Recent content by FitzTheRuke

Yeah, I think that it's more likely for us to see updated and new species (going forward) in books with subclasses rather than ones with monsters (except in cases where the book has both, which might be the most likely scenario of all).

I don't disagree with you that it sounds like a nice idea. However, I don't think that it will ever happen. They are far more likely to make another similar book than to update that one. I mean, the newer, similar book could contain some updates from that book (for example the Species) making it...

The answer to that is supposed to be "work less, focus on what brings joy and interest". But unfortunately, that's not the world we currently live in. They are more likely to have to fight some sort of revolution, sadly.

It's conflating the joust (sports) equipment with the weapon of war, is all.

Not much. If we don't hear anything by the end of March, I'll probably start to worry, though! Based on the... leak? By B&G about their fancy edition, which appears to be out in May or June, we'd need to hear something within the next six weeks, but it could be near the end of that, without any...

Maybe eventually, with minimal effort. Even then, I doubt the main goal would not be to sell it to you again. I mean, it would be on the goal-list as a nice "perk", sure, but not a main feature. If they do it at all (beyond a basic errata) I would expect it to be to "fix" monster stablocks...

Now, this, I agree with.

I'll say it again: The WHOLE POINT of making 2024 "backwards compatible" was to NOT do this!

I was about to agree with you, but on further reflection, I think you're mistaken. I think that (in spite of your attempts otherwise) you are affected by your own low opinion of FLGSes. For example, I would say that I haven't played D&D at my own FLGS with a "hardcore player" in many many...

Either way. My point is that we (the players of the game) don't need to get the calipers out. IMO it satisfies the spell that both the DM and monster (or player and PC) simply do their best to play it out. Right, Left? Who cares. Pick one (or roll randomly, as @Lanefan suggested) and go with it...

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as if I was arguing with you. Yes - I get what you're saying. I was just adding: It's not like under most circumstances, a character will intrinsically know which direction will get them furthest away. They'd just do their best. So does the DM. Pick a...

And are they getting a yardstick out to measure which way gets them the furthest?

I would argue that they don't even need to actually succeed at the "fastest route to the furthest spot" because the spell would not somehow impart that perfect "top-down, distance" information that the players have to the victim of the spell. They would just need to do their best, modelled by a...

Your encouragement means a lot to me. I've lost another couple of weeks, but the game is very much on my mind and I fully plan to get to it soon. I've just been both busy and sadly, prone to dithering. I'll get to it, I swear!

I can definitely make up an Adventure with less work than running a pre-written, but I find that I enjoy reworking the prewritten adventures. I've never run one even close to exactly like what's in the book, but I get the "gist" of it out of it, even if the details are changed. It's probably why...