assume that you rolled a 1?
Well, see, at first they thought it would be to their advantage if they posted it early, but then that would put their editors at a disadvantage in order to ensure anything not relating to wizards had been removed. These effects cancel each other out, though, so they'll just have to post it when it feels like real D&D, and not just some fluff piece about a video game, ya know?
Look, if Duke Nukem Forever can make it to market...
...although at this point 5E will probably make DN4E look like what fans wanted it to be...
No, I actually rolled a 16, but I didn't train Bluff and my Charisma is only a 12.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Yeah, if memory serves, this was an issue with the early D&D products - hence why Munchkins and Rule Lawyers were things, the unclear phrasing and slip-shop editing made the rules unclear and hard to interpret in places. Notice how Munchkins of today typically rely on combinations of rules, tweaking options and "creative" applications of rules, instead of weaseling around word usage? That's because rulebooks of today are formatted and edited, just like textbooks, with careful detail paid to how rules fit into a whole.
But First: Even if you don't give two shits for 4e, (philistine) there's a wonderful example of what these Tales should look like in our very own 4e thread.
Roleplaying the Roll
I want to say something snarky here, but I really shouldn't. Yes, a wizard wouldn't have to roll, and wouldn't fail, blah blah blah. It's nice to see somebody maintain a good attitude in a game when things aren't going well for their character. Summary: System may not have supported failing forward, but the player sure as hell did.
Third Time's The Charm
I was right about to say "holy shit, two non-failing DMs in a row!" And then I got to the last line. Summary: My houserule just like all the other house rules is special because I require a 1 in 8000 chance instead of 1 in 400. Someone managed to nail that roll and that crazy story (you've heard a billion times before) happened again. Also I kill characters because I'm in charge and the stupid players need to know that.
Anything is Possible!
Nice story about improvised actions and how much fun they can be for everyone. Summary: P1: Nothing on our character sheet says we can do anything useful yet! P2: Let's do something that would be cool and is not on our character sheet! DM: Roll that beautiful bean footage! P1: Success! All: BOOYAKA!
Critical Thinking
This is why some people's 'house rules' never get put in books. They're shit. They should never be published, and likely never will be. Unless you're working on Next. (zing!) Summary: One DM's illustration of why finding two shovels 5% of the time is totes a great way to balance out stabbing yourself in the eye 5% of the time, y'all!
Mr. Kurtz:
Angie's List is apparently not appropriate for all contractors.
Gawd, spel chick plz!
hoo boy
more use of the word iconic
Drow, Driders, Druegar, and Grimlocks
if only the latter were a firebreathing t-rex