D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

Plan to adopt the new core rules?

  • Yep

    Votes: 245 54.3%
  • Nope

    Votes: 206 45.7%

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
that is a distinction without a difference...
No, it isn't. A background feature saying you know someone is not the same as a background feature relying on you knowing someone. That would be like if a feature said "you can do X if you know such and such a person", and the background features don't say anything like that.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

mamba

Legend
No, it isn't. A background feature saying you know someone is not the same as a background feature relying on you knowing someone.
yes it is, that is the whole point of you knowing that someone

“You know how to get messages to and from your contact, even over great distances; specifically, you know the local messengers, corrupt caravan masters, and seedy sailors who can deliver messages for you.”

it even says this is ‘specifically’ how you do it…
 
Last edited:

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
This is a good template, borrowed from PF2.

"You can frighten foes so much, they might die. Attempt an Intimidation check against the Will DC of a living creature within 30 feet of you that you sense or observe and who can sense or observe you. If the target can't hear you or doesn't understand the language you are speaking, you take a –4 circumstance penalty. The creature is temporarily immune for 1 minute."

Note the penalty for no shared language and the fact that specific creatures might be immune (because they are not living) and some might have an immunity to emotional effects, which this is per the rules.

Edit: The above ability is non-magical.
Can this be used against PCs? Or by one PC against another?

If yes, fine; though some players will complain about the loss of agency.

If no, it's a non-starter.
 

MuhVerisimilitude

Adventurer
Can this be used against PCs? Or by one PC against another?

If yes, fine; though some players will complain about the loss of agency.

If no, it's a non-starter.
There is, as far as I know, nothing that prevents this from being used against player characters. I don't see how that matters at all, though.
 

Hussar

Legend
I’m sure it’s skewed. There are many here who aren’t fans of 5e.

So you think it’s fair to suggest others they shouldn’t offer any reasons for why they don’t like something? Why?


I’m behind this 100%. But I have to say I often see the opposite. One person says I don’t like 4e because xyz and immediately they are told how terrible it is they think that/how wrong they are for thinking that/that 4e is awesome/etc.

Perception is funny that way.

I said d a fairly minor nice thing about 4e in this thread and at least three posters popped up to tell me how bad 4e is and how much they don’t like and reject 4e.

🤷
 

Oofta

Legend
This is a good template, borrowed from PF2.

"You can frighten foes so much, they might die. Attempt an Intimidation check against the Will DC of a living creature within 30 feet of you that you sense or observe and who can sense or observe you. If the target can't hear you or doesn't understand the language you are speaking, you take a –4 circumstance penalty. The creature is temporarily immune for 1 minute."

Note the penalty for no shared language and the fact that specific creatures might be immune (because they are not living) and some might have an immunity to emotional effects, which this is per the rules.

Edit: The above ability is non-magical.

Untold millions of soldiers have charged into battle knowing they would likely not survive. People do things that terrify them all the time. Intimidating someone so much they run away is a mystical supernatural ability as far as I'm concerned.

Intimidate may be useful in my games at certain times depending on the disposition of the enemy. If it's possible to intimidate an enemy, I'll likely let the players know or at least drop multiple hints. But an enemy that is knowingly risking their lives and they do it anyway is not going to be scared away by someone looking at them funny.
 

Oofta

Legend
Insults: The nice thing about insults is that they're often (but not always) more than just a word. They frequently are coupled with tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language. If someone calls me a bad word in a language I don't know but in a pleasant tone of voice, I'll have no idea I've been insulted. But if someone calls me a bad word in a language I don't know and at the same time glares at me, says it in an angry or disgusted tone, mutters it under their breath, makes a rude or lewd gesture, spits, turns away sharply, sticks out their tongue or waggles their fingers in their ears--I can usually figure out I've been insulted.

Wolf cubs: The actual example (assuming this is the correct one) doesn't say the cubs suddenly appear. They could have been part of the narrative all along. If the DM said "eight wolves step out of the bushes and surround you, snarling" then yeah, I could see not allowing someone to loom over cubs--the DM has established that there are eight (8) wolves, and that they're all actively engaged in the adult activity of ambushing player characters (cubs will be at home with mom). But if the DM said "eight wolves of various sizes and ages step out of the bushes" or "you stumble into a wolves' den, and eight wolves stand up and snarl at you" and the player says, "are there any cubs around? I want to loom over them threateningly," then sure--it's reasonable to assume that "various sizes and ages" means that some are cubs, and it's reasonable to assume that in a wolves' den, there would be cubs around.

But! I see that a post later you talk about mindless undead or constructs. Well, that's a completely different thing that has nothing to do with the power and everything to do with the choice of enemy. I searched for the power name and I found this description for Come And Get Me: While raging, as a free action the barbarian may leave herself open to attack while preparing devastating counterattacks. Doesn't say you have to do anything to the enemy; you're just leaving yourself open to the attack. And I think it's reasonable to assume that mindless undead or constructs would have been programmed to go after a particular type of target first: closest, largest, smallest, most armored, least armored, etc. You the DM don't have to actually decide what that programming is ahead of time (unless it's really important to the adventure), so if the barbarian steps up and uses that power, then you say that something about the barbarian triggers their movement.

Getting in the way without moving: I can't find the original post for that, but "moving" in D&D typically means actually moving, as in from point A to point B. If the Bad Guys are within reach of me or my weapon, I can definitely get in their way without leaving my space.

I was done with 4E a decade ago, I'm done arguing about it now. No matter how often the same arguments are made, it doesn't change anything. Come and Get It and several other fighter powers were supernatural as far as I'm concerned.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
Perception is funny that way.

I said d a fairly minor nice thing about 4e in this thread and at least three posters popped up to tell me how bad 4e is and how much they don’t like and reject 4e.

🤷
I don’t know the initial trigger, but I know when I jumped in it was because 5e fans that disliked 4e were being accused of hypocrisy over a disputed factual record (what from 4e is actually in 5e). I don’t think that was right no matter how we got there.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
I was done with 4E a decade ago, I'm done arguing about it now. No matter how often the same arguments are made, it doesn't change anything. Come and Get It and several other fighter powers were supernatural as far as I'm concerned.
So, any trait that requires even the slightest bit of interpretation or may vary depending on the immediate circumstances is supernatural to you? Okay then...
 


Remove ads

Top