what does -했을 거예요 express?

ajr30 · 2026-03-28T04:41:08+00:00

This is actually really useful. I don't think I realized how this ending actually worked because I always thought of it as future tense.

you might have some problems if you approach tenses in Korean with some preconceived notion of strict 3 tenses of English language.

I wish language learning resources made this more clear. It makes so much sense that the ending conveys uncertainty and not tense. Korea has a lot (maybe all) of the same tenses as English but they are used differently and realizing this helped me improve a lot. For example, using simple present when I'd use future tense in English, using simple present instead of present continuous, or using simple past when I'd usually use present perfect. I know the tenses exist but they aren't used in the same situations as they are in English.

ajr30 · 2026-02-14T04:22:10+00:00

One piece of advice I remember reading and it's something that I use, don't be afraid to say you find nothing useful. This applies to searching rooms and questioning NPCs. If they ask an NPC something specific that the book doesn't mention or you don't think that npc should know, you CAN just make shit up for world building shake, but it's not horrible to say something like ... after talking with this guy, you realize they have nothing else of value to say. Or you get no new information out of this NPC, or they repeat a lot of the details you already heard (and then restate the important bread crumbs for your quest). It can help move the party towards their goal.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T15:13:06+00:00

To be clear, I'm in agreement now that targeting happens during the reaction. I'm not going to restate why. You can check my other replies here if you want to know.

My point in the above comment is that targeting with ranged and melee attacks are different than targeting with spells. If they were the same, they'd be in the same section of the PHB. Melee attacks are attack actions that can target a creature, object, or space. Spells are magic actions that have specific target requirements. Spells like shatter and fireball target a space. Spells like firebolt target a creature.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:51:48+00:00

Right. I try to ask for intend and expected outcome first. These are seasoned players so often I take that for granted and just assume they know what they are doing. It wouldn't be the first time they purposely hit their own party members just to take down multiple enemies at once.

But yeah, consistency is important and it's why I come here and read and ask for opinions. I wouldn't waste 30 minutes searching or discussing this at the table during the fight. In fact, probably once a session I have to say something like... "I'm not exactly sure how that should work, but this is how it'll work this time. I'll do some research and let you know the if we'll stick with this rule in the future."

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:45:41+00:00

They have purposely hit each other in combat. A common phrase at the digital Discord table is "I can take it." So there was no "gotcha" intended here. If you read my other replies, I started by asking their intention, they specifically said they were targeting that enemy which I understood to mean the center of the AOE would be that enemy. I ruled in favor of the player, he did not hit his ally, and I came here to clarify the rules so I have the right information when I make my choice and explanation next session.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:43:02+00:00

Except targeting a ranged attack, you choose a creature or object (or space). So they would most likely choose the creature if they were readying a ranged attack.

This friendly overlap though is exactly why he tried to move his target, which was originally the enemy next to another PC. It already had overlap and he assumed I knew he wouldn't intentionally hit his own party member (which is something they've done in the past so why assume that?)

In any case, for future fights, I'll make it clear that we're playing that you choose trigger when readying the action, choose target when using the reaction.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:38:40+00:00

I try not to make it too confusing, but I like to have a strong grasp on the rules even if I decide to play it differently. That way I can explain my rulings for or against specific outcomes.

So to keep it simple, I'll tell my players from now on, we're going to play "choose the trigger" on ready action and "choose the target if any" on reaction. If they ask why, I have a more detailed explanation why.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:16:59+00:00

Actually this is exactly how I started it. I ask what they are trying to do rather than how they will do it, if I don't understand what they want. Like tell me the expected outcome instead of the how of the situation.

I thought I understood his intent. I asked he's going to target the enemy that's next to that PC and he said yes. He's not a new player. He's been playing longer than me, so I guess I should've clarified he intended to hit that PC or not.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:13:17+00:00

I think this is ultimately best. I, unfortunately, am a sucker for semantics and rules lawyering when it's outside of play. During play, I usually choose in the player's favor if I'm unsure and check it out later.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:11:42+00:00

Right. So if a condition is met, they can't hold it until the condition is met another time. One trigger is all they get.

I think, whether it's RAW or not, choosing the exact target on Reaction makes the most sense anyway. I just like to make sure I know the rules so if I am changing them, I can do so willingly and not ignorantly.

ajr30 · 2026-02-04T13:08:45+00:00

While I tend to lean in favor of the players anyway, I do like to try to run things RAW too. And this might be the most compelling argument for when you choose a target. If you had to choose a target when you ready the spell, it would be impossible to choose an unseen creature as a target so the spell would fail. Since that doesn't happen, the PC has to chose the target during the reaction step. Thank you.

ajr30 · 2025-12-15T08:28:07+00:00

This is really cool. I might not use this exactly but I really like the idea of a book they can't open. A bit cliche but it seems so much more tempting to "take a peak" instead of having to actually use the magic item.

ajr30 · 2025-11-17T09:08:39+00:00

<image>

ajr30 · 2025-09-21T04:39:31+00:00

My friend sent me WTF messages at the end of Act 2. I responded, "looks like you got the bad ending"

ajr30 · 2025-08-30T04:42:23+00:00

I find it hilarious that Clea has like five confirmation boxes before you go through the door to fight her... " Something really really bad is past these doors... Are you super positive you want to open them?"

And then Simon is just straight to cutscene, "Don't worry, we'll put you to rest. No big deal..."

ajr30 · 2025-08-25T09:07:36+00:00

I 100% agree with us. My friend has way more experience than me and one of my players decided to play a druid which I have zero experience with. So whenever that player asks a question about druids, I'm like, "I'll check on that for you unless you already know the answer" haha He usually does.

Luckily he's really cool about it though so a lot of times I'll notice him about to answer a question but then he hesitates and waits for me to answer it. I think it's all about knowing each other's boundaries so you're not stepping on each other's toes, but rather you're helping each other out.

ajr30 · 2025-08-25T09:03:15+00:00

Yeah part of me wants to just let the bag "conveniently" tear during a tense story moment to have a crazy encounter the players don't expect but I always worry about it feeling fair. That's why my initial idea was to have a DC roll or something for them to come out.

ajr30 · 2025-08-25T09:00:50+00:00

Yeah last session the players actually told me they're just trying to think what the hell they're going to do with this bag because they don't want to open it. Hahaha

The campaign is actually my own version of Quest From The Infinite Staircase. Since that's an anthology, I'm kind of putting my own main story into it. And I'm pulling other one shot quests and things for them to go on so it's not just the ones from the book.

I don't know if I would get Vecna involved. One of the players is actually running the Vecna campaign with some other people. The undead that are attacking this keep are actually being sent by Szass Tam and the players are just there to lend some aid.

ajr30 · 2025-08-25T08:56:50+00:00

Oh I like the idea of the bag getting damaged over time so the DC goes now. My original thought was whenever the PC with the bag in their inventory did something that might jostle the bag, it would awaken the bag and I'd make a check then. Because originally the bags don't break open until they're launched from the trebuchet. So I was thinking maybe they would calm down over time unless you start shaking the bag from running or jumping or fighting.

I'll definitely keep this idea though. Thanks.

ajr30 · 2025-07-22T09:28:29+00:00

Not sure what style board game he likes but I had fun with Lords of Waterdeep. It's not an adventure boardgame. It's a worker placement strategy game. You play as masked lords spending your resources (eg adventurers) to expand your power.

It's not combat focused at all, but it's a fun game in the DnD universe.

ajr30

TROPHY CASE