Manuals and Tomes

[lianightdemon]

Do books like tome of clear thought, and manual of physical prowess increase the ability score above 20?

Also if you are able to get two copies of the same book (Lucky treasure or crafting) can you read both and have your ability score go up by 4 in total?

[Naanomi]

Yes, the books can take you all the way to the 30 absolute limit assuming you have enough (or live long enough, as the books do reset themselves instead of disappearing in this edition)

[Chronos]

Personally, I like that the books reset themselves after a century, as it explains why any exist to be found as treasure, rather than already being used up. But it does introduce that problem with long-lived races. They need an additional rule that no single character can ever benefit from the same copy of a book more than once.

[Occasional Sage]

Personally, I like that the books reset themselves after a century, as it explains why any exist to be found as treasure, rather than already being used up. But it does introduce that problem with long-lived races. They need an additional rule that no single character can ever benefit from the same copy of a book more than once.

I doubt that most campaigns take place over the course of centuries to make it an issue. As such, they didn't bother writing the rule down (much like the illithid mindslave posse thing).

Frankly though, I rather like the idea of the undying mage in her tower slowly approaching INT30 over a half millennium.

[Slipperychicken]

Personally, I like that the books reset themselves after a century, as it explains why any exist to be found as treasure, rather than already being used up. But it does introduce that problem with long-lived races. They need an additional rule that no single character can ever benefit from the same copy of a book more than once.

Sounds more like a fluff thing to me. Gathering six supremely-powerful items and cowering in a dungeon for a thousand years to get all your stats to 30 isn't exactly feasible for a PC. You're not getting those items or that kind of time unless the DM gives it to you. Besides, it gives BBEGs something to do with their spare time.


Now, if we ever get something like a fast-time demiplane, that could combo with these books for some serious cheese.

[Chronos]

That sorcerer lich with 30 charisma might sound thematically cool... until you realize that it's impossible to pass a saving throw targeted at one of your nonproficient saves. Such things just don't work in 5e's bounded accuracy.

[Elderand]

Sounds more like a fluff thing to me. Gathering six supremely-powerful items and cowering in a dungeon for a thousand years to get all your stats to 30 isn't exactly feasible for a PC. You're not getting those items or that kind of time unless the DM gives it to you. Besides, it gives BBEGs something to do with their spare time.


Now, if we ever get something like a fast-time demiplane, that could combo with these books for some serious cheese.

You know what happens to people who gather magical treasure and go isolate themselves somewhere to take advantage of the magical treasure powers don't you ? Yup, you just turned yourself into a goddamn quest and dungeon crawl for the next batch of adventurers who hears rumors.

[Person_Man]

It's also worth mentioning that 5E does not assume the existence of magic items in all games. By introducing them into the game, the DM is purposefully choosing to upend the carefully constructed game balance of bounded accuracy. So presumably, the DM is not going to introduce them unless the PCs are unlikely to abuse them.

[Slipperychicken]

That sorcerer lich with 30 charisma might sound thematically cool... until you realize that it's impossible to pass a saving throw targeted at one of your nonproficient saves. Such things just don't work in 5e's bounded accuracy.

Also, he could talk NPCs into doing damn near anything, especially if he trained charisma skills. That might be even more dangerous than his DC 24 saving throws.

To be honest, I'd expect at least part of the adventure would be spent trying to keep him from getting his stats to 30.

[Zyzzyva]

I like the idea of an ultrapowerful lich who's still holed up in their dungeon because they're at 28/28/29/27/28/27 and they're not going to go out and conquer the world until their stat block is perfect. :smallbiggrin:

[Myzz]

pretty sure in the Feywild time fluctuates differently... minutes can be hours, days, or years.... Of course the reverse is also true, centuries could be years, months, days, hours, or mere minutes...

If PC's were to board themselves up in a tower so that they could wait millenia to stat themselves to 30... that's fine! its a reverse adventure at that point. Every power hunger NPC would be throwing armies at them to get to their riches! Or to discover their secret to immortality (in the case of non-elf PC's)... After a few hundred years adventurers would come looking for loots...

[Occasional Sage]

pretty sure in the Feywild time fluctuates differently... minutes can be hours, days, or years.... Of course the reverse is also true, centuries could be years, months, days, hours, or mere minutes...

If PC's were to board themselves up in a tower so that they could wait millenia to stat themselves to 30... that's fine! its a reverse adventure at that point. Every power hunger NPC would be throwing armies at them to get to their riches! Or to discover their secret to immortality (in the case of non-elf PC's)... After a few hundred years adventurers would come looking for loots...

Doesn't the weird time in the Feywild run in different ratios? There's a chance it's normal, a chance it's fast, and a chance it's slow?

[SharkForce]

unless you're leaving the book behind when you go there, it doesn't much matter if the time is different. you're just going to need to adventure for 100 years on the feywild instead of the prime material.

[Slipperychicken]

unless you're leaving the book behind when you go there, it doesn't much matter if the time is different.

That's what I was thinking. You'd probably want to drop the books in an (ideally) fast-time area, try to check on them regularly or otherwise prevent people from stealing them, then pick them up and use them each time a hundred years pass in their timeline.

[SharkForce]

That's what I was thinking. You'd probably want to drop the books in an (ideally) fast-time area, try to check on them regularly or otherwise prevent people from stealing them, then pick them up and use them each time a hundred years pass in their timeline.

and then you come back and the books aren't there, because in the one day you've been gone it's actually been 2 months and that was easily enough time for someone to swipe the books before you could react.

[Naanomi]

Leave a set in the Feywild; check on them later; millions of years have passed, the God Emporer Pixie with 30 in every stat welcomes you to his domain

[Giant2005]

and then you come back and the books aren't there, because in the one day you've been gone it's actually been 2 months and that was easily enough time for someone to swipe the books before you could react.

That is a pretty good idea for a story hook if a player ever did get their hands on one. Whoever hid it waiting for its recharge wants it back.

[Yagyujubei]

That sorcerer lich with 30 charisma might sound thematically cool... until you realize that it's impossible to pass a saving throw targeted at one of your nonproficient saves. Such things just don't work in 5e's bounded accuracy.

well a paladin would get you that tasty +5(or more since this is epic level stuff) to all your saves, and you would be a fool to go and fight a lich without a paladin by your side in the first place.

and like i said, this would be epic level stuff, by the time you do this nonsense your stats are gonna be pretty high, and youre likely gonna have quite a few magic items at your disposal.

[lianightdemon]

Or you know instead just spend the time gather enough gold to buy the material components and craft yourself 10 copies of each tome. (Assuming your GM allows crafting magic items) They are only very rare so 50,000 gold each.

[Slipperychicken]

Or you know instead just spend the time gather enough gold to buy the material components and craft yourself 10 copies of each tome. (Assuming your GM allows crafting magic items) They are only very rare so 50,000 gold each.

Even if he allows magic item crafting, you still need the formulas, which currently run off DM fiat.

Also, crafting 60 very rare tomes (10 for each stat) would cost 3 million gold.

[NotALurker]

I doubt that most campaigns take place over the course of centuries to make it an issue. As such, they didn't bother writing the rule down (much like the illithid mindslave posse thing).

Frankly though, I rather like the idea of the undying mage in her tower slowly approaching INT30 over a half millennium.

DM: "how is your wizard's Int so high, you only bought one tome?"
Wizard: "and I am 350 years old, I used it three times"

is the problem



It's also worth mentioning that 5E does not assume the existence of magic items in all games. By introducing them into the game, the DM is purposefully choosing to upend the carefully constructed game balance of bounded accuracy. So presumably, the DM is not going to introduce them unless the PCs are unlikely to abuse them.

using one of the options that Wotc presented should not mean that the game stops working.

[SharkForce]

DM: "how is your wizard's Int so high, you only bought one tome?"
Wizard: "and I am 350 years old, I used it three times"

is the problem

really? that's the problem? that someone might start in a game with a tome and claim they've used it three times?

that's a player problem, not a problem with the tome.

[NotALurker]

really? that's the problem? that someone might start in a game with a tome and claim they've used it three times?

that's a player problem, not a problem with the tome.

ok its ONE problem

why is it a player problem its not like he cheated or used the item in a way it was not intended? in universe it would make perfect sense to do this.

[Occasional Sage]

DM: "how is your wizard's Int so high, you only bought one tome?"
Wizard: "and I am 350 years old, I used it three times"

is the problem

Aaaaaand DM adjudication comes into play. Presuming a character who could reasonably live long enough to play these games, and a game starting at a sufficiently high level to make a Manual feasible to own, AND a magic-mart approach to character construction: as a DM I would say "Fine, but if you've gained three uses of the Manual you need to pay for it three times; your starting wealth is not a bank account, it's the value of your stuff and you've gotten triple value."

For the record: the magic mart is not and will not be a part of my games for the foreseeable future, and high-starting-level is uncommon.

[Slipperychicken]

DM: "how is your wizard's Int so high, you only bought one tome?"
Wizard: "and I am 350 years old, I used it three times"

is the problem


DM: "Look at the starting equipment table, DMG 38. You don't start with a very rare item unless the campaign started at 17th level or higher in a high magic game. Which this isn't. Also, quit being a cheeselord and pick your items normally."

[NotALurker]

Aaaaaand DM adjudication comes into play. Presuming a character who could reasonably live long enough to play these games, and a game starting at a sufficiently high level to make a Manual feasible to own, AND a magic-mart approach to character construction: as a DM I would say "Fine, but if you've gained three uses of the Manual you need to pay for it three times; your starting wealth is not a bank account, it's the value of your stuff and you've gotten triple value."

For the record: the magic mart is not and will not be a part of my games for the foreseeable future, and high-starting-level is uncommon.

what is your universe justification for one book costing what three should cost?

and no it is not chessey to buy items that the rules say you can buy, might as well say that you can't buy a longsword because they are too good, you have to buy daggers.

the rules SHOULD fix this problem, easy enough to just say "this item can only be used once by any given person" still can cause issues if there are ways to speed up time but at least its better.

[Gritmonger]

DM: "Look at the starting equipment table, DMG 38. You don't start with a very rare item unless the campaign started at 17th level or higher in a high magic game. Which this isn't. Also, quit being a cheeselord and pick your items normally."

...but I AM Cheese Lord - look at my background! I was forged in the Curding Cauldrons by the great Blast Furnace of Cheddar, a perfect avatar of cheese!

[themaque]

...but I AM Cheese Lord - look at my background! I was forged in the Curding Cauldrons by the great Blast Furnace of Cheddar, a perfect avatar of cheese!

I specifically said we where playing a dessert based campaign! Can't you come up with some other sweet idea?

[Gritmonger]

I specifically said we where playing a dessert based campaign! Can't you come up with some other sweet idea?

...Count Crème Fraîche?

[themaque]

...Count Crème Fraîche?

Berry Nice. Ben and Jerry are almost done with their Cleric and Ranger. Preaches and Cream with a Chocolate Mouse.

[Knaight]

and no it is not chessey to buy items that the rules say you can buy, might as well say that you can't buy a longsword because they are too good, you have to buy daggers.

This isn't buying items the rules say you can buy. This is using starting equipment, adding in an unsupported detail about having had it for hundreds of years (which is by no means something the books support), adding in a detail about having already used the item several times (again, no rules support), and doing it in a way that is obviously designed to exploit the system. This isn't running into a system flaw here, it's finding a combination that is all sorts of cheesy and only works with some generous assumptions made.

[NotALurker]

This isn't buying items the rules say you can buy. This is using starting equipment, adding in an unsupported detail about having had it for hundreds of years (which is by no means something the books support), adding in a detail about having already used the item several times (again, no rules support), and doing it in a way that is obviously designed to exploit the system. This isn't running into a system flaw here, it's finding a combination that is all sorts of cheesy and only works with some generous assumptions made.

so item+time=cheese? how about if the could only be used every 10 years? would be 40 year old wizard be cheating if he used it more then once? what about 1 year?

what assumptions are needed? just pick a race that lives long enough and park yourself 2/3 of the way through its lifespan BAM it works by RAW, no cheating needed.

[Knaight]

what assumptions are needed? just pick a race that lives long enough and park yourself 2/3 of the way through its lifespan BAM it works by RAW, no cheating needed.
This still involves the unstated assumption that the item was purchased early and they've had access to it the whole time and used it several times already, none of which is even remotely implied by the rules. That there is technically no rule against it doesn't mean it isn't all sorts of cheesy.

To use a 3.5 example, chaining metamagic feats together to turn Locate City into a weapon of mass destruction is totally rules legal. By the time RAW gets fuzzy, it's just a matter of whether it kills everything for hundreds of miles around or just the vast majority of people for hundreds of miles around. That doesn't stop it from being the sort of cheesy that means it has no business showing up in a real game. Cycling through tomes acquired in character creation isn't quite at that level, but it's TO stuff.

