I'm not going to be able to keep my players occupied with lizard folk for a level 9 party. It would be beyond a waste of time for the players at that point. They would kill them in 2 rounds, if that.
You certainly can keep a level 9 party occupied with 16xLizardfolk, though it will be spectacularly annoying to run and they're a bad choice because they don't have good ranged attacks (a medium encounter of 32xGoblin is quite a bit more dangerous. If you really want to kill the party, use 64xBandit and then add a racial option such as Halfling).
However, a much more playable option would be to just add easy swarm rules so you can just treat a horde of orcs as one monster.
Or a Warlord and 2-3 minions and a caster. Mix and match. Make the warlord a powerful Lizardfolk fighter.
To bring it back to the original posters point, I do understand your DM not wanting to deal with floating modifiers on weapons and armor or with items like headband of intelligence. Unfortunately a lot of magical items have those sort of modifiers plus extra stuff, so your DM is probably making more work for themselves by not using items that have damage and to hit modifiers, then they would be putting a slightly stronger creature because your party has those items.
That is assuming that you count +1s as bounded accuracy because I certainly do.
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
Consider this case with an Amulet of Health (19 Con):
Assume as a Rare item, chars typically start finding this item at 2nd tier level (in my game I don't let chars have access to Rare items until at least 9th).
A wizard at 8th level likely has put their 2 ASI's into their spell casting ability, and at best, starts with a Con of 14, with most 27 point buy builds. For a 8th level wizard, that means a +2 on their Con saves for Concentration. Now along comes the Amulet. Their Con save is now +4. Working with anything less than 21 points of damage from a single attack translates into a DC10 on the Con save. With a +2, that means a 35% chance of failure. That amulet, the +4 makes it a 25% chance of failure. That may not sound like much, but it is massive. Imagine this same char being hit twice in a turn. With a +2, that works out to a 57.75% chance of failing at least one of the saves, and blowing Conc. With a +4, that chance of failure drops to 43.75%.
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
Consider this case with an Amulet of Health (19 Con):
Assume as a Rare item, chars typically start finding this item at 2nd tier level (in my game I don't let chars have access to Rare items until at least 9th).
A wizard at 8th level likely has put their 2 ASI's into their spell casting ability, and at best, starts with a Con of 14, with most 27 point buy builds. For a 8th level wizard, that means a +2 on their Con saves for Concentration. Now along comes the Amulet. Their Con save is now +4. Working with anything less than 21 points of damage from a single attack translates into a DC10 on the Con save. With a +2, that means a 35% chance of failure. That amulet, the +4 makes it a 25% chance of failure. That may not sound like much, but it is massive. Imagine this same char being hit twice in a turn. With a +2, that works out to a 57.75% chance of failing at least one of the saves, and blowing Conc. With a +4, that chance of failure drops to 43.75%.
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
Crucial? Really?!? OMG I am so tired of hearing these “If yer not 1st, yet last!” arguments. It’s never “crucial.” You know why? Because no matter how high those numbers are doesn’t really matter, because the DM will always be adjusting for overall combat effectiveness. That includes Ability Scores, Saves, Save DCs, AC, HP, all of it. If you have it, the DM should crank things up, and if you don’t have it, the DM shouldn’t.
So, if you take a feat instead of an ASI, it all get arrogated in. If you have slightly lower stats but can do more things, that gets considered. If you have higher stats, but can do fewer things, that gets considered. If you have magic items that blow up your stats, guess what? Yup, that gets considered too. Don’t have those items? Guess what... yeah, you guessed it.
No matter what power level the PCs are spiking on the DM’s Scouter, that’s how tough the fights will be. And I can prove it.
Take your 57.75% and your 43.75% and run them both against this, my BBE just hit them with a 6th-level Magic Missile. Make 8 Concentration checks. Guess what? Statistically, they both drop Concentration that turn.
The only thing that’s “crucial” is not being a wangrod.
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
Consider this case with an Amulet of Health (19 Con):
Assume as a Rare item, chars typically start finding this item at 2nd tier level (in my game I don't let chars have access to Rare items until at least 9th).
A wizard at 8th level likely has put their 2 ASI's into their spell casting ability, and at best, starts with a Con of 14, with most 27 point buy builds. For a 8th level wizard, that means a +2 on their Con saves for Concentration. Now along comes the Amulet. Their Con save is now +4. Working with anything less than 21 points of damage from a single attack translates into a DC10 on the Con save. With a +2, that means a 35% chance of failure. That amulet, the +4 makes it a 25% chance of failure. That may not sound like much, but it is massive. Imagine this same char being hit twice in a turn. With a +2, that works out to a 57.75% chance of failing at least one of the saves, and blowing Conc. With a +4, that chance of failure drops to 43.75%.
