Search results

Nope, you are understanding it correctly. I am saying that the notion of objective evil is as incoherent as the notion of 2+2=5. I can imagine gods that I would consider evil, no problem. But evil only exists in relationships between things. It is not definable otherwise. There’s no such thing...

"The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven" (Milton ripping off Shakespeare). I can conceptualize a plane of evil or a plane of good. Sort of. But only by imagining things that I think are good or bad. There is no good or evil without context. At best...

I don't think it is possible to make a "4-0-0" character in 5e. I've never seen one. One of the underlying principles of 5e is to allow each class to be effective on its own, and because of bounded accuracy it doesn't take that much to at least be decent at most things, and you can rarely be...

I don't think I'm very good at playing non-human perspectives. I try my best, but it quickly descends into stereotypes from World of Warcraft and stuff.

I find this impossible to conceptualize. I can only imagine evil in terms of context. For example, take the Necronomicon, a classic example of an object of Pure Evil. It is written in blood, bound in human flesh, contains descriptions and illustrations of the vilest of acts, merely reading it...

There are many shorter lived sapient species, though. Why aren't goblins mostly running the show? Also, some of these assumptions really vary by setting. On Exandria, Elves are longer lived, often attaining several centuries, but nothing close to immortal. Even in AD&D elf lifespans were measure...

Agreed. I find it difficult to think in evolutionary terms because the D&D biome is so completely unhinged that it is impossible to realistically speculate about the sorts of evolutionary pressures that a specific species would have faced. On top of which, it is a trope for D&D settings to have...

Another thing I'm thinking about is that my school campaign is mostly kids with few or no preconceptions about which species "should" play which class. So they probably feel more free to mix and match than a grognard like me does. On the other hand, some matches are sort of obvious, like the...

I don't follow your conclusion, nor does it track my experience. My games already allow the players to assigns their ASIs, and players are MUCH more likely to just pick whatever species suits them for conceptual reasons. My most recent school campaign currently includes a human paladin, goliath...

There's already The Legend of Vox Machina, though. So releasing a similar show would likely draw unflattering comparisons, especially considering the popularity and critical acclaim for the former.

What does that even mean? Evil is not a substance. Evil is a subjective concept; it's a term that only has meaning when given context. You can't be made of evil. That's like being made of red, or made of comfort, etc.. You can say the words "a plane of pure evil," for example, but those words...

That is so species-ist! I bet to other weird elf-arachnid fusion people, she's totes adorable!

This reply seems so on brand, given your self-description. Fair enough!

They're really good, aren't they? I can't wait for the MM.

A jillion times better, all due respect to Venger and co.

Here's Gary Gygax on the subject of Lawful Good (2005): So...yeah. This is one of the reasons I don't use alignments.

Keep in mind that even as late as the AD&D DMG there was a random harlot table, and as late as the mid-80s the game was pushing a comeliness stat (with a bonus for female characters, naturally). I love all this stuff. I don't agree with it, but I find it fascinating. I think it's both awesome...

My suggestion, if you want to make it a + thread, is don't lay out your thesis, since you don't wish to debate it. Something like: "Assuming "paladin" is problematic, suggest alternatives (+)." Then the onus is on those who don't share that assumption to not engage. I'd be happy with the term...

My issue with capping it is that falling, from any height, very soon becomes a viable strategy for most characters. For some, the damage is negligible. A raging barbarian, for example, can probably survive a fall from any height, RAW, after level 4 or so. Water and falling damage is weird. Past...

I don't think this is an appropriate use of a + thread. As I see it, a plus thread is a sort of "yes and" thread, where you are trying to constructively problem solve, or celebrate something. Like, "Name three things you love about 5e (+)" or "suggestions for how to improve sorcerers (+)." You...