[Battlebooze]

~Evil chuckle~

These things are so ripe for plot use, it's absolutely mind-boggling. They practically scream to be a plot MacGuffin.

Hand out a currently inactive tome as "treasure" to a low level party. Somehow let the players know there is ten years left before it can be used again. Not soon enough to be useful now, but they could hide it somewhere safe. Or they could try to sell it without getting murdered in the process.

[Occasional Sage]

what is your universe justification for one book costing what three should cost?



"Fine, but if you've gained three uses of the Manual you need to pay for it three times; your starting wealth is not a bank account, it's the value of your stuff and you've gotten triple value."


Asked and answered.

[Yagyujubei]

ok its ONE problem

why is it a player problem its not like he cheated or used the item in a way it was not intended? in universe it would make perfect sense to do this.

the problem is this could never happen like you've described it. You're never going to start a campaign with a character that's had one of these tomes for hundreds of years, and by the time you're in a campaign and get one of these the passage of time is regulated by your DM. you don't get to show up to a session and be like "oh btw since last sessions it's been 400 years for my character and I bumped my INT by 8"

also, a) this would only ever become an issue in a game where your DM allows a FIFTY THOUSAND g allowance at character creation for items, and if they allow that garbage they deserve to be punked with cheese like that.

and b) the way the wording is, it's clearly intended to come into play super endgame for a cool powerful effect imho, and anyone that would try to exploit it in a normal game situation is a total douche. Just because something CAN be broken doesn't mean that it is (simulacrum for instance). It's selfish people who abuse them to break the game and ruin it for everyone else.

[Epoch]

To be perfectly honest, I would house rule that a player cannot benefit from the same manual multiple times.

Imagine in the Lich Sorcerer scenario described above that you study from a manual, learning all kinds of neat things about the fabric of reality and how to make it do funny things. You read it cover to cover, and find that you have actually become smarter from studying it. You put your new knowledge to work, and spend a century perfecting new spells, and reading, and probably knitting, a whole lot of knitting. Once a century has gone by, you pick up the book again, read it cover to cover, annnnnnnnnd welp, it's all the same information isn't it? Nothing that you didn't already know, because you've already read this book. Everything in it has become second nature to you by now. You cannot gain any more benefit from it.

"But Dungeon Master!" says Player, "It's been a century! Surely my character has forgotten everything he read and can benefit from re-familiarizing himself with the contents of the manual?"

"Why certainly," says I, "So it stands to reason that your character, having forgotten everything he read, has also lost the boost to his intelligence that the book granted. I was working under the assumption that you were putting everything you learned from the manual into practice, but if you've just been sitting on your laurels for a century, it follows that you would no longer possess that knowledge, and therefore must re-learn from the manual to get it back."

To summarize: You've either been using all the new skills you discovered in the manual for a century (so there's no point in reading it again) OR you've let your abilities atrophy from lack of practice (you lose the ability buff after a century, but gain it back when you re-read it). Either way, no one in my campaign is going to just mash their head against the same book for centuries and keep stacking buffs from it.

[Yagyujubei]

To be perfectly honest, I would house rule that a player cannot benefit from the same manual multiple times.

Imagine in the Lich Sorcerer scenario described above that you study from a manual, learning all kinds of neat things about the fabric of reality and how to make it do funny things. You read it cover to cover, and find that you have actually become smarter from studying it. You put your new knowledge to work, and spend a century perfecting new spells, and reading, and probably knitting, a whole lot of knitting. Once a century has gone by, you pick up the book again, read it cover to cover, annnnnnnnnd welp, it's all the same information isn't it? Nothing that you didn't already know, because you've already read this book. Everything in it has become second nature to you by now. You cannot gain any more benefit from it.

"But Dungeon Master!" says Player, "It's been a century! Surely my character has forgotten everything he read and can benefit from re-familiarizing himself with the contents of the manual?"

"Why certainly," says I, "So it stands to reason that your character, having forgotten everything he read, has also lost the boost to his intelligence that the book granted. I was working under the assumption that you were putting everything you learned from the manual into practice, but if you've just been sitting on your laurels for a century, it follows that you would no longer possess that knowledge, and therefore must re-learn from the manual to get it back."

To summarize: You've either been using all the new skills you discovered in the manual for a century (so there's no point in reading it again) OR you've let your abilities atrophy from lack of practice (you lose the ability buff after a century, but gain it back when you re-read it). Either way, no one in my campaign is going to just mash their head against the same book for centuries and keep stacking buffs from it.

well....these are highly magical tomes, so who's to say that the content doesnt disappear upon reading, and refill anew a hundred years later.

think of it this way, there is a magical grimoire, that through extremely powerful enchantment is able to gather all of the arcane research conducted on the whole material plane into it's pages every hundred years. when someone reads the book all prior entries are wiped out and it has to spend 100 more years gathering new research before it can even be opened again.

I dunno, I wouldn't see that as too much of a stretch in many DnD settings.

[rollingForInit]

well....these are highly magical tomes, so who's to say that the content doesnt disappear upon reading, and refill anew a hundred years later.

The DM's who're using the Tome (or any variation of them) in their games.

[Yagyujubei]

The DM's who're using the Tome (or any variation of them) in their games.

obviously >_>

I was just pointing out that the reasoning in his post could easily be explained away if one wished it. in the end it's up to the DM and the players how they want everything to work.

[NotALurker]

This still involves the unstated assumption that the item was purchased early and they've had access to it the whole time and used it several times already, none of which is even remotely implied by the rules. That there is technically no rule against it doesn't mean it isn't all sorts of cheesy.

To use a 3.5 example, chaining metamagic feats together to turn Locate City into a weapon of mass destruction is totally rules legal. By the time RAW gets fuzzy, it's just a matter of whether it kills everything for hundreds of miles around or just the vast majority of people for hundreds of miles around. That doesn't stop it from being the sort of cheesy that means it has no business showing up in a real game. Cycling through tomes acquired in character creation isn't quite at that level, but it's TO stuff.

the locate city bomb is using things in ways they were never intended, the tomes were made to be used every 100 years.

like I said they should fix it, its hard to believe that they would make this item and forget that there are races with more then 100 year lifespan. This not not some combination of 10 things that uses them in ways they were never intended, this is an obvious use of an item. for elfs in your world to NOT do this would require some meta-gaming.


the problem is this could never happen like you've described it. You're never going to start a campaign with a character that's had one of these tomes for hundreds of years, and by the time you're in a campaign and get one of these the passage of time is regulated by your DM. you don't get to show up to a session and be like "oh btw since last sessions it's been 400 years for my character and I bumped my INT by 8"

also, a) this would only ever become an issue in a game where your DM allows a FIFTY THOUSAND g allowance at character creation for items, and if they allow that garbage they deserve to be punked with cheese like that.

and b) the way the wording is, it's clearly intended to come into play super endgame for a cool powerful effect imho, and anyone that would try to exploit it in a normal game situation is a total douche. Just because something CAN be broken doesn't mean that it is (simulacrum for instance). It's selfish people who abuse them to break the game and ruin it for everyone else.

why not, lets say the tome is a level 10 item and your starting at level 12 "I was a court wizard, when I was first hired my father gave me this tome, I have used it every 100 years sense"

you can reflavor your starting gold however you wish, no reason it could or should not work.

[Yagyujubei]

the locate city bomb is using things in ways they were never intended, the tomes were made to be used every 100 years.

like I said they should fix it, its hard to believe that they would make this item and forget that there are races with more then 100 year lifespan. This not not some combination of 10 things that uses them in ways they were never intended, this is an obvious use of an item. for elfs in your world to NOT do this would require some meta-gaming.



why not, lets say the tome is a level 10 item and your starting at level 12 "I was a court wizard, when I was first hired my father gave me this tome, I have used it every 100 years sense"

you can reflavor your starting gold however you wish, no reason it could or should not work.

those arent the mechanics of DND though, you dont get items because theyre in your "backstory". that isn't how the system works.

"oh I've had this robe of the magi since I was a baby so it's in my starting equipment at no cost"

no, no you don't. yeah it COULD work, if your DM is out of his mind, or you're playing a super high powered campaign, but the reasons why it shouldnt are pretty obvious to me unless you're in those specific circumstances.

again, this is all up to DM fiat, but as I said before, if your DM allows this he deserves to get munchkin'd into the ground.

[NotALurker]

those arent the mechanics of DND though, you dont get items because theyre in your "backstory". that isn't how the system works.

"oh I've had this robe of the magi since I was a baby so it's in my starting equipment at no cost"

no, no you don't. yeah it COULD work, if your DM is out of his mind, or you're playing a super high powered campaign, but the reasons why it shouldnt are pretty obvious to me unless you're in those specific circumstances.

again, this is all up to DM fiat, but as I said before, if your DM allows this he deserves to get munchkin'd into the ground.

...no I BOUGHT the item, then used it. I reflavored it as being given it. Are you so use to 3e and 5e you are unable to have anything in the game without having 5 rules for how it works?

[Zyzzyva]

Also, your character is 350 years old and introductory level? Even for an elf that's getting well into middle age. Everyone else is dead.

I certainly don't have problems with a character using the same tome more than once, or even using a tome in their backstory (which, as other people have mentioned, requires a whole load of cash to start with) but using it multiple times in the same backstory is just odd. It's not a flaw in the game rules; it's a perfectly legitimate action, assuming you have the insane starting position to justify it.

[Yagyujubei]

...no I BOUGHT the item, then used it. I reflavored it as being given it. Are you so use to 3e and 5e you are unable to have anything in the game without having 5 rules for how it works?

no I houserule rule all the time, what you propose is just idiotic and an obvious and pathetic attempt to prove some ridiculous point that the item description is broken by providing an "in a vacuum" scenario that would never happen in a real game.

but hey, if your DM allows you to buy a 50,000 gp tome at the start of your campaign, then say you had it all along, and have used it over the course of hundreds of years prior to the start of the campaign to boost your ability scores well above intended levels then more power to you guy.

[Myzz]

so...

If you had all the books, read them... Then put them into a dimensional pocket... Could you use a Wish, for time passage inside your dimensional pocket to pass on the scale of 1 min = 100 Years?



I do like the you can only gain 1 benefit from a given book... Of course your party will also want to read the book...

[NotALurker]

Also, your character is 350 years old and introductory level? Even for an elf that's getting well into middle age. Everyone else is dead.

I certainly don't have problems with a character using the same tome more than once, or even using a tome in their backstory (which, as other people have mentioned, requires a whole load of cash to start with) but using it multiple times in the same backstory is just odd. It's not a flaw in the game rules; it's a perfectly legitimate action, assuming you have the insane starting position to justify it.

no reason you have to be the same age as everyone else.



no I houserule rule all the time, what you propose is just idiotic and an obvious and pathetic attempt to prove some ridiculous point that the item description is broken by providing an "in a vacuum" scenario that would never happen in a real game.

but hey, if your DM allows you to buy a 50,000 gp tome at the start of your campaign, then say you had it all along, and have used it over the course of hundreds of years prior to the start of the campaign to boost your ability scores well above intended levels then more power to you guy.

the item is in the game, therefor using it is intended therefor you are NOT boosting your stats beyond the intended levels.


so...

If you had all the books, read them... Then put them into a dimensional pocket... Could you use a Wish, for time passage inside your dimensional pocket to pass on the scale of 1 min = 100 Years?



I do like the you can only gain 1 benefit from a given book... Of course your party will also want to read the book...

wish might be risky, but there are other ways to do it.

honestly it would be so much easier if they would just make them one use only. or better you follow their own design goals and not have them in the game.

[Maxilian]

Personally, I like that the books reset themselves after a century, as it explains why any exist to be found as treasure, rather than already being used up. But it does introduce that problem with long-lived races. They need an additional rule that no single character can ever benefit from the same copy of a book more than once.

Is really unlikely that in 1 campaing you will get to use the same book with the same character twice

[Gritmonger]

Is really unlikely that in 1 campaing you will get to use the same book with the same character twice

Besides which, if you've got 100 years on your hands, you might as well get crackin' making books yourself - at a paltry 5 1/2 years apiece (very rare construction time), you could make eighteen or so before you even need that original...

[NotALurker]

Besides which, if you've got 100 years on your hands, you might as well get crackin' making books yourself - at a paltry 5 1/2 years apiece (very rare construction time), you could make eighteen or so before you even need that original...

hmm I wonder if the very long lived races could make a killing by doing nothing but making books, then selling their use every 100 years.

of course you would have to sink alot of money into guards and such.

[Occasional Sage]

Is really unlikely that in 1 campaing you will get to use the same book with the same character twice

This right here is why there aren't rules to prevent the cheese being discussed. Generally, 5e contains the rules important to the majority of campaigns and trusts to individual tables to handle the outliers in a manner similar-in-feel.