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
Crucial? Really?!? OMG I am so tired of hearing these “If yer not 1st, yet last!” arguments. It’s never “crucial.” You know why? Because no matter how high those numbers are doesn’t really matter, because the DM will always be adjusting for overall combat effectiveness. That includes Ability Scores, Saves, Save DCs, AC, HP, all of it. If you have it, the DM should crank things up, and if you don’t have it, the DM shouldn’t.
So, if you take a feat instead of an ASI, it all get arrogated in. If you have slightly lower stats but can do more things, that gets considered. If you have higher stats, but can do fewer things, that gets considered. If you have magic items that blow up your stats, guess what? Yup, that gets considered too. Don’t have those items? Guess what... yeah, you guessed it.
No matter what power level the PCs are spiking on the DM’s Scouter, that’s how tough the fights will be. And I can prove it.
Take your 57.75% and your 43.75% and run them both against this, my BBE just hit them with a 6th-level Magic Missile. Make 8 Concentration checks. Guess what? Statistically, they both drop Concentration that turn.
The only thing that’s “crucial” is not being a wangrod.
Yup....you develop your char that is "focused on being fun, and what I want". Meantime, you have one or two in your group that grasp basic math, and understand how these pluses impact EVERYTHING in the game. So they play and develop their char intelligently, and the DM then has to adjust difficulty levels to their abilities. Newsflash: DM's adjust to the highest ability char, not the lowest common denominator. So suddenly your char is an interesting and fun sidekick to the group, but sub-par when things get dicey, and the group suffers.
Oh, and as for your BBEG dumping 6 attacks against my Concentration? Yeah, no doubt the probability is super high that Conc will fail. Until that Wizard is actually a Sorcerer, and at 9th level, with that Amulet has a +8 on Con Saves, and only fails on a 1, instead of a 1,2, or 3. That translates into a 73.5% chance of Conc staying up against that 6th level Magic Missile versus 37.7% chance without the Amulet.
+2 on any save is the equivalent of 2 ASI's, and those ASI"s MUST be used well, not thrown away on some whim.
You can scream all you like, but D&D is a game of math. That is the reality, when every single monster, every single NPC, every single PC, has stats defining every single action. I am not about to scroll through the source books, but if you tally up the thousands of pages of material, I would wager that at least 90% of them have some reference to stats and mechanics.
Newsflash: DM's adjust to the highest ability char, not the lowest common denominator. So suddenly your char is an interesting and fun sidekick to the group, but sub-par when things get dicey, and the group suffers.
uhhhhhh. you should never really assume what DMs do, because I can guarantee a large number do not do this.
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
[Sic]
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
Crucial? Really?!? OMG I am so tired of hearing these “If yer not 1st, yet last!” arguments. It’s never “crucial.” You know why? Because no matter how high those numbers are doesn’t really matter, because the DM will always be adjusting for overall combat effectiveness. That includes Ability Scores, Saves, Save DCs, AC, HP, all of it. If you have it, the DM should crank things up, and if you don’t have it, the DM shouldn’t.
So, if you take a feat instead of an ASI, it all get arrogated in. If you have slightly lower stats but can do more things, that gets considered. If you have higher stats, but can do fewer things, that gets considered. If you have magic items that blow up your stats, guess what? Yup, that gets considered too. Don’t have those items? Guess what... yeah, you guessed it.
No matter what power level the PCs are spiking on the DM’s Scouter, that’s how tough the fights will be. And I can prove it.
Take your 57.75% and your 43.75% and run them both against this, my BBE just hit them with a 6th-level Magic Missile. Make 8 Concentration checks. Guess what? Statistically, they both drop Concentration that turn.
The only thing that’s “crucial” is not being a wangrod.
Yup....you develop your char that is "focused on being fun, and what I want". Meantime, you have one or two in your group that grasp basic math, and understand how these pluses impact EVERYTHING in the game. So they play and develop their char intelligently, and the DM then has to adjust difficulty levels to their abilities. Newsflash: DM's adjust to the highest ability char, not the lowest common denominator. So suddenly your char is an interesting and fun sidekick to the group, but sub-par when things get dicey, and the group suffers.
[Sic]
You can scream all you like, but D&D is a game of math. That is the reality, when every single monster, every single NPC, every single PC, has stats defining every single action. I am not about to scroll through the source books, but if you tally up the thousands of pages of material, I would wager that at least 90% of them have some reference to stats and mechanics.
