They give it to the Rogue because they’re both convinced it’s cursed

Proper min/max-ers will set aside their ego, and coordinate swapping the item as necessary. So thankful I’ve got a group with zero ego issues.

Tip or stern of either.

Both are example of stubborn group members who need to be flexible and work well with others.

The fighter in my story is the rogue in your story? That makes sense.

It requires attunement

Yes indeed!

Hand that is closest.

Make the lens also go above that rule, because that rule sucks if the dm is adding a lot of traps above 20.

It splits in two, and both weapons now gain a downside as they broke the magic holding the power in balance between the two states.

The Druid loses bonus actions on hits below 10 or when surrounded.

The fighter lets out a massive roar that causes all neaby targets to focus him when he lands a critical hit.

Russian world war 1 strategy of having a dead mate. When your friend dies you pick up his weapon and continue on.

Hunter weapon tbh

This is the plot of Soul Calibur lmao

No, it doesn’t. That’s precicely what classes are for. Everyone has their job and the rogue’s job is to finde traps and deal sneak attack damage. You don’t see the rogue going around demanding second wind, action surge and heavy armor, now do you?

You don’t see the rogue going around demanding second wind, action surge and heavy armor, now do you?

I mean ‘sneak attack totally applies here’ is the classic ‘rogue doing fighter things’ trope.

Random VLDL that fits nicely: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WKr7K6pe83w&pp=ygUWVmxkbCBmYWlsZWQgcGVyY2VwdGlvbg%3D%3D

I’d let the druid have it everytime. The druid could use either version and my fighters would scoff at a silly 1d6 weapon. Not even a martial weapon.

Good point. Still not worth a fight.

Standard Action: Use the item

Move Action: Throw the item to the other guy

There’s a place for a dysfunctional party dynamic, particularly early on in a game. Savvy DMs can factor party dysfunction into the difficulty of an encounter and allow the story to progress even as individual party members tussle with one another.

I think one thing that players and DMs both forget to include is paths for failure in a given adventure or chronicle. Sometimes its good to write out a “Bad Ending” to a game and allow players to experience it. This doesn’t have to be the end of the group, the end of the campaign, or even the end of the story. Particularly early on “everyone fucks up and gets thrown in jail together” can be its own kind of team-building exercise. And for faster and more heavy handed games, a “bad ending” can open up the possibility for players to roll up a new party to pick up the banner that the old party dropped.

What really matters is that the game itself is structured so everyone has an opportunity to enjoy themselves. And that can include a kleptomaniac and a short-tempered brute, so long as the players can agree that’s the kind of game they’re ready to play.

But it’s definitely harder to do than a game in which everyone’s a team player.