The loophole isn't an oversight, it's a design decision.

[archaeo]

no reason you have to be the same age as everyone else.

No, but the rules also don't provide you with the opportunity to possess artifact-level magic items, for free, for hundreds of years before the beginning of the campaign. It doesn't outright forbid it, but neither does the system forbid you from having any particular magic item before the game even starts, and I can think of any number of items that would wreck the system more than a manual or tome.

Does the system really need to tell you that this isn't a great idea?


honestly it would be so much easier if they would just make them one use only. or better you follow their own design goals and not have them in the game.

One imagines they wrote it with the 100-year recharge specifically so that you could create interesting little scenarios like "sit in a fast-time bubble" or what have you. Some tables will really love the idea of gaming the system, after all. It also works as an entertaining plot hook; maybe there are six Great Librarians, each with a tome, who are ever living and all powerful, etc.

One-time use is not as interesting or as cool as a century-long lock, in my opinion, and it's only really is a problem if you're determined to twist it into cheesiness at tables that aren't interested in exploring cheese.

[NotALurker]

This right here is why there aren't rules to prevent the cheese being discussed. Generally, 5e contains the rules important to the majority of campaigns and trusts to individual tables to handle the outliers in a manner similar-in-feel.

The loophole isn't an oversight, it's a design decision.

they must really like long lived characters then. or they just are so bad at their jobs it never occurred to them that not every character starts at age 20.

[heavyfuel]

Yes, the books can take you all the way to the 30 absolute limit

Is there such a limit? Maybe I skipped over it, but I don't think this limit is set when it comes to the books.

[themaque]

Is there such a limit? Maybe I skipped over it, but I don't think this limit is set when it comes to the books.

AFB but yes. There is a soft limit of 20 without some listed exception for characters.

There is a hard limit of 30 for everything.

[HoarsHalberd]

they must really like long lived characters then. or they just are so bad at their jobs it never occurred to them that not every character starts at age 20.

There is no rule that allows someone to have had an item for a period of time prior to the beginning of the game, any such allowance would be solely down to the DM. Just lik allowing someone to use the noble background to write up a level 1 crown prince who can levy the country's resources as soon as he hits a guard outpost, whilst not having a rule against it is plainly obvious down to the DM. Anything your character has done prior to the beginning of the game is down to the DM.

There are a handful of broken areas that require a home rule patch over to fix, but this is not one of them.

[NotALurker]

There is no rule that allows someone to have had an item for a period of time prior to the beginning of the game, any such allowance would be solely down to the DM. Just lik allowing someone to use the noble background to write up a level 1 crown prince who can levy the country's resources as soon as he hits a guard outpost, whilst not having a rule against it is plainly obvious down to the DM. Anything your character has done prior to the beginning of the game is down to the DM.

There are a handful of broken areas that require a home rule patch over to fix, but this is not one of them.

the rule against it would be the rules about starting gold.

there is no rule that says you have be no older then X when you start.

[HoarsHalberd]

the rule against it would be the rules about starting gold.

there is no rule that says you have be no older then X when you start.

Incorrect. You start with that much gold as pocket money from your father. Heck you might not use it for money. You could discover a threat, and go back to town before sending word to your fathers nearest vassals that they must send troops (a resource) to your aid. Where is the rule that says you cannot be the crown prince with full access to the resources of the realm as you require?

As for your point, correct but irrelevant. There is no rule that allows you to have had an item for any period of time prior to the story. You can make yourself as old as you like. However your back story is up to DM control and as it is an attempt to break bounded accuracy and you have no rule that allows you to have an item for a period of time prior to the beginning of the game you won't be allowed to. Unless you can present to me a rule that says otherwise you don't have a case. Nothing broken needs home ruling unless there is a rule that allows it.

[Chronos]

It's not so much that there's a limit of 30 for ability scores, as that ability scores higher than that just don't exist. An ability score of 16 has a modifier of +3. An ability score of 20 has a modifier of +5. An ability score of 30 has a modifier of +10. An ability score of 31 has a modifier of <Error: Subscript out of range on line 6>.

And the primary value of the 100-year recharge time is that without that, the books logically shouldn't exist as loot at all. If someone is making these things (and they can be made, somehow or another, even if the means are beyond the PCs' capability), then they're making them for a reason: Either the creator wants to use it herself, or she's making it for someone else she knows (friend, party member, paying customer, whatever). Either way, it's going to be used as soon as it's created. If it somehow falls into someone else's hands before that can happen, then that someone else is going to use it immediately upon obtaining it. What's the backstory of this book the players just found in a treasure chest or monster's lair, and why wasn't it already used? The reset answers that question: It was already used, and now it's recharged.

[heavyfuel]

It's not so much that there's a limit of 30 for ability scores, as that ability scores higher than that just don't exist. An ability score of 16 has a modifier of +3. An ability score of 20 has a modifier of +5. An ability score of 30 has a modifier of +10. An ability score of 31 has a modifier of <Error: Subscript out of range on line 6>.

Indeed, that's what I thought. Here's to hoping we never get an Epic Level Handbook or a Deities and Demigods splat that creates scores higher than 30, or the books will be able to get you to the new amount.

[lianightdemon]

Doubtful even Tiamat only has a strength of 30, and nothing above 30. +10 modifier is intended to be upper limit of ability scores. And the epic rules are already in the DMG. You get epic boons, or an ability score boost/feat, every time you get a certain amount of xp at level 20. With bonded accuracy low level mobs still need the chance to hit powerful characters.

[Naanomi]

If I can have tome access be part of my backstory, why pay at all? Clearly I gave all my books back after my stats were all 30, so they shouldn't come out of my starting equipment allowance.

[Gritmonger]

If I can have tome access be part of my backstory, why pay at all? Clearly I gave all my books back after my stats were all 30, so they shouldn't come out of my starting equipment allowance.

Oh yeah? Well *I* was formed from the elements themselves at the beginning of time, speak Primordial, and have been incubating in the Astral until the moment of this campaign, so I've had time to get all my stats to 30, polymorph into a chipmunk, get all my stats BACK to 30, and then polymorph back and do it yet again. Plus I have regeneration 30, DR 30/stuff-not-in-the-campaign, and at least four character classes at level 20, but I'll start at "1" for your campaign, and my own amusement.

[themaque]

Oh yeah? Well *I* was formed from the elements themselves at the beginning of time, speak Primordial, and have been incubating in the Astral until the moment of this campaign, so I've had time to get all my stats to 30, polymorph into a chipmunk, get all my stats BACK to 30, and then polymorph back and do it yet again. Plus I have regeneration 30, DR 30/stuff-not-in-the-campaign, and at least four character classes at level 20, but I'll start at "1" for your campaign, and my own amusement.

Sweet back-story, I bet I know how we met

I am one of the many many many illegitimate sons and daughters of Elminster. When he died (check page 34 of my fanfic/backstory) you will clearly see that he left me his tower and all possessions therein. That included his complete collection of tombs, spells, magic items, and a couple rings of wishes.

Long story short, I'm not level 27 with all stats at 30. I know, I'm as surprised as anyone else.

[NotALurker]

Incorrect. You start with that much gold as pocket money from your father. Heck you might not use it for money. You could discover a threat, and go back to town before sending word to your fathers nearest vassals that they must send troops (a resource) to your aid. Where is the rule that says you cannot be the crown prince with full access to the resources of the realm as you require?

As for your point, correct but irrelevant. There is no rule that allows you to have had an item for any period of time prior to the story. You can make yourself as old as you like. However your back story is up to DM control and as it is an attempt to break bounded accuracy and you have no rule that allows you to have an item for a period of time prior to the beginning of the game you won't be allowed to. Unless you can present to me a rule that says otherwise you don't have a case. Nothing broken needs home ruling unless there is a rule that allows it.

fine show me a rule that says that you can have a character with blue eyes? if you can not then everyone MUST not have blue eyes or they are cheating. how about a character with eyelids? what rule says that you can have them?

EVERYTHING is legal by the rules unless they say otherwise. not the other way around.

[Gritmonger]

Sweet back-story, I bet I know how we met

I am one of the many many many illegitimate sons and daughters of Elminster. When he died (check page 34 of my fanfic/backstory) you will clearly see that he left me his tower and all possessions therein. That included his complete collection of tombs, spells, magic items, and a couple rings of wishes.

Long story short, I'm not level 27 with all stats at 30. I know, I'm as surprised as anyone else.


A whole collection? Lucky. I only have the two mausoleums and a single crypt. All my own. Long story. Well, longer story.

[Naanomi]

In all seriousness I wish more temporary items worked this 'long reset' way from a background perspective: manuals of golem making particularly

[ChubbyRain]

using one of the options that Wotc presented should not mean that the game stops working.

Funny enough wotc has a habit of doing this. Like, a lot.

[NotALurker]

Funny enough wotc has a habit of doing this. Like, a lot.

yes, yes they do. that only shows they are not good at their job and should hire people who are. what is your point?

[themaque]

EVERYTHING is legal by the rules unless they say otherwise. not the other way around.

Not... QUITE but I can see what you are trying to say. These are rough guidelines not a legal document expected to cover ever single occurrence. It's specifically written with the concept that a GM will filter, interpret, and make rulings as to what works or doesn't in his game.

Using one of the options presented to you by WotC in a way it was obviously not intended isn't a sign to burn all your books. In this example, you are using an item in a way that while not against the RAW is definitely against RAI. It's perfectly fair for you to ASK to do so, but I don't think it's reasonable.

To quote a movie for comedic effect:
"There's no rule stating I can't FART on your entree, but I don't do it, because it's bad manners."

[hawklost]

fine show me a rule that says that you can have a character with blue eyes? if you can not then everyone MUST not have blue eyes or they are cheating. how about a character with eyelids? what rule says that you can have them?

EVERYTHING is legal by the rules unless they say otherwise. not the other way around.

Ummm, the first rule in DnD is that the DM gets to decide what is legal or not. Ergo you are right that everything is legal Unless your DM decides otherwise. There is no if and or but about it. You try to cheeze your way into a game (and there is absolutely no TTRPG out there that is played by a large base that you can't cheese your way in) but the point of the DM/GM/Narrator ect is to make a story and to keep it fun. Unless everyone in a game wants you (and possibly them) to be gods among men starting out then there is no way to do it.

By your logic otherwise I can create a Cantrip that allows me to cast Wish every single round (there is no rule against it and I studied new cantrips!)
By your logic I can be a dragon in the game since there are no ECL anymore and we are starting at lvl 1. No DM, you can't tell me I am not allowed, everything is legal
By your logic, I can rez every time I die because I am favored by a god and he doesn't want me to die, there is nothing forbidding me from having it and nothing saying that you stay dead once your die or that a god cannot bring you back anytime.
By your logic there is nothing wrong with a party creating characters with starting wealth and then letting one of the members kill all of the others to gain XP and wealth, repeat until that person is X level and Wealth then start adventuring. Its all legal by the game and since the players control the PCs the DM cannot b--ch about the fact that noone seems to care that they are dying.

[ChubbyRain]

yes, yes they do. that only shows they are not good at their job and should hire people who are. what is your point?

What do you think my point is? Using any one option from WotC can cause the game not to work, from a mechanical standpoint (Fiat can make any game work).

[NotALurker]

Not... QUITE but I can see what you are trying to say. These are rough guidelines not a legal document expected to cover ever single occurrence. It's specifically written with the concept that a GM will filter, interpret, and make rulings as to what works or doesn't in his game.

Using one of the options presented to you by WotC in a way it was obviously not intended isn't a sign to burn all your books. In this example, you are using an item in a way that while not against the RAW is definitely against RAI. It's perfectly fair for you to ASK to do so, but I don't think it's reasonable.

To quote a movie for comedic effect:
"There's no rule stating I can't FART on your entree, but I don't do it, because it's bad manners."

as a very last resort the DM can make houserules and such yes but only when the game fails in some way or he wants to have the game do something for which it was not made.

the problem with using RAI is that it is not set in stone, you just interpreting it. when I see an item that can be used every 100 years I think "cool they obviously know that elves live for long enough to use it a couple times, so either they are morons or it is intended" when you look at it you say "obviously the 100 year limit is just a plot thing and its cheating to use it more then once"


Ummm, the first rule in DnD is that the DM gets to decide what is legal or not. Ergo you are right that everything is legal Unless your DM decides otherwise. There is no if and or but about it. You try to cheeze your way into a game (and there is absolutely no TTRPG out there that is played by a large base that you can't cheese your way in) but the point of the DM/GM/Narrator ect is to make a story and to keep it fun. Unless everyone in a game wants you (and possibly them) to be gods among men starting out then there is no way to do it.