Newsflash, DM’s adjust to the party’s overall power level, not the highest Ability PC in the group. If your DM only adjusts to the highest PC, then they are not playing fair to the whole group. My group uses rolled Abilities. If I adjusted to the highest PC that would make me a shitty DM. I adjust to the whole Party, because that’s my job as DM.
Newsflash, DM’s adjust to the party’s overall power level, not the highest Ability PC in the group. If your DM only adjusts to the highest PC, then they are not playing fair to the whole group. My group uses rolled Abilities. If I adjusted to the highest PC that would make me a shitty DM. I adjust to the whole Party, because that’s my job as DM.
Why did a thread about bounded accuracy turn into a thread about rolled stats? It's not like all-18s or all-3s actually puts you outside of the range of 'bounded accuracy'.
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
[Sic]
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
Crucial? Really?!? OMG I am so tired of hearing these “If yer not 1st, yet last!” arguments. It’s never “crucial.” You know why? Because no matter how high those numbers are doesn’t really matter, because the DM will always be adjusting for overall combat effectiveness. That includes Ability Scores, Saves, Save DCs, AC, HP, all of it. If you have it, the DM should crank things up, and if you don’t have it, the DM shouldn’t.
So, if you take a feat instead of an ASI, it all get arrogated in. If you have slightly lower stats but can do more things, that gets considered. If you have higher stats, but can do fewer things, that gets considered. If you have magic items that blow up your stats, guess what? Yup, that gets considered too. Don’t have those items? Guess what... yeah, you guessed it.
No matter what power level the PCs are spiking on the DM’s Scouter, that’s how tough the fights will be. And I can prove it.
Take your 57.75% and your 43.75% and run them both against this, my BBE just hit them with a 6th-level Magic Missile. Make 8 Concentration checks. Guess what? Statistically, they both drop Concentration that turn.
The only thing that’s “crucial” is not being a wangrod.
Yup....you develop your char that is "focused on being fun, and what I want". Meantime, you have one or two in your group that grasp basic math, and understand how these pluses impact EVERYTHING in the game. So they play and develop their char intelligently, and the DM then has to adjust difficulty levels to their abilities. Newsflash: DM's adjust to the highest ability char, not the lowest common denominator. So suddenly your char is an interesting and fun sidekick to the group, but sub-par when things get dicey, and the group suffers.
[Sic]
You can scream all you like, but D&D is a game of math. That is the reality, when every single monster, every single NPC, every single PC, has stats defining every single action. I am not about to scroll through the source books, but if you tally up the thousands of pages of material, I would wager that at least 90% of them have some reference to stats and mechanics.
Newsflash, DM’s adjust to the party’s overall power level, not the highest Ability PC in the group. If your DM only adjusts to the highest PC, then they are not playing fair to the whole group. My group uses rolled Abilities. If I adjusted to the highest PC that would make me a shitty DM. I adjust to the whole Party, because that’s my job as DM.
You are a bad DM if you use rolled stats, but as stated above, this thread is not about how awful rolled stat generation is.
You are a bad DM if you use rolled stats, but as stated above, this thread is not about how awful rolled stat generation is.
No, you're not. I don't agree with rolling stats, I don't use it at my tables or like it as a player, but you are not a bad DM if you use rolled stats. This is utterly incorrect, uncalled for, and extremely offensive for no reason.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Third ignore them, there is no gain in fighting. I admit that I am a horrible person and a terrible player and DM because I use rolled stats, and I am proud of it.
I personally love bounded accuracy, because it simplifies everything
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
You are a bad DM if you use rolled stats, but as stated above, this thread is not about how awful rolled stat generation is.
No, you're not. I don't agree with rolling stats, I don't use it at my tables or like it as a player, but you are not a bad DM if you use rolled stats. This is utterly incorrect, uncalled for, and extremely offensive for no reason.
I do agree rolled stats are generally a bad idea but yeah no need for the bad DM call.
Rolled stats suck because of bounded accuracy so it's applicable.
Stats didn't matter nearly as much previously and rolling was just kinda fun.
Now with bounded accuracy rolling is a bad idea in general.
Also I do agree you have to challenge up to your most powerful PC otherwise you will not find good balance. You will drastically underpower encounters otherwise.
The only way it does work to do that is if you have a powerful PC who doesn't do the optimal thing most of the time as a RP choice. This is valid and DM can adjust for that but if you underpower encounters they might feel obligated to pull punches and you don't want that either.
So generally it's better to stick with the advice that's been stated:
Use Standard array/point buy
Don't hand out a lot of items that give bonuses
Plan for the most powerful and scale back as needed
I support you guys (Third and Bovine) We don't always agree, but you can play the game however you want to, and I don't mean that in a patronizing way. I genuinely support however you want to play. After all, your enjoyment doesn't threaten mine.
