The thing that makes it actually bad is that they’re taking advantage of the mentally handicapped(investors). That and that said investors have millions to toss at nonsense while so many people are licky to have pennies to toss at such luxuries as “food”.
Honestly though I don’t think taking advantage of evil people, who swear they deserve their millions because they’re definitely super smart, is really anything I care that much about.
I very much did not. He was complaining about D&D having spells that made him feel bad and I offered an example of how there’s more to 5e than spellslots to get the job done.
Do you think we don’t also talk our way out of problems? We do that all the time. I routinely, even with -1 charisma, would do shit all the time to get us out of dangerous fights and solve problems in more ways than “gun”.
And none of you have even given examples as to why other systems are better so please, do go on.
“Wrong, I don’t reward players for being smart so it’s bad!” Dude my group went into town and bought a bunch of fertilizer and other things(because I checked and making explosives actually isn’t that difficult apparently) and that, plus a bomb-crazy dwarf we knew nearby, let us do some crazy damage to a golem.
You like a certain style of play, fine, but acting like that’s the only way to feel rewarded is showing your limitations, not the system’s.
I don’t want to sit here defending 5e but 80% of the complaints I hear about always seem to boil down to “why isn’t the system creative for me?!”. It’s a lot of people self-limiting and then being mad.
You can instantly create a harder, thoughtful encounter by simply introducing more enemies than just one they can beat on, and/or by doing WHAT THE BOOK SAYS and get the players used to multiple encounters per day so they need to manage their resources. My DM wanted to make fights harder and I simply mentioned that a stronger enemy is cool and all but what would be better is making us have to make choices. I was a stupid accurate fighter and focused on range, and while feats and stuff made me a dangerous close-quarters fighter I was also the only one who could reliably down other ranged enemies. We played up to level 13 in that campaign and there were a lot of fights that were pretty stressful and fun. We even had a tournament arc and that was wild.
Your inability to create complex encounters is not the fault of the system, especially when the system literally tells you how to make it work and you ignore what’s in the book. But, of course, not reading the material is pretty standard procedure for D&D players.
There is a stark difference between something we’ve literally observed in nature and claiming that a drow woman would derive sexual pleasure from it. And don’t try and tell me “lol can’t have pregnancy without sex” as if you’re that daft that you actually think that argument isn’t 100% garbage in this case.
Come on, be serious.
Literally talking to my DM about this right now. You have to grade on a curve but absolutely good, kind, even in control people can be barbarians. Frankly the entire self-limitation people put on themselves by forcing a class based on tropes is getting tiring.
Hell, I had an idea for a barbarian that doesn’t get bad but instead just locks in. Just goes real quiet and fuck’s shit up.
You can also make a paladin that doesn’t wear plate armour, who uses a bow, and who’s oath is to protect their village or simply they just love their wife a lot and it’s their wedding vows.
Hell yes, Abserd-style multiclass incoming.
“That’s so weird!”
“And what are you doing?”
“…”
They expect embarrassment but they will only get pity.
“They’re stupid as anything, but at least they mean well.” Bar’s in hell, goddamn.
I think as long as you’re eating food that tastes good within what you’re able to eat then you’re doing just fine and people shouldn’t judge you. It’s people that could eat whatever and choose to be flavourless that suck.
Apparently English men were partly mad abojt vikings because they’d show up bathed and well-groomed and would take their wives. They told on themselves and didn’t get it.
If the next person getting tied down holds down the person currently being tied down then this could work. I’m sure they’d be game so that’s fine.
I’d die for a bean yaknowwhatI’msaying
Pythagoras what a weird dude.
Ah, but you see, arithmetic is scary.
The only time I get too much to deal with is when I’m rolling four dice per attack, twice per round, and want to have a high level of confidence in my answer while also not taking up everyone’s time. For that I just made a spreadsheet and moved on with it.
They do include them, but I only use backgrounds as ways to pad out the mechanics and that choice is heavily influenced by the background I’ve already created. My current character is using the custom option because none of the backgrounds really fit.
Buddy we’re playing adventurers who are by their nature main characters. We can’t Dues-ex everything but we can know things. Also who’s to say we’re city dwellers? Both my last characters lived well outside city limits. And when you live in a world with actual trolls you don’t think their children’s stories would have key information like that? How many of our own children’s stories include warnings? How many myths and legends? Hell the bible likely said to not eat pig because it made people sick and everyone thought it was some will of god shit so they stayed away.
If I made a player roll for it, say their character really probably wouldn’t know, then I’d make that shit a DC 5. Like, “everyone else knows it but you missed that lesson, sorry.”
Making characters stupid for “realism” based in a misunderstanding of how either world works is just boring for nothing.
1000%. Ever seen a Ferrari in a sky blue? Shit rocks way harder than red. In GT7 my friend and I painted a 512 to be full carbon and that thing looks incredible.
The only exceptions where it at least looks pretty decent are Miatas and other small cars like Minis Fiat 500s.
Unsolicited but usually helpful advice is my forte lol! Appreciate the appreciation!