By your logic otherwise I can create a Cantrip that allows me to cast Wish every single round (there is no rule against it and I studied new cantrips!)
By your logic I can be a dragon in the game since there are no ECL anymore and we are starting at lvl 1. No DM, you can't tell me I am not allowed, everything is legal
By your logic, I can rez every time I die because I am favored by a god and he doesn't want me to die, there is nothing forbidding me from having it and nothing saying that you stay dead once your die or that a god cannot bring you back anytime.
By your logic there is nothing wrong with a party creating characters with starting wealth and then letting one of the members kill all of the others to gain XP and wealth, repeat until that person is X level and Wealth then start adventuring. Its all legal by the game and since the players control the PCs the DM cannot b--ch about the fact that noone seems to care that they are dying.

you only gain the cantrips the game says you gain, unless the rules are so sloppily written they say something like "you gain 3 cantrips, that may be from this list or you can make them up" if it says "you gain 3 cantrips from this list" then you can't just make them up.

there are rules that say how raise dead is used, it does not happen just cause you feel like it certain things have to be done.

[hawklost]

as a very last resort the DM can make houserules and such yes but only when the game fails in some way or he wants to have the game do something for which it was not made.

See, this is the total BS that makes most of your arguments fail. It isn't a last resort for a DM to make a houserule, it is fully within there power to do it for any reason and any time.

It could be that they just don't like that short rests take 1 hour and decide that a short rest occurs once combat has ended. Why? Becuase they like the way the game is faster that way, but not because the rule was broken in the first place.
Heck, the DM could say that there are no gods in the world at all, but clerics really pray to an ideal that they call a god and they are really casting spells the same way a Wizard does but just thematically different. (Rule not broken, DM just wants something different and did this wonderful thing called houserule)
Don't agree that Orcs are evil? House rule that they have been prosecuted unfairly and that they are really just nice people and the 'good' races are really evil.
Don't like that Paladins can be of Vengence or are not LG? Well, new house rule, they are required to be LG and vengence paladins are forbidden. Its not that it was broken that they weren't its because the DM doesn't want it to be that way.



the problem with using RAI is that it is not set in stone, you just interpreting it. when I see an item that can be used every 100 years I think "cool they obviously know that elves live for long enough to use it a couple times, so either they are morons or it is intended" when you look at it you say "obviously the 100 year limit is just a plot thing and its cheating to use it more then once"



you only gain the cantrips the game says you gain, unless the rules are so sloppily written they say something like "you gain 3 cantrips, that may be from this list or you can make them up" if it says "you gain 3 cantrips from this list" then you can't just make them up.

there are rules that say how raise dead is used, it does not happen just cause you feel like it certain things have to be done.

DMG page 283 gives how to make a new spell. Guess what? It does not forbid anything in it, only recommends that something that everyone wants might be too powerful. Heck, it even recommends that Wizards/Sorcerors not be given healing but doesn't forbid it. By your wonderful logic, my Cantrip that can cast a Wish spell is fully legal then and therefore your changing of claims by saying you are restricts is foolish.

There is only rules about which spells raise the dead and how they do it. By your own logic, since there is nothing forbidding a person writing into their background that a God will not allow them to die and will rez them immediately on death no matter how many times they have died previously, it is fully legal (By your own logic of if it isn't forbidden it is acceptable)

See, by using the 'if it doesn't outright forbid it, I am allowed to use it' then people can do an infinite amount of BS. Since that isn't the way the game was created nor how the game is supposed to be played it is foolish to try to claim it is how it should be.

[themaque]

as a very last resort the DM can make houserules and such yes but only when the game fails in some way or he wants to have the game do something for which it was not made.

the problem with using RAI is that it is not set in stone, you just interpreting it. when I see an item that can be used every 100 years I think "cool they obviously know that elves live for long enough to use it a couple times, so either they are morons or it is intended" when you look at it you say "obviously the 100 year limit is just a plot thing and its cheating to use it more then once"


I'm not sure you understand a few basic design philosophies behind 5e, or at least how I read it to be. This game is supposed to be highly modular and encourages house rules. There are multiple times when the RAW is simply "Ask your GM". This isn't a bug, it's a feature. :smallwink: House rules are there to make the game more fun for that particular gaming group. That's it. That is the sole reason. This rule isn't fun? we change it. This campaign is dwarf only? Well it sounds like fun so we make that a house rule. Timmy keeps bringing Durian for a snack? No durian house rule. (That one should probably be written into the core rules. -shudder-) They are not there to govern the rules or players. That is a side affect of their true purpose, making the game more fun for that particular group of people.

And yes, every game table will be a little different. Barry is going to run his games pretty loosey goosey but Matthew is going to be pretty strict with how he runs things. But this is in no way a new thing for 5th edition only. No matter what the system your playing there is going to be differences from table to table. That happened in 2nd ed, 3.pathfinder, 4th edition, Rifts, Gurps, Hackmaster, WoD, Traveler, Scion, Ghostbusters RPG. Any game other than Paranoia. (You do not have clearance for Rules Knowledge. Any comparisons to any other games living or dead are TREASON. The Computer is your friend)

BACK TO THE BOOK
Yes, the magic item in question, was designed to be used multiple times. It's limitation on how often is a controlling factor, limiting it's use to once a campaign under most circumstances. But let's keep something else in consideration, you will not have this item at level 5, nor 10 or even 15. In order to START with the book as you are intending, since it is Very Rare, you have to be at LEAST 17th level and you can posses ONE of them. and then ONLY if you are using a HIGH MAGIC setting.

When you get that high of a level with a high magic setting, I think an extra use MIGHT be appropriate, since it's your ONE Very Rare Item, however a GM is also fully right to limit how many times you can use it before games start.

There have been multiple people who have made points as to how these can exist in a game world. Even you yourself! The Elvin lords exchange a use of powerful artifacts to human lords in exchange for political favors? That sounds pretty awesome to me.

EDIT: Side Question: How long do you see a normal book lasting? After it's used it spends 100 years as a normal book. That would mean it has no magical protections, by itself, from the ravages of time. In a system such as this, how long do you see that lasting? What protections would need to be used to keep it up? Could it degrade to the point where it no longer becomes magic again?

[NotALurker]

I'm not sure you understand a few basic design philosophies behind 5e, or at least how I read it to be. This game is supposed to be highly modular and encourages house rules. There are multiple times when the RAW is simply "Ask your GM". This isn't a bug, it's a feature. :smallwink: House rules are there to make the game more fun for that particular gaming group. That's it. That is the sole reason. This rule isn't fun? we change it. This campaign is dwarf only? Well it sounds like fun so we make that a house rule. Timmy keeps bringing Durian for a snack? No durian house rule. (That one should probably be written into the core rules. -shudder-) They are not there to govern the rules or players. That is a side affect of their true purpose, making the game more fun for that particular group of people.

And yes, every game table will be a little different. Barry is going to run his games pretty loosey goosey but Matthew is going to be pretty strict with how he runs things. But this is in no way a new thing for 5th edition only. No matter what the system your playing there is going to be differences from table to table. That happened in 2nd ed, 3.pathfinder, 4th edition, Rifts, Gurps, Hackmaster, WoD, Traveler, Scion, Ghostbusters RPG. Any game other than Paranoia. (You do not have clearance for Rules Knowledge. Any comparisons to any other games living or dead are TREASON. The Computer is your friend)

BACK TO THE BOOK
Yes, the magic item in question, was designed to be used multiple times. It's limitation on how often is a controlling factor, limiting it's use to once a campaign under most circumstances. But let's keep something else in consideration, you will not have this item at level 5, nor 10 or even 15. In order to START with the book as you are intending, since it is Very Rare, you have to be at LEAST 17th level and you can posses ONE of them. and then ONLY if you are using a HIGH MAGIC setting.

When you get that high of a level with a high magic setting, I think an extra use MIGHT be appropriate, since it's your ONE Very Rare Item, however a GM is also fully right to limit how many times you can use it before games start.

There have been multiple people who have made points as to how these can exist in a game world. Even you yourself! The Elvin lords exchange a use of powerful artifacts to human lords in exchange for political favors? That sounds pretty awesome to me.

EDIT: Side Question: How long do you see a normal book lasting? After it's used it spends 100 years as a normal book. That would mean it has no magical protections, by itself, from the ravages of time. In a system such as this, how long do you see that lasting? What protections would need to be used to keep it up? Could it degrade to the point where it no longer becomes magic again?

I pay Wotc for a game, that means they owe me a game where everything works and is fun out of the gate. If I have to spend hours fixing it that means they failed. Just because a rule is optional that does not mean it is not as important for it to work.

5e was advertised as modular, but it is not. it is much less modular then either 3e or 4e. there is no way to have a fighter that is tactical and interesting like a wizard. there is no way to have a fighter be as powerful as a wizard. There is no way to play real high magic that does not involve fixing the game.

I would think the books would be traded to the longer lived races, who would see it as a way to get a good item for very cheap.

one of my houserules in my setting is that magic items are all but untouchable by anything other then magic or other magic items (it DOES make detecting magic items easy, if you see someone in unmarked armor then he either just bought it or its magical). So in my setting they would last through most anything other then a considered effort to destroy them.

[JNAProductions]

And how long did it take to make that rule? "Hours" is a pretty big exaggeration for basic fixes like "Manuals are one-use only".

[NotALurker]

And how long did it take to make that rule? "Hours" is a pretty big exaggeration for basic fixes like "Manuals are one-use only".

how many "little fixes" like that are there? the problem is that something that easy to fix and that obvious was missed. my job as a DM is the make the fights and the stories not to go through the PHB with a comb fixing everything in it so it becomes usable.

[JNAProductions]

Then here's how to do that: Trust your players. Trust that they want to play a fun game and won't try to abuse the system, even if it's not perfect.

Edit: Won't abuse it too much. Little abuses can be fun, like Life Cleric Magic Initiate Goodberry shenanigans, since that benefits the whole party.

[NotALurker]

Then here's how to do that: Trust your players. Trust that they want to play a fun game and won't try to abuse the system, even if it's not perfect.

Edit: Won't abuse it too much. Little abuses can be fun, like Life Cleric Magic Initiate Goodberry shenanigans, since that benefits the whole party.

and I will I trust them all to have system mastery enough to know what is too far? how about for them to know what I consider important in a setting?

[JNAProductions]

and I will I trust them all to have system mastery enough to know what is too far? how about for them to know what I consider important in a setting?

1) Yes. They're smart people, right?

2) Here's another idea: Tell them what you find important. And if they do abuse something you didn't want abused? Tell them that when they do it and ask them to change it. If they're mature, they'll understand and change, no hard feelings.

[NotALurker]

1) Yes. They're smart people, right?

2) Here's another idea: Tell them what you find important. And if they do abuse something you didn't want abused? Tell them that when they do it and ask them to change it. If they're mature, they'll understand and change, no hard feelings.

smart does not mean they have spent the time to read threat every book I will allow, and crunched all the numbers, even the ones that normally a DM would be the only one to see.

[JNAProductions]

I'm kinda confused. Unless you're saying the system is so inherently broken that poor system mastery leads to massive abuse, them not knowing the books well means they're more likely to have underperforming characters, not overpowered broken ones.

[themaque]

smart does not mean they have spent the time to read threat every book I will allow, and crunched all the numbers, even the ones that normally a DM would be the only one to see.

What do you mean every book you allow? If you are playing 5e there is ONE book. Maybe two if you are letting them pick magic items?


I pay Wotc for a game, that means they owe me a game where everything works and is fun out of the gate. If I have to spend hours fixing it that means they failed. Just because a rule is optional that does not mean it is not as important for it to work.

5e was advertised as modular, but it is not. it is much less modular then either 3e or 4e. there is no way to have a fighter that is tactical and interesting like a wizard. there is no way to have a fighter be as powerful as a wizard. There is no way to play real high magic that does not involve fixing the game.

one of my houserules in my setting is that magic items are all but untouchable by anything other then magic or other magic items (it DOES make detecting magic items easy, if you see someone in unmarked armor then he either just bought it or its magical). So in my setting they would last through most anything other then a considered effort to destroy them.

I actually find 5e to be very modular and easy to run. The fighter class is much easier to pull off creative and interesting maneuvers because I'm not strictly limited to what I can do by mechanics but instead by my creativity and the GM. However, that is something we have gone in great lengths to in other threads.

It does raise a question. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to honestly have a great disregard for 5th edition. If you hate it this much, why play it? Is it just what the rest of your group wants to play? If I'm mistaking passion for distaste, I apologize, and please let me know.

As far as the house rule goes... wow. Does that mean that Magic Armor makes you invulnerable to all non-magic weapons? If nothign but magic or other magic items can touch it, covering yourself in magic leathers would make you invulnerable to anything other than magic! That would require some explaining for me to understand clearly.

And you did notice the description of the book reads "The manual then loses it's magic, but it regains it in a century". So do you read this as it's loses it's ability to increase stats, or that it loses it's magic?