I support you guys (Third and Bovine) We don't always agree, but you can play the game however you want to, and I don't mean that in a patronizing way. I genuinely support however you want to play. After all, your enjoyment doesn't threaten mine.
*Crying* G-gee thanks man
(lol)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Third ignore them, there is no gain in fighting. I admit that I am a horrible person and a terrible player and DM because I use rolled stats, and I am proud of it.
Not fighting them, just calling out them. I'm fine calling out jerks on either side of the aisle.
I'm not fighting them, I was just calling out them being a jerk. I do that to everyone on these kinds of threads, whether they agree with me or not.
You are not a horrible person, player, and DM for using rolled stats. I did for the longest time, but decided I didn't like randomness in character generation.
I support you guys (Third and Bovine) We don't always agree, but you can play the game however you want to, and I don't mean that in a patronizing way. I genuinely support however you want to play. After all, your enjoyment doesn't threaten mine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
A good DM will be careful about what magic items they give the players and at what levels they do so. I found out the hard way once, when I gave a Cloak of the Bat to a low level party Wizard. It proved to be a complete game-changer for me. I had to adjust most of my combat encounters to account for what The BatWizard could do without any risk to himself.
In and of itself, Bounded Accuracy has little to do with the effect on a campaign that items which grant stats will have. At Tier 1 they can be Very Powerful. At Tier 2, they are Kinda Cool. At Tier 3, they are Somewhat Meh, and players are quite likely to be looking for better items to attune.
In and of itself, Bounded Accuracy has little to do with the effect on a campaign that items which grant stats will have. At Tier 1 they can be Very Powerful. At Tier 2, they are Kinda Cool. At Tier 3, they are Somewhat Meh, and players are quite likely to be looking for better items to attune.
Offer someone playing a strength based character a belt of storm giant strength and see how many say no.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Or a Warlord and 2-3 minions and a caster. Mix and match. Make the warlord a powerful Lizardfolk fighter.
That's missing the concept of 'keeping low CR monsters relevant'. Not that I have a super strong desire to do so.
To bring it back to the original posters point, I do understand your DM not wanting to deal with floating modifiers on weapons and armor or with items like headband of intelligence. Unfortunately a lot of magical items have those sort of modifiers plus extra stuff, so your DM is probably making more work for themselves by not using items that have damage and to hit modifiers, then they would be putting a slightly stronger creature because your party has those items.
That is assuming that you count +1s as bounded accuracy because I certainly do.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Not entirely sure this is tangential to the original point, but I am thinking that given the concept of bounded accuracy, and the limits on a savings throw, it is mandatory to maintain low pluses on any magic items. Stuff like Headbands of Intellect can indeed be game-breaking.
Consider this case with an Amulet of Health (19 Con):
Assume as a Rare item, chars typically start finding this item at 2nd tier level (in my game I don't let chars have access to Rare items until at least 9th).
A wizard at 8th level likely has put their 2 ASI's into their spell casting ability, and at best, starts with a Con of 14, with most 27 point buy builds. For a 8th level wizard, that means a +2 on their Con saves for Concentration. Now along comes the Amulet. Their Con save is now +4. Working with anything less than 21 points of damage from a single attack translates into a DC10 on the Con save. With a +2, that means a 35% chance of failure. That amulet, the +4 makes it a 25% chance of failure. That may not sound like much, but it is massive. Imagine this same char being hit twice in a turn. With a +2, that works out to a 57.75% chance of failing at least one of the saves, and blowing Conc. With a +4, that chance of failure drops to 43.75%.
That is is just an extension of the concept of why char stats are so important. The idea of "starting stats don't matter" is utterly ludicrous. All stats, no matter at what point in char development, are crucial.
The Lizardfolk are relevant as minions of the reskinned Warlord. Relevant doesn't mean challenging on their own without context.
Crucial? Really?!? OMG I am so tired of hearing these “If yer not 1st, yet last!” arguments. It’s never “crucial.” You know why? Because no matter how high those numbers are doesn’t really matter, because the DM will always be adjusting for overall combat effectiveness. That includes Ability Scores, Saves, Save DCs, AC, HP, all of it. If you have it, the DM should crank things up, and if you don’t have it, the DM shouldn’t.
So, if you take a feat instead of an ASI, it all get arrogated in. If you have slightly lower stats but can do more things, that gets considered. If you have higher stats, but can do fewer things, that gets considered. If you have magic items that blow up your stats, guess what? Yup, that gets considered too. Don’t have those items? Guess what... yeah, you guessed it.