[NotALurker]

What do you mean every book you allow? If you are playing 5e there is ONE book. Maybe two if you are letting them pick magic items?



I actually find 5e to be very modular and easy to run. The fighter class is much easier to pull off creative and interesting maneuvers because I'm not strictly limited to what I can do by mechanics but instead by my creativity and the GM. However, that is something we have gone in great lengths to in other threads.

It does raise a question. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to honestly have a great disregard for 5th edition. If you hate it this much, why play it? Is it just what the rest of your group wants to play? If I'm mistaking passion for distaste, I apologize, and please let me know.

As far as the house rule goes... wow. Does that mean that Magic Armor makes you invulnerable to all non-magic weapons? If nothign but magic or other magic items can touch it, covering yourself in magic leathers would make you invulnerable to anything other than magic! That would require some explaining for me to understand clearly.

And you did notice the description of the book reads "The manual then loses it's magic, but it regains it in a century". So do you read this as it's loses it's ability to increase stats, or that it loses it's magic?

part of me is pissed off about the blatant lying they did. they said it would be modular, a game for everyone that you could play 4e style characters but practically nothing of what they said was true is. they even lied about what was in the books by putting player material in the DM's book and not saying so on the outside of the books.
it would be one thing if they said "we are making 2.5e, and going to actively ignore all of 4e" then sure I would not agree with their goal but at least it would be honest. but that is not what they did.

it means its hard to dent and such, think of it like this if you blocked a hit with your shield you would still feel the pain even if the shield is intact.

I would say its a normal book for 100 years..which is just a weird way to write it because how do you even know what it is during that time? if would not even detect as magic

[JNAProductions]

What player material is in the DMG? Do you mean magic items? Because that being a DM-dependent part of the game isn't a mistake or a lie, it's a design choice. You don't have to like it, but it's what they decided on.

[NotALurker]

What player material is in the DMG? Do you mean magic items? Because that being a DM-dependent part of the game isn't a mistake or a lie, it's a design choice. You don't have to like it, but it's what they decided on.

that and all the mods that the PCs could need to know about.

in some low magic settings sure but what about settings with magic marts? what about low magic settings starting at 10ish where you will have one or two items?

if they had done what they said they would not have hard coded low or high magic into the game, they would provide us with options so we can decide. and for high magic players need to know what magic items exist.

[JNAProductions]

The mods that are DM dependent, yes. The DM controls the world, he decides the rules. If you want players to help decide what mods to choose, then bring the DMG with you and read it with them, or go over the various choices. However, they are ultimately up to the DM, which makes it pretty reasonable to be in the DMG.

As for how to give players magic item choice? Open the book with them. If you run a magic mart, let players see the DMG's treasure section when in town.

[themaque]

part of me is pissed off about the blatant lying they did. they said it would be modular, a game for everyone that you could play 4e style characters but practically nothing of what they said was true is. they even lied about what was in the books by putting player material in the DM's book and not saying so on the outside of the books.
it would be one thing if they said "we are making 2.5e, and going to actively ignore all of 4e" then sure I would not agree with their goal but at least it would be honest. but that is not what they did.

it means its hard to dent and such, think of it like this if you blocked a hit with your shield you would still feel the pain even if the shield is intact.

I would say its a normal book for 100 years..which is just a weird way to write it because how do you even know what it is during that time? if would not even detect as magic

Okay, I can see where your frustrations are coming from. To be fair, The game changed quite a bit from playtest to playtest. What I have saved on my hard drive (the first play test) Is pretty different from what they finally arrived at and is sitting on my coffee table. I'm sorry the game changed to far from what you want the game to be, but that's not the games fault it's just what it is. I'm not even certain it's WotC's fault.

Speaking as a guy with limited knowledge of 4e (just played with the first core for a year or so) I can see influences. Not whole mechanics, for they are changed, but 4e DID influence the game. It's just more in line with what a vocal majority of people said they wanted. The game was play tested, people could write in, we saw how the game developed. But if 4e is your baby, keep playing. If your friends want to play 5e, than don't blame the game for not being what you want it to be. That's not fair to anyone; especially to yourself, as it will keep you from having fun.

I think the Players info inside the game was specific examples of modifying existing classes/races to help GM's do so in their own games. Magic items, and having magic items in the DMG, is a very long tradition. I thought it was made decently clear, but I also expected it to be there so I could easily be wrong.

Fair enough on magic items resistances, I think it's pretty standard for most groups that magic items are tougher than standard. I'm 98% sure it was RAW for 3.P.

and if for 100 years the tombs are simply books, no could easily not register as magic. But if the race is long lived, they would know and remember. They would have to take extra careful attention to it. Eventually however, the books may just degrade. Putting another limitation to the cheese factor. This would also help explain how they get lost or randomly found. They LOOKED like some old moldy tome until the day... the magic awakens.

[JNAProductions]

This would also help explain how they get lost or randomly found. They LOOKED like some old moldy tome until the day... the magic awakens.

BOOM! CRASH! SCARY LIGHTNING! SPOOKY SKELETONS! DRAMATIC MUSIC!

...

Sorry, I couldn't resist. That was just so hammy, themaque. Also quite sensible, though my personal opinion is that the books are going to be damn tough even without magic.

[NotALurker]

Okay, I can see where your frustrations are coming from. To be fair, The game changed quite a bit from playtest to playtest. What I have saved on my hard drive (the first play test) Is pretty different from what they finally arrived at and is sitting on my coffee table. I'm sorry the game changed to far from what you want the game to be, but that's not the games fault it's just what it is. I'm not even certain it's WotC's fault.

Speaking as a guy with limited knowledge of 4e (just played with the first core for a year or so) I can see influences. Not whole mechanics, for they are changed, but 4e DID influence the game. It's just more in line with what a vocal majority of people said they wanted. The game was play tested, people could write in, we saw how the game developed. But if 4e is your baby, keep playing. If your friends want to play 5e, than don't blame the game for not being what you want it to be. That's not fair to anyone; especially to yourself, as it will keep you from having fun.

I think the Players info inside the game was specific examples of modifying existing classes/races to help GM's do so in their own games. Magic items, and having magic items in the DMG, is a very long tradition. I thought it was made decently clear, but I also expected it to be there so I could easily be wrong.

Fair enough on magic items resistances, I think it's pretty standard for most groups that magic items are tougher than standard. I'm 98% sure it was RAW for 3.P.

and if for 100 years the tombs are simply books, no could easily not register as magic. But if the race is long lived, they would know and remember. They would have to take extra careful attention to it. Eventually however, the books may just degrade. Putting another limitation to the cheese factor. This would also help explain how they get lost or randomly found. They LOOKED like some old moldy tome until the day... the magic awakens.

they put things that LOOK like they are from 4e, hit dice, but that ignores the reason such things exist.

I do not blame the game I blame the people who lied about what they were making and what they were selling.
its like what was in the books. if they had called the PHB "rules, class and race options" with a note that said other rules you would need to know would be in the DMG then it would be one thing. instead they called it the PHB while putting things players need to know to play the game in a book not labeled as such.


The mods that are DM dependent, yes. The DM controls the world, he decides the rules. If you want players to help decide what mods to choose, then bring the DMG with you and read it with them, or go over the various choices. However, they are ultimately up to the DM, which makes it pretty reasonable to be in the DMG.

As for how to give players magic item choice? Open the book with them. If you run a magic mart, let players see the DMG's treasure section when in town.

sure and when the players want to know how they work? are all the players suppose to buy the DMG? what about if the players and DM are working together to decide what mods they want?

what races and classes I can play are also up to the DM, why are they in the PHB while other things that may or may not be open to me are in the DMG?

sure I am sure 6 people reading one book all at the same time will work out well. what about starting a character in a high magic setting?

[JNAProductions]

My players only have the PHB. We've never had an issue playing the game.

It doesn't hold all the options, true. But it's certainly what a player needs to play. A player's handbook, if you will.

And again, it is up to the DM if optional rules are used or not. The most common optional rules are actually in the PHB-Feats and Multiclassing. Those are, technically, optional rules for you to use or not. I, for instance, disallow multiclassing.

[themaque]

sure and when the players want to know how they work? are all the players suppose to buy the DMG? what about if the players and DM are working together to decide what mods they want?

what races and classes I can play are also up to the DM, why are they in the PHB while other things that may or may not be open to me are in the DMG?

sure I am sure 6 people reading one book all at the same time will work out well. what about starting a character in a high magic setting?

Magic items aren't that complicated, and even in High magic games their example lists don't have to many items. The complicated ones generally required to be attuned, and that limits you to three. I think most people can keep track of that on their own or scrap paper.

As far as mods for that campaign, Players won't need to refer to that every week. That's a one or two time problem tops. Besides, that's part of the job of the GM to help make things run smoothly and that everyone understands what's going on.

Players only NEED a PHB.
A DM only NEEDS a PHB.

The DMG and MM make life so much easier they are almost required, but just about everything you NEED is in the PHB. The DMG and the MM are tools to help and suggest how to keep things smooth. Not tell you what to do at every turn and that's only for the DM. Players used to need a MM if they are playing a caster, but now they can get away with JUST the PHB just fine thanks to the appendices.

[NotALurker]

My players only have the PHB. We've never had an issue playing the game.

It doesn't hold all the options, true. But it's certainly what a player needs to play. A player's handbook, if you will.

And again, it is up to the DM if optional rules are used or not. The most common optional rules are actually in the PHB-Feats and Multiclassing. Those are, technically, optional rules for you to use or not. I, for instance, disallow multiclassing.

it has most of the rules yes, but not all.

EVERY rule is optional, the fact some are labled as such does not and has never mattered. its just an excuse for them to make crappy rules "its only an optional rule, if you don't like it you do not have to use it"


My players only have the PHB. We've never had an issue playing the game.

It doesn't hold all the options, true. But it's certainly what a player needs to play. A player's handbook, if you will.

And again, it is up to the DM if optional rules are used or not. The most common optional rules are actually in the PHB-Feats and Multiclassing. Those are, technically, optional rules for you to use or not. I, for instance, disallow multiclassing.

it has most of the rules yes, but not all.

EVERY rule is optional, the fact some are labeled as such does not and has never mattered. its just an excuse for them to make crappy rules "its only an optional rule, if you don't like it you do not have to use it"

[NotALurker]

Magic items aren't that complicated, and even in High magic games their example lists don't have to many items. The complicated ones generally required to be attuned, and that limits you to three. I think most people can keep track of that on their own or scrap paper.

As far as mods for that campaign, Players won't need to refer to that every week. That's a one or two time problem tops. Besides, that's part of the job of the GM to help make things run smoothly and that everyone understands what's going on.

Players only NEED a PHB.
A DM only NEEDS a PHB.

The DMG and MM make life so much easier they are almost required, but just about everything you NEED is in the PHB. The DMG and the MM are tools to help and suggest how to keep things smooth. Not tell you what to do at every turn and that's only for the DM. Players used to need a MM if they are playing a caster, but now they can get away with JUST the PHB just fine thanks to the appendices.

so if I tell my players the king is giving them a magic item each they would be ok with just a PHB? becuase I am sure they would need to be able to read the items and compare them to make a choice.


Magic items aren't that complicated, and even in High magic games their example lists don't have to many items. The complicated ones generally required to be attuned, and that limits you to three. I think most people can keep track of that on their own or scrap paper.

As far as mods for that campaign, Players won't need to refer to that every week. That's a one or two time problem tops. Besides, that's part of the job of the GM to help make things run smoothly and that everyone understands what's going on.

Players only NEED a PHB.
A DM only NEEDS a PHB.

The DMG and MM make life so much easier they are almost required, but just about everything you NEED is in the PHB. The DMG and the MM are tools to help and suggest how to keep things smooth. Not tell you what to do at every turn and that's only for the DM. Players used to need a MM if they are playing a caster, but now they can get away with JUST the PHB just fine thanks to the appendices.

so if I tell my players the king is giving them a magic item each they would be ok with just a PHB? becuase I am sure they would need to be able to read the items and compare them to make a choice.

[JNAProductions]

Feats and multiclassing are rules you consider crappy? I actually like them, though disallow multiclassing to avoid munchkining headaches. (Mostly my own.) Overall, having had D&D since 3.5, I find the 5E rules the best, though that's something that's just an opinion.

Either way, as themaque pointed out, PHB is all you truly need. The DMG and MM are insanely helpful, but you could run an adventure fighting nothing but characters built like players. Could even be pretty dang fun.

Edit: If you don't have the DMG, don't include magic items. Give them a noble title, or a plot of land, or an army.

Also, why do they get to pick a magic item if the king is giving them a gift? Wouldn't that be the king's choice?

[NotALurker]

Feats and multiclassing are rules you consider crappy? I actually like them, though disallow multiclassing to avoid munchkining headaches. (Mostly my own.) Overall, having had D&D since 3.5, I find the 5E rules the best, though that's something that's just an opinion.

Either way, as themaque pointed out, PHB is all you truly need. The DMG and MM are insanely helpful, but you could run an adventure fighting nothing but characters built like players. Could even be pretty dang fun.

not all optional rules are, but way too many people are giving the bad optional rules a pass just because they are labeled as optional, rather then being optional but not labeled as such.

if you only have the PHB you are missing chucks of the game. That SHOULD not be the case but it is. you can not play a high magic game without the DMG for example unless you are going to make up all the magic items yourself and the rules for using them.

[JNAProductions]

And the default setting is low-magic. Again, that is a design choice, It's not one you agree with, but that doesn't change the fact that low-magic is intended for the average gamer. I believe it's assumed the hardcore gamer is going to purchasing all the books.

To compare it to 4E, you definitely need at least the PHB and the DMG to play that. You can't play it with just the PHB, at least as far I know, so 5E is actually better in that regard.

[NotALurker]

Feats and multiclassing are rules you consider crappy? I actually like them, though disallow multiclassing to avoid munchkining headaches. (Mostly my own.) Overall, having had D&D since 3.5, I find the 5E rules the best, though that's something that's just an opinion.

Either way, as themaque pointed out, PHB is all you truly need. The DMG and MM are insanely helpful, but you could run an adventure fighting nothing but characters built like players. Could even be pretty dang fun.

Edit: If you don't have the DMG, don't include magic items. Give them a noble title, or a plot of land, or an army.

Also, why do they get to pick a magic item if the king is giving them a gift? Wouldn't that be the king's choice?

"talk to my wizards, they will make whatever you want"

"you may look through my personal vault, we keep most every item you can think of their just in case its needed"

also the creepy version "my wizards have been looking at you via divinations for a long long time to determine what item you each want the most"


And the default setting is low-magic. Again, that is a design choice, It's not one you agree with, but that doesn't change the fact that low-magic is intended for the average gamer. I believe it's assumed the hardcore gamer is going to purchasing all the books.

To compare it to 4E, you definitely need at least the PHB and the DMG to play that. You can't play it with just the PHB, at least as far I know, so 5E is actually better in that regard.

having low magic as default means that its very hard to make a high magic game work. you not only have to make alot more magic items, the rules for buying and selling them when they are common, and you have to remake the math behind them.

high magic as default makes alot more sense, you then lay out the math for how they effect the characters and how to set your scale between high magic and no magic.

[JNAProductions]

"talk to my wizards, they will make whatever you want"

"you may look through my personal vault, we keep most every item you can think of their just in case its needed"

also the creepy version "my wizards have been looking at you via divinations for a long long time to determine what item you each want the most"

1) You've seen the crafting rules, right? "Just give them up to 50 years!" That's one palce 5E isn't so hot. At all.

2) That's one open king. I guess it makes sense, just seems... Unlikely. Very trusting, for someone prone to getting assassinated.

3) I believe that. Fanboy royalty. Stalker fanboy royalty.

[NotALurker]

1) You've seen the crafting rules, right? "Just give them up to 50 years!" That's one palce 5E isn't so hot. At all.

2) That's one open king. I guess it makes sense, just seems... Unlikely. Very trusting, for someone prone to getting assassinated.

3) I believe that. Fanboy royalty. Stalker fanboy royalty.

just because they go in, does not mean they will not be guarded, searched and frisked on the way out.

the simplest way would be to have them take off all their magic items before they enter, then make sure only the one item they picked up is the only magic item they have when they leave.

[themaque]

so if I tell my players the king is giving them a magic item each they would be ok with just a PHB? becuase I am sure they would need to be able to read the items and compare them to make a choice.

Well, there are two trains of thought here. Do you want their answer in character or out? Does the Fighter ask for a mighty blade wreathed in fire or does he ask for a flametounge from page 170.

If you want to say "Anything you the player wants" than yes, they will have to borrow your DMG, but they might have an idea as to what kind of thing they want to begin with but yes they will want to read the DMG. It will slow down game, but considering MOST magic items will be coming from you I don't see this slowing down game to often.

HOWEVER: This is going well outside the boundaries of the Manuals and Tomes at this point. If you want to continue this maybe we should start a new thread or keep it to one already created describing the benefits or problems with 5e.

[NotALurker]

Well, there are two trains of thought here. Do you want their answer in character or out? Does the Fighter ask for a mighty blade wreathed in fire or does he ask for a flametounge from page 170.

If you want to say "Anything you the player wants" than yes, they will have to borrow your DMG, but they might have an idea as to what kind of thing they want to begin with but yes they will want to read the DMG. It will slow down game, but considering MOST magic items will be coming from you I don't see this slowing down game to often.

HOWEVER: This is going well outside the boundaries of the Manuals and Tomes at this point. If you want to continue this maybe we should start a new thread or keep it to one already created describing the benefits or problems with 5e.

why would the answer be different in or out of character? in either case he would think through the options and pick the best one for himself.

[themaque]

why would the answer be different in or out of character? in either case he would think through the options and pick the best one for himself.

The Difference is in and out of character knowledge.

How does everyone else know what an Iron Flask is? In character, they very probably wouldn't. Trogdor the Barbarian isn't going to know the intricacies of the silver raven, but he would know Huge Flaming AX or pretty magic bird to keep as pet. Tibult the thief might not know the specifics of the Necklace of Adaptation, but asking for something to keep him from getting hit by that choking gas trap might be nice.

[Gritmonger]

The Difference is in and out of character knowledge.

How does everyone else know what an Iron Flask is? In character, they very probably wouldn't. Trogdor the Barbarian isn't going to know the intricacies of the silver raven, but he would know Huge Flaming AX or pretty magic bird to keep as pet. Tibult the thief might not know the specifics of the Necklace of Adaptation, but asking for something to keep him from getting hit by that choking gas trap might be nice.

Please tell me Trogdor is a Dragonborn ... with a big beefy arm.

[themaque]

NO Trogdor was a man.

http://www.hrwiki.org/w/images/1/15/A_man.PNG

I mean he was a Dragon Man

http://i1288.photobucket.com/albums/b495/sheepshield/dragonborn_zpsad40fb18.jpg

or maybe he WAS just a dragon

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs13/f/2007/036/5/b/Trogdor_by_intoc.jpg

But he was still TROGDOR, and Trogor really wants an ax or pretty bird.

[NotALurker]

The Difference is in and out of character knowledge.

How does everyone else know what an Iron Flask is? In character, they very probably wouldn't. Trogdor the Barbarian isn't going to know the intricacies of the silver raven, but he would know Huge Flaming AX or pretty magic bird to keep as pet. Tibult the thief might not know the specifics of the Necklace of Adaptation, but asking for something to keep him from getting hit by that choking gas trap might be nice.

if I was risking my life day in and day out and I was offered a magic item I would make sure I made a good choice. not having 18 int does not mean you do not care for your life enough to spend an hour or two talking over the options with someone who does know about them.


"Togar the best options for you would probably be the flaming axe and the bracers of armor"
"what they do?"
"flaming axe is on fire"
"fire no hurt Togar?"
"...no it does not hurt you"
"good, togar not like smell of burned Togar, what other do?"
"bracers of armor make it harder to hit you"
"hmm Togar kill people easy, but ass get arrows in them, ass get sore. Togar want bracers"

[JNAProductions]

So offer each player a short list of appropiate items. You don't need to give a Flametongue to a full caster Wizard, nor a set of Robes of the Archmagi to Barbarian. In addition, items will be ehavily restricted by power level-you wouldn't be handing out either of those items to a level 3 party, likewise, you're never going to hand out a Cap of Water Breathing as treasure to a level 17 party. (Possibly as a tool, though, before the mission starts.)

[themaque]

if I was risking my life day in and day out and I was offered a magic item I would make sure I made a good choice. not having 18 int does not mean you do not care for your life enough to spend an hour or two talking over the options with someone who does know about them.


"Togar the best options for you would probably be the flaming axe and the bracers of armor"
"what they do?"
"flaming axe is on fire"
"fire no hurt Togar?"
"...no it does not hurt you"
"good, togar not like smell of burned Togar, what other do?"
"bracers of armor make it harder to hit you"
"hmm Togar kill people easy, but ass get arrows in them, ass get sore. Togar want bracers"

That sounds like a fun little bit of role play vs Kenny looking in the book and deciding that while the bracers are nice, they don't stack with his barbarian armor, so he better take the Flaming ax.

[Chronos]

You only need the PHB as a player unless you're playing a rogue, who, for some reason, have a major chunk of their class features in the DMG instead of the PHB. Tell me, if you're making a rogue, you've probably read that part of their schtick is that they can find and disarm traps. If you're just reading the PHB, what build choices do you need to make to make that work well?

[HoarsHalberd]

fine show me a rule that says that you can have a character with blue eyes? if you can not then everyone MUST not have blue eyes or they are cheating. how about a character with eyelids? what rule says that you can have them?

EVERYTHING is legal by the rules unless they say otherwise. not the other way around.

If the DM says no blue eyes, no blue eyes. You wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Rules are tools of the players to interact with the DM's world. That's why people rules lawyer. Everything is legal for the DM, and if and when they go too far you are free to leave. NOTHING is legal without the DM's say so. If he says you're not playing with home rules, you still don't have a rule that says you are allowed to do it.

[ChubbyRain]

You only need the PHB as a player unless you're playing a rogue, who, for some reason, have a major chunk of their class features in the DMG instead of the PHB. Tell me, if you're making a rogue, you've probably read that part of their schtick is that they can find and disarm traps. If you're just reading the PHB, what build choices do you need to make to make that work well?

Yet another example of players coming to a 5e game not really knowing what they are going to get.

5e is a game that wanted to be rules light but wotc couldn't help but throw up all over the place and ended up making the game rules heavy.

[hawklost]

"talk to my wizards, they will make whatever you want"
"Oh Great Wizard, as a magic user myself, I could a staff that increases the potency of my spells"
....
OOC, so, can I have a staff that gives me a +1 DC to my spells? Wait, you say that is too much for my character to have at this level? Then what can I have? Oh, you will give me something that increases the power of my Ice Spells? Cool.... where is that in the book? Wait, you took 5 minutes to make this up and its not in the book!? Screw that, I demand a book item!



"you may look through my personal vault, we keep most every item you can think of their just in case its needed"
DM: "In the Vault you see many items that are of great beauty, anything from swords and staves to glowing rocks. Sadly nothing has a convenient name or stats written on them so you will have to talk with the Vault Keeper to get information about each item you are interested in"
OOC: Ok guys, tell me what kind of weapon/item you are looking at and I will give you a small description of a few, know that the Vault Keeper might only know the basics of the item and not all its special criteria but don't worry, as a good DM, I will not just screw you over but give you enough info to decide. Also, No looking through the DMG! these items might not be in there because I like to actually have variety


also the creepy version "my wizards have been looking at you via divinations for a long long time to determine what item you each want the most"
DM: For you Fred the Fighter, you get a +1 Sword. For you Derrick the Druid, you get a +1 Leather armor since you take so much damage. You Weisly the Wizard, you need a Wand of Magic Missile since you always run out of your first level spells.
......
DM: What? You don't like the items I gave you? You wanted a +1 Full Plate of Invulnerability? Why would you think that you would get that? The Kingdom isn't made of gold and that item is worth 25000 gp! Besides, the King just gave you a gift, are you complaining in Character that what he gave you isn't good enough?

See, in each of the scenarios the Players didn't open the DMG, they gave the DM some idea of what they wanted or could use and the DM gave them an item.

Even if the DMG did not exists it isn't hard for a DM to come up with items that players could use

Want to Fly once a day? Well, there are this cool winged figurine that gives the player wings for 1 hour a day now
Staff of Call Lightning? Here you go, nothing in the DMG has it but it isn't hard for a DM to make up.

Now, if you are talking about balancing the items for player level, then you are asking for something else. No matter the level if the players get to pick magical items out of the DMG they can mix and max items to make themselves break any campaign.

[themaque]

You only need the PHB as a player unless you're playing a rogue, who, for some reason, have a major chunk of their class features in the DMG instead of the PHB. Tell me, if you're making a rogue, you've probably read that part of their schtick is that they can find and disarm traps. If you're just reading the PHB, what build choices do you need to make to make that work well?

I think this is overstating the case. The Rogue player doesn't need all the information in the DMG for traps. Even half of the hard rules there say use intuition do what feels right. Perception, Sleight of Hand, and Thieves tools all describe generally how to be used to help find traps.

I will admit, the one line they SHOULD have added is the need for Arcane to handle magic traps. That was straight up bad editing. Other than that I think you're pretty good.