No matter what power level the PCs are spiking on the DM’s Scouter, that’s how tough the fights will be. And I can prove it.
Take your 57.75% and your 43.75% and run them both against this, my BBE just hit them with a 6th-level Magic Missile. Make 8 Concentration checks. Guess what? Statistically, they both drop Concentration that turn.
The only thing that’s “crucial” is not being a wangrod.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yup....you develop your char that is "focused on being fun, and what I want". Meantime, you have one or two in your group that grasp basic math, and understand how these pluses impact EVERYTHING in the game. So they play and develop their char intelligently, and the DM then has to adjust difficulty levels to their abilities. Newsflash: DM's adjust to the highest ability char, not the lowest common denominator. So suddenly your char is an interesting and fun sidekick to the group, but sub-par when things get dicey, and the group suffers.
Oh, and as for your BBEG dumping 6 attacks against my Concentration? Yeah, no doubt the probability is super high that Conc will fail. Until that Wizard is actually a Sorcerer, and at 9th level, with that Amulet has a +8 on Con Saves, and only fails on a 1, instead of a 1,2, or 3. That translates into a 73.5% chance of Conc staying up against that 6th level Magic Missile versus 37.7% chance without the Amulet.
+2 on any save is the equivalent of 2 ASI's, and those ASI"s MUST be used well, not thrown away on some whim.
You can scream all you like, but D&D is a game of math. That is the reality, when every single monster, every single NPC, every single PC, has stats defining every single action. I am not about to scroll through the source books, but if you tally up the thousands of pages of material, I would wager that at least 90% of them have some reference to stats and mechanics.
uhhhhhh. you should never really assume what DMs do, because I can guarantee a large number do not do this.
Newsflash, DM’s adjust to the party’s overall power level, not the highest Ability PC in the group. If your DM only adjusts to the highest PC, then they are not playing fair to the whole group. My group uses rolled Abilities. If I adjusted to the highest PC that would make me a shitty DM. I adjust to the whole Party, because that’s my job as DM.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Why did a thread about bounded accuracy turn into a thread about rolled stats? It's not like all-18s or all-3s actually puts you outside of the range of 'bounded accuracy'.
You are a bad DM if you use rolled stats, but as stated above, this thread is not about how awful rolled stat generation is.
No, you're not. I don't agree with rolling stats, I don't use it at my tables or like it as a player, but you are not a bad DM if you use rolled stats. This is utterly incorrect, uncalled for, and extremely offensive for no reason.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Third ignore them, there is no gain in fighting. I admit that I am a horrible person and a terrible player and DM because I use rolled stats, and I am proud of it.
I personally love bounded accuracy, because it simplifies everything
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I do agree rolled stats are generally a bad idea but yeah no need for the bad DM call.
Rolled stats suck because of bounded accuracy so it's applicable.
Stats didn't matter nearly as much previously and rolling was just kinda fun.
Now with bounded accuracy rolling is a bad idea in general.
Also I do agree you have to challenge up to your most powerful PC otherwise you will not find good balance. You will drastically underpower encounters otherwise.
The only way it does work to do that is if you have a powerful PC who doesn't do the optimal thing most of the time as a RP choice. This is valid and DM can adjust for that but if you underpower encounters they might feel obligated to pull punches and you don't want that either.
So generally it's better to stick with the advice that's been stated:
Use Standard array/point buy
Don't hand out a lot of items that give bonuses
Plan for the most powerful and scale back as needed
I support you guys (Third and Bovine) We don't always agree, but you can play the game however you want to, and I don't mean that in a patronizing way. I genuinely support however you want to play. After all, your enjoyment doesn't threaten mine.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
*Crying* G-gee thanks man
(lol)
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I'm not fighting them, I was just calling out them being a jerk. I do that to everyone on these kinds of threads, whether they agree with me or not.
You are not a horrible person, player, and DM for using rolled stats. I did for the longest time, but decided I didn't like randomness in character generation.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
A good DM will be careful about what magic items they give the players and at what levels they do so. I found out the hard way once, when I gave a Cloak of the Bat to a low level party Wizard. It proved to be a complete game-changer for me. I had to adjust most of my combat encounters to account for what The BatWizard could do without any risk to himself.
In and of itself, Bounded Accuracy has little to do with the effect on a campaign that items which grant stats will have. At Tier 1 they can be Very Powerful. At Tier 2, they are Kinda Cool. At Tier 3, they are Somewhat Meh, and players are quite likely to be looking for better items to attune.
<Insert clever signature here>
Offer someone playing a strength based character a belt of storm giant strength and see how many say no.