[Zyzzyva]

Timmy keeps bringing Durian for a snack? No durian house rule. (That one should probably be written into the core rules. -shudder-)

What are you talking about? That's how I became an Ur-Priest (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?137623-3-5-Otyugh-Hole-Who-uses-it-Why-How)! :smallwink:


not all optional rules are, but way too many people are giving the bad optional rules a pass just because they are labeled as optional, rather then being optional but not labeled as such.

if you only have the PHB you are missing chucks of the game. That SHOULD not be the case but it is. you can not play a high magic game without the DMG for example unless you are going to make up all the magic items yourself and the rules for using them.

But that's not the intent. The math in this version is a lot closer worked-over than previous editions (excepting possibly 4e, which I have no experience in; it's certainly tighter than 3e). As it turns out, the math works best in low-magic, heroic-rather-than-mythic fantasy settings; you can argue with that if you like (and plenty of people have here), but that's the default base they've built. And, coincidentally, that's what the PHB lets you play without needing anything else. My first 5e game was played with a single hardcopy of the PHB! (We fought a lot of wolves, and an orc who raged for extra hit points.)

Besides, "the new edition of D&D requires three books!" is... kinda a weird gripe. That's sorta how the editions have rolled for a little while now.

[themaque]

What are you talking about? That's how I became an Ur-Priest (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?137623-3-5-Otyugh-Hole-Who-uses-it-Why-How)! :smallwink:


I'm willing to talk and discus in a reasonable discourse just about anything. The line stops firmly at a steel reenforced wall with razor wire at the mention of Durian in the house. I've written it into the house rules and e-mailed it to my players, not kidding, just did it right now. You bring Durian to my house, you leave.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JBntA-ZOz0M/Td4nmoKPFfI/AAAAAAAADiE/xI5l8FWUfTg/s1600/no-durian.jpg

[archaeo]

But that's not the intent. The math in this version is a lot closer worked-over than previous editions (excepting possibly 4e, which I have no experience in; it's certainly tighter than 3e). As it turns out, the math works best in low-magic, heroic-rather-than-mythic fantasy settings; you can argue with that if you like (and plenty of people have here), but that's the default base they've built. And, coincidentally, that's what the PHB lets you play without needing anything else. My first 5e game was played with a single hardcopy of the PHB! (We fought a lot of wolves, and an orc who raged for extra hit points.)

I'm not really sure the math demands or even prefers "low-magic, heroic-rather-than-mythic fantasy settings," I just think the DM is well-advised to remember that that's what the baseline is. That's sort of what I like best about this DMG; at the very beginning, it talks about the "Core Assumptions" of the rules, and then tells you all the ways you can play with those assumptions.

If you want high-magic mythic characters, turn on a bunch of the high-powered options and throw increasingly more dangerous monsters at them until you get the difficulty right. If you want a gritty, nasty game, all the rules are there. It's really not too hard to deviate from those core assumptions, and it will only get easier as the rules get clarified and expanded online.

The PHB does indeed do a fine job of providing that default experience, as do the Basic rules, as you say. I'm not really sure what the gripe is w/r/t Rogues, but I suspect it will go away once they update the Basic DM rules with a few example traps, which seems like a sensible thing for WotC to do.


Besides, "the new edition of D&D requires three books!" is... kinda a weird gripe. That's sorta how the editions have rolled for a little while now.

Well, it's more the offense people seem to take at the idea that 5e is "rules light," or whatever. I don't think anyone is really complaining about the system's length, they just all disagree about the right words to use to describe said length and breadth and whatnot.

[NotALurker]

I'm not really sure the math demands or even prefers "low-magic, heroic-rather-than-mythic fantasy settings," I just think the DM is well-advised to remember that that's what the baseline is. That's sort of what I like best about this DMG; at the very beginning, it talks about the "Core Assumptions" of the rules, and then tells you all the ways you can play with those assumptions.

If you want high-magic mythic characters, turn on a bunch of the high-powered options and throw increasingly more dangerous monsters at them until you get the difficulty right. If you want a gritty, nasty game, all the rules are there. It's really not too hard to deviate from those core assumptions, and it will only get easier as the rules get clarified and expanded online.

The PHB does indeed do a fine job of providing that default experience, as do the Basic rules, as you say. I'm not really sure what the gripe is w/r/t Rogues, but I suspect it will go away once they update the Basic DM rules with a few example traps, which seems like a sensible thing for WotC to do.



Well, it's more the offense people seem to take at the idea that 5e is "rules light," or whatever. I don't think anyone is really complaining about the system's length, they just all disagree about the right words to use to describe said length and breadth and whatnot.

what happened to a "game for everyone"? that they said they were making, where you could decide what kind of game you wanted? I guess they do not care for those of us who like high magic games.

I find it hard to take anyone seriously when they say 5e is rules light.

[themaque]

I find it hard to take anyone seriously when they say 5e is rules light.

5th edition Dungeons and Dragons is relatively rules light yet example heavy. It provides a general outline and allows for customization and improvisation much easier than many previous editions of D&D.

Is it as rules light as FATE? No. Is it rules light compared to Hackmaster? Yes, very much lighter. You can't say "If you have 23 or more many pages of rules you classify in the heavyweight classification of rules. Anything 12 pages and under is rules lightweight classification". Just because I think it's light to me doesn't mean I'm wrong, I'm just using a different scale.

And please stop complaining that the game was trying to be "for everyone" but isn't your cup of tea. It should be common knowledge that one size does NOT fit all. They did the best they could, and general consensus seems to be they did alright.

Even the in game system of "high magic" is less than in previous editions, I admit you are correct. It's fair to say you don't like it. What can we do to fix it? Open a thread to make a sustainable High Magic environment to your liking. Would love to hear your fixes and collaborate on a solution.

[NotALurker]

5th edition Dungeons and Dragons is relatively rules light yet example heavy. It provides a general outline and allows for customization and improvisation much easier than many previous editions of D&D.

Is it as rules light as FATE? No. Is it rules light compared to Hackmaster? Yes, very much lighter. You can't say "If you have 23 or more many pages of rules you classify in the heavyweight classification of rules. Anything 12 pages and under is rules lightweight classification". Just because I think it's light to me doesn't mean I'm wrong, I'm just using a different scale.

And please stop complaining that the game was trying to be "for everyone" but isn't your cup of tea. It should be common knowledge that one size does NOT fit all. They did the best they could, and general consensus seems to be they did alright. It's fair to say you don't like it, but at some point you need to just accept the current game for what it is.

sure when Wotc comes out and says they lied about their goals for the game, apologize for it and offers to buy back any books they sold to people who bought them thinking they were buying something else.

[hawklost]

sure when Wotc comes out and says they lied about their goals for the game, apologize for it and offers to buy back any books they sold to people who bought them thinking they were buying something else.

Funny thing about Goals, most companies and people never reach them the way they want. So claiming they lied is just... well, spreading lies about companies and products, something you hate that people do.

Considering also that there was nothing requiring you to buy the books, that you could read the book pretty easily before buying it (heck, most stores have games so you could watch and/or join one of those and try it before buying the books) And gave out a free Basic rulebook (which you already called rules heavy) with information about what the rest of the PHB was going to have in it. (Size, classes, Feats, Spells, you knew the size of it all before you purchased the item)

If you choose to fail to actually read information about a product before you buy it, that is not the companies fault.

[NotALurker]

Funny thing about Goals, most companies and people never reach them the way they want. So claiming they lied is just... well, spreading lies about companies and products, something you hate that people do.

Considering also that there was nothing requiring you to buy the books, that you could read the book pretty easily before buying it (heck, most stores have games so you could watch and/or join one of those and try it before buying the books) And gave out a free Basic rulebook (which you already called rules heavy) with information about what the rest of the PHB was going to have in it. (Size, classes, Feats, Spells, you knew the size of it all before you purchased the item)

If you choose to fail to actually read information about a product before you buy it, that is not the companies fault.

if they had said "we tried making a game for everyone..and we failed we are sorry" then that might be ok, but they did not.

if I called a salesmen and asked what color the truck I wanted was and he told me red, because he knew I liked red but when I got there I saw it was black he would still be a lier.

Also this is not a case of falling short, this is a case where they never even tried to meet their stated goals. the most basic level of honestly would have required to state when they were no longer trying to make a game for everyone, or at least say how they were changing it. "we are not going to try and make the game work with high magic, nor are we going to balance the classes" would have been enough.

[hawklost]

if they had said "we tried making a game for everyone..and we failed we are sorry" then that might be ok, but they did not.

if I called a salesmen and asked what color the truck I wanted was and he told me red, because he knew I liked red but when I got there I saw it was black he would still be a lier.

Also this is not a case of falling short, this is a case where they never even tried to meet their stated goals. the most basic level of honestly would have required to state when they were no longer trying to make a game for everyone, or at least say how they were changing it. "we are not going to try and make the game work with high magic, nor are we going to balance the classes" would have been enough.

Well, considering your comments about the game and some others on the forums, if we attempted a game you think would be fun, most of the people here would say it isn't for them. So, by that, it was an impossible goal and you knew that from the beginning, your way of playing is completely different than many people on the forums.

Also, no, it is not the same as the car saleman. One is flat out lying, the other is like this.

a Car company says they will make a car with "a Color for everyone". They create a car with 100+ colors on it. You go to the sales room floor after the car is completed and look at every single color on the floor. You don't see one that exactly fits what you want. You then go out on the streets and throughout the sales room calling the company a liar because they did not have your exact shade of chartreuse that you wanted.

[Fwiffo86]

and I will I trust them all to have system mastery enough to know what is too far? how about for them to know what I consider important in a setting?

Isn't that your job as the DM?

You seem to confuse arbitration (a clearly defined concept in the game, such that no-one is ignorant of it) with fixing the game.

Your issue is that the game does not function as you have envisioned it (or more accurately: how you want it to). Because it does not, you believe it to be broken some how, and spend your time finding corner cases that everyone else would adjudicate in a moment and claim they are indicators of faulty design.

It sounds to me like you don't want the actual job of being DM. You want a game that can run on autopilot. I don't think this game is for you, and if you are running this edition for others, it must be a very different game than the rest of us are using.



what races and classes I can play are also up to the DM, why are they in the PHB while other things that may or may not be open to me are in the DMG?

Simple answer: None of those things are required to play the game. All the materials needed to play the game are located in the PHB. You don't need magic items. You don't need Monster stats. You don't need magic item economy rules. The game works just fine without any of that stuff. As a player, you don't need to know any of the stuff in the DMG. Period. It isn't your concern.

I agree with the 1e method. Your proficiency bonus tables, exp tables, basically anything with a number was in the DMG. Why? because the player didn't need that info. The DM is the only one who needs to actually know what chance you have to accomplish something.

[themaque]

Simple answer: None of those things are required to play the game. All the materials needed to play the game are located in the PHB. You don't need magic items. You don't need Monster stats. You don't need magic item economy rules. The game works just fine without any of that stuff. As a player, you don't need to know any of the stuff in the DMG. Period. It isn't your concern.

I agree with the 1e method. Your proficiency bonus tables, exp tables, basically anything with a number was in the DMG. Why? because the player didn't need that info. The DM is the only one who needs to actually know what chance you have to accomplish something.

I think going the 1e route would be an extreme. I will admit that as a player I enjoy at least knowing about my character. Rough Idea as to how well I think my character will work. I do admit, especialy when the base game is assumed no Magic Stores, that the Magic Items DON'T need to be in the PHB. Full trap breakdowns don't need to be in the PHB. Example DC's and suggestion on useful skills are in PHB, but you don't need the full formula.

[NotALurker]

Well, considering your comments about the game and some others on the forums, if we attempted a game you think would be fun, most of the people here would say it isn't for them. So, by that, it was an impossible goal and you knew that from the beginning, your way of playing is completely different than many people on the forums.

Also, no, it is not the same as the car saleman. One is flat out lying, the other is like this.

a Car company says they will make a car with "a Color for everyone". They create a car with 100+ colors on it. You go to the sales room floor after the car is completed and look at every single color on the floor. You don't see one that exactly fits what you want. You then go out on the streets and throughout the sales room calling the company a liar because they did not have your exact shade of chartreuse that you wanted.

yes they would be liers unless they had as many color's as the human eye can see they would not have a color for everyone.

I am not judging the game by my personal standards of fun, that would be unreasonable unless they knew me personally and said they were making a game I personally would like.

I am using their own standards and goals that they put out when they were making the game and have never retracted. they said they were making a game for everyone, that means high magic and low magic would work equally well. that means balanced classes (easy enough to provide an "epeen stroker" option for those of you who like super powerful wizards) for example.


Isn't that your job as the DM?

You seem to confuse arbitration (a clearly defined concept in the game, such that no-one is ignorant of it) with fixing the game.

Your issue is that the game does not function as you have envisioned it (or more accurately: how you want it to). Because it does not, you believe it to be broken some how, and spend your time finding corner cases that everyone else would adjudicate in a moment and claim they are indicators of faulty design.

It sounds to me like you don't want the actual job of being DM. You want a game that can run on autopilot. I don't think this game is for you, and if you are running this edition for others, it must be a very different game than the rest of us are using.



Simple answer: None of those things are required to play the game. All the materials needed to play the game are located in the PHB. You don't need magic items. You don't need Monster stats. You don't need magic item economy rules. The game works just fine without any of that stuff. As a player, you don't need to know any of the stuff in the DMG. Period. It isn't your concern.

I agree with the 1e method. Your proficiency bonus tables, exp tables, basically anything with a number was in the DMG. Why? because the player didn't need that info. The DM is the only one who needs to actually know what chance you have to accomplish something.

you only need one class and one race. you only need more then that if your settings has more. same for magic items, in high magic you need the players to have all the stats for magic items. this may or may not come up.

[Zyzzyva]

yes they would be liers unless they had as many color's as the human eye can see they would not have a color for everyone.

Truth-in-advertising laws want to have a chat with you. And not the usual Truth-in-advertising chat, either!

[NotALurker]

Truth-in-advertising laws want to have a chat with you. And not the usual Truth-in-advertising chat, either!

I was not talking about the law.

they said something they knew was not true, that means they lied. most people understand that from a young age.

[themaque]

a Car company says they will make a car with "a Color for everyone". They create a car with 100+ colors on it. You go to the sales room floor after the car is completed and look at every single color on the floor. You don't see one that exactly fits what you want. You then go out on the streets and throughout the sales room calling the company a liar because they did not have your exact shade of chartreuse that you wanted.


yes they would be liers unless they had as many color's as the human eye can see they would not have a color for everyone.

I am not judging the game by my personal standards of fun, that would be unreasonable unless they knew me personally and said they were making a game I personally would like.

I am using their own standards and goals that they put out when they were making the game and have never retracted. they said they were making a game for everyone, that means high magic and low magic would work equally well. that means balanced classes (easy enough to provide an "epeen stroker" option for those of you who like super powerful wizards) for example.


Do you go to Baskin Robbins and yell at them if they don't happen to have 31 flavors? They had set goals and ideals when they went out. I'm happy with the product they came out with.

I'm 99% sure they are not sitting in their offices laughing at the poor fools tricked into buying their game.

I think the Magic Tombs are nice. I really like the re-set option and think it offers some wonderful story opportunities. Yes if you get two through some amazing chance you can get the bonuses twice.

[JNAProductions]

Hyperbole is an accepted method of communication. Superlatives like "everyone", "all", "everything", etc. are not meant to be taken literally. Read them instead as "as many as possible", "as much as possible", "all we can do within reason", etc.

Communication is not 100% literal.

[Zyzzyva]

I was not talking about the law.

they said something they knew was not true, that means they lied. most people understand that from a young age.

The point is that you can say things like "best in the world", "we're making a game for everyone", "satisfaction guaranteed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_v._Chung)" without being a liar. English is not predicate calculus, the point of a sentence is not to be crushed down to a truth-value.

[Gritmonger]

Do you go to Baskin Robbins and yell at them if they don't happen to have 31 flavors? They had set goals and ideals when they went out. I'm happy with the product they came out with.

I'm 99% sure they are not sitting in their offices laughing at the poor fools tricked into buying their game.

This sounds like an awesome campaign for Nobilis - an assault on the number 31... and only the number 31...


I think the Magic Tombs are nice. I really like the re-set option and think it offers some wonderful story opportunities. Yes if you get two through some amazing chance you can get the bonuses twice.
Sounds like a 20th level epic quest - you must navigate the Astral on a looping path through the Outlands to arrive back at your destination one hundred years ago *exactly* in order to make sure you can use it when it resets and not a moment before...

[Fwiffo86]

you only need one class and one race. you only need more then that if your settings has more. same for magic items, in high magic you need the players to have all the stats for magic items. this may or may not come up.

Is there a point to this statement? Technically, you don't need rules. You don't need anyone other than your own imagination. Do you understand the level of unreasonable you are taking everything?

[NotALurker]

Hyperbole is an accepted method of communication. Superlatives like "everyone", "all", "everything", etc. are not meant to be taken literally. Read them instead as "as many as possible", "as much as possible", "all we can do within reason", etc.

Communication is not 100% literal.

I did not think a "game for everyone" meant they would make a game for every human being. I thought "a game that caters to every major playstyle, focusing on those of the previous two editions" they failed to deliver on that, they failed to even try. they EVEN failed to say they failed or stopped trying.


The point is that you can say things like "best in the world", "we're making a game for everyone", "satisfaction guaranteed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_v._Chung)" without being a liar. English is not predicate calculus, the point of a sentence is not to be crushed down to a truth-value.

the fact that many people lie does not make it ok.


Is there a point to this statement? Technically, you don't need rules. You don't need anyone other than your own imagination. Do you understand the level of unreasonable you are taking everything?

my point is that if your standard for what goes into a PHB is "the bare minimum a player could need to know" then it is not rational, and was inconstantly applied to 5e.

a much more rational and logical approach is to put "all the data a player could need to know" in the PHB then to label any future books as player books if they have any player data in them.

[Fwiffo86]

I thought "a game that caters to every major playstyle, focusing on those of the previous two editions" they failed to deliver on that, they failed to even try.

Do you see this statement? You openly say that the edition does not match what you thought it was going to be. This is proof that your problem with this edition has nothing to do with the edition, but with your perception of it instead. Not only that, but what you apparently thought doesn't even match what they claimed it would be. In no way did anyone claim it was going to focus on (your perceived) major playstyles, or the last 2 editions. Where did this false belief come from?



a much more rational and logical approach is to put "all the data a player could need to know" in the PHB then to label any future books as player books if they have any player data in them.

A player only needs to know what applies to his character. That's it. He doesn't need to know about optional classes (as he has already selected one) unless the DM has plans to make them available at character creation. If he does, then he will inform the player. The same applies for races, items (there is no reason for a player to know how a magic item works unless he actually has the thing in his possession), or any other potentially optional rule. The PHB has what a "Player" needs to know. All remaining information is optional, and not required to be known by a player.

[HoarsHalberd]

I was not talking about the law.

they said something they knew was not true, that means they lied. most people understand that from a young age.

No. Lying implies an intent to spread misinformation. They said something that was true in their eyes: "we're building a game for everyone." That turned out not to be true because of edition diehards, people who like very complex functions and people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing. Though the way optional rules were introduced allows some scope for the former to take out the ones that conflict with home brewed content.

[Knaight]

No. Lying implies an intent to spread misinformation. They said something that was true in their eyes: "we're building a game for everyone." That turned out not to be true because of edition diehards, people who like very complex functions and people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing. Though the way optional rules were introduced allows some scope for the former to take out the ones that conflict with home brewed content.

Oh come on. They made a hyperbolic advertising claim, like just about every company ever, knowing full well that there would be people who dislike the game. The intended reading was always that a good chunk of people who like D&D style games would like 5e, not that literally everyone would. Characterizing people who don't like it as "edition diehards" and "people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing" is a load of BS.

[HoarsHalberd]

Oh come on. They made a hyperbolic advertising claim, like just about every company ever, knowing full well that there would be people who dislike the game. The intended reading was always that a good chunk of people who like D&D style games would like 5e, not that literally everyone would. Characterizing people who don't like it as "edition diehards" and "people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing" is a load of BS.

I also commented on those who would prefer more complex functions, and I admit I missed out those who wanted a very simple game, and those who wanted the holy grail of balanced content. But good work ignoring the complimentary reason I gave. Oh and before you say anything about me dismissing those who wanted a more complex game, I'd point to the "some scope."

And if it was intended to be read in a certain way then it isn't a lie. A lie has to attempt to deceive.

Anyway, I'd recommend taking this to a different thread as it is now an entire page and then some since someone was even vaguely on topic.

[Shining Wrath]

what is your universe justification for one book costing what three should cost?

and no it is not chessey to buy items that the rules say you can buy, might as well say that you can't buy a longsword because they are too good, you have to buy daggers.

the rules SHOULD fix this problem, easy enough to just say "this item can only be used once by any given person" still can cause issues if there are ways to speed up time but at least its better.

So you claim that a PC should be able to

Start the game with a legendary item. Note very carefully that the fact that an item has a listed price for which it can be sold does not require or even imply that the item is available for purchase in a particular campaign. It may not exist; the current owners may not intend to sell it (even in short lived races, it's a wonderful heirloom to pass down in the family); it may have been taken by a BBEG and obtaining it is a quest the DM has in mind. It is explicitly stated that there is no 3.5 style magic mart.
Start the game at an age of your choosing
Assume that your character has had a legendary item in their possession for several hundred years and no one has bothered to steal it. If there's one item that will be searched for with scrying spells, it's a manual that adds to Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. You are essentially asserting that your PC has been the most powerful spellcaster with that particular key ability for most of their lives


A game is in perfect accordance with RAW if it denies any or all of the listed items.

[Fwiffo86]

the rules SHOULD fix this problem, easy enough to just say "this item can only be used once by any given person" still can cause issues if there are ways to speed up time but at least its better.

And what about DMs that don't want to abide by the rule that it can only be used by a single character once? Are you going to deny them that because it would say with your change?

[Knaight]

I also commented on those who would prefer more complex functions, and I admit I missed out those who wanted a very simple game, and those who wanted the holy grail of balanced content. But good work ignoring the complimentary reason I gave. Oh and before you say anything about me dismissing those who wanted a more complex game, I'd point to the "some scope."
Yes, I didn't mention the one reason you threw in as a sidenote, which still leaves out a ton of valid reasons to dislike 5e. It's not just about it being at the wrong level of mechanical complexity, it's that 5e is built in a lot of very particular ways which employs a bunch of mechanics people may or may not like. Disliking class based systems is a perfectly valid reason to dislike 5e. Wanting to run a game without having to actively work against the system to get it to do what you want it to do is a good reason to dislike 5e (provided you aren't trying something it's good at). Spinning that as "people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing" is a load of nonsense.

The bulk of people who dislike 5e do so because it doesn't appeal to them in some way, not because they are actively trying to find a reason to dislike it. Disliking 5e is not some sort of personal failing.

And if it was intended to be read in a certain way then it isn't a lie. A lie has to attempt to deceive.
I'm not calling it a lie, I'm calling it an advertising campaign. The only person claiming lying here is NotALurker,

[georgie_leech]

Yes, I didn't mention the one reason you threw in as a sidenote, which still leaves out a ton of valid reasons to dislike 5e. It's not just about it being at the wrong level of mechanical complexity, it's that 5e is built in a lot of very particular ways which employs a bunch of mechanics people may or may not like. Disliking class based systems is a perfectly valid reason to dislike 5e. Wanting to run a game without having to actively work against the system to get it to do what you want it to do is a good reason to dislike 5e (provided you aren't trying something it's good at). Spinning that as "people who want to run their game without the hassle of DMing" is a load of nonsense.

The bulk of people who dislike 5e do so because it doesn't appeal to them in some way, not because they are actively trying to find a reason to dislike it. Disliking 5e is not some sort of personal failing.

I'm not calling it a lie, I'm calling it an advertising campaign. The only person claiming lying here is NotALurker,

Given that he appears to be disagreeing with NotALurker, you two appear to be in violent agreement with each other.

"They're not lies."
"No, they're not lying!" :smalltongue:

[Malifice]

DM: "how is your wizard's Int so high, you only bought one tome?"
Wizard: "and I am 350 years old, I used it three times"

is the problem

using one of the options that Wotc presented should not mean that the game stops working.

Jesus. Can you see a table where this would be an option? A DM that would let this fly?

On a related note, have you got anything good to say about 5th edition? Not having a dig mate, but all you ever seem to do is post negative stuff about it.

[Gritmonger]

Jesus. Can you see a table where this would be an option? A DM that would let this fly?

On a related note, have you got anything good to say about 5th edition? Not having a dig mate, but all you ever seem to do is post negative stuff about it.

It seems more on the psychological side of trying to make another option look better by tearing down all other options. It's common in off-center scientific theory circles, where people presume that if they take down the modern accepted theory that, by default, whatever strange theory they espouse "wins." It's kind of backward, because the winner should instead be a better explanation of the facts.

[Shining Wrath]

It seems more on the psychological side of trying to make another option look better by tearing down all other options. It's common in off-center scientific theory circles, where people presume that if they take down the modern accepted theory that, by default, whatever strange theory they espouse "wins." It's kind of backward, because the winner should instead be a better explanation of the facts.

That in turn requires an understanding of the scientific method, which would in turn mean that something published in a peer reviewed journal would have more credibility than a Facebook post by an anonymous person.

[Occasional Sage]

On a related note, have you got anything good to say about 5th edition? Not having a dig mate, but all you ever seem to do is post negative stuff about it.

I think you're going to be waiting a while for your answer.