|
Additional encounter powers and dailies letting you use stronger attacks more often, +1 or +2 damage effects on the entire party across multiple rounds, and feats unlocking improved synergy. If you're not doing an average of +8 damage over the course of an entire fight when you level up, you may be doing something wrong.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
P.d0t posted:Edit: on that note, how the gently caress does MM3 give monsters ~8 HP per level? Or to put it another way, where are the PCs' +8 damage per level allegedly coming from? PCs do more damage, and get more AoE damage, but HP inflation is an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
goldjas posted:If your talking specifically about 4E(and this probably more or less applies to any edition as well), you can just make it so every magic item has 2 things, the "useful thing" (hit more, damage more or whatever) and then the "fun" thing (pickpocket one per encounter). Completely ditching damage/accuracy as components of items solves both problems, but it's a lot harder to write throwaway splat book items that way so... Getting a wondrous item doesn't trigger this level of comparison because, amongst other reasons, you're not really using one item "instead" of another. If you use a sword of teleporting then you're not using a sword of 6 extra damage. If you own a bag that vomits tiny skeletons then... you own a bag that vomits tiny skeletons. It'll sit in your backpack until you encounter something that can be solved with a bag that vomits tiny skeletons at which point it will be the best thing ever. You're not spending every round being confronted by the consequences of not owning a bag that vomits giant wasps instead. Heck, you might even have a bag that vomits giant wasps instead. There is no monster-vomiting-bag item slot, there's no downside to owning two. Splicer fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Jan 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
I think the corollary to that is how 4e's item treadmill is giving you the finger if your character uses more than one attack method. And god help you if each one uses a different stat, particularly with inherent bonuses turned off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
The Buffalo Chicken was actually pretty fuckin great. I made a pound and a half of chicken breasts, coated them in the dry mix ranch dressing stuff (lightly) and submerged them in Frank's Red Hot for six hours on low. At one with some blue cheese and a really good apple (it was a Honey Crisp), gave the other to my brother since he was hanging out and also hungry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
I AM THE MOON, you're my favorite poster in this whole drat thread. Please never stop posting recipes. Any ideas on how to spice up lobster? Not looking for a bisque or just plain tails, but something that adds and complements the item as a main course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:Any ideas on how to spice up lobster? Not looking for a bisque or just plain tails, but something that adds and complements the item as a main course. Finely diced garlic and a little sriracha (or wasabi) mixed into a cream sauce. Dip the sea bug in the sauce. Enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
You really can't go wrong with melted herb butter for sea bugs of any stripe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Edit: on that note, how the gently caress does MM3 give monsters ~8 HP per level? Or to put it another way, where are the PCs' +8 damage per level allegedly coming from?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:That's only an increase of about a +2 damage per round per level, assuming 1 monster per PC in an encounter that lasts 4 rounds, which is average-ish. Some combination of new feats, inherent bonuses, stat increases, paragon paths, and better powers will keep you close to that up into Epic levels, where, admittedly, the math breaks down a bit. I guess if I squint I can see how it works correctly. It seems to me a simpler way would be to add 1[W] per PC per encounter per level (13th Age does this, iirc) and bump monster HP by the same amount (approximately 5, say). Coincidentally, 1[W] lines up nicely with 1 HD, until you start adding CON mod to hit points every level.. Having the other +3 damage spread between all that other stuff just seems like asking for trouble; I've often felt 4e was overdependent on optimization, and power creep hasn't helped.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
TheAwfulWaffle posted:To me, one of the strangest things about 4E is that the designers went out of their way to give drat near every +X item some other power or ability. There's tons and tons and tons of varied and unusual weapons and armors hiding in the Compendium. But a constant criticism I see about 4E (even from 4E fans) is that the magic items are "boring". Weird. Yes I love reading the Adventurers Vault 1 & 2, Mordenkainen's Emporium etc for all the cool gear inside. Just thinking when I could use that or how it would go if I had that equipped. Sure a lot of it is situational and some things are better than others. But with so much to choose from, I'd never get bored. I love finding loot so the more the merrier for me. I used to play as an Eleven archer and just wanted to be a bit better at what I do. So for me, a bow with a slightly better to hit, or some armour that affords a little extra protection was perfectly OK. Sure it's not that exciting, but my main excitement was using the powers I had chosen and when to use them. knux911 fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jan 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
I'd never made US-style chili before last week, and I'd never used a slow cooker. So I decided to remedy that, and used/altered one of the chili recipes from here. It was awesome. Here's what I did. Meat 500g ground beef 1 rasher bacon (all that was left in the fridge) Other stuff 400g can of "4-bean mix" (couldn't find kidney beans in the cupboard) 800g (2 cans) diced tomatos 250g jar of "Old El Paso pickled Jalapenos", half the liquid drained (couldn't find "chilis in adobo" in the supermarket) 1 cup Nescafe instant coffee (as in, a teaspoon in a cup of water, not like a cup of the powder). 1 large onion Spices 1 tsp basil 2 tsp oregano 1 tblsp minced garlic 1 tsp very hot chili flakes 2 tsp liquid smoke Put all the "stuff" except the meat in the slow cooker. Turn it on low. Chop bacon small. Fry. Put it in the slow cooker. Brown beef in bacon grease. Put it in the slow cooker. Put all the spices in the slow cooker. Leave that poo poo for like 7 hours. Stir in 1 tblsp cornflour (in water, like a paste then pour it in) to thicken, serve on tortillas with Tapatio hot sauce. It was goddamn delicious, so thankyou D&D arguments thread! e: I made tortilla bowls, but gently caress doing that again unless I can get moulds or something, it was a huge pain in the arse. Next time, I'm going to get my fiancee to make her "mexican salad" (no idea how mexican it actually is) to go with it because that's delicious too. Mexican salad: 145g can corn kernels, drained 240g can red kidney beans, drained 1 Avocado, chopped small 1 tblsp sweet chilli sauce 2 tsp olive oil 100g tomato (or whatever) 1 medium onion, chopped small 1 tblsp fresh coriander, chopped small Juice of 1 lemon. Mix it together. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Jan 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
America has it's own style of chili? I thought we just stole everything from others. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
I just based what I put in on stuff that (presumably) Americans said in this thread. Apart from a friend of mine who cooked an awesome chili for me one time, my Aussie experience of "chili" has been ground beef + beans in a frypan with a packet of "taco seasoning" thrown into it. Then again, I never really looked for any good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
I keep meaning to try making genuine southwestern chili at some point, but I keep getting all the fixins together and my brain tells me just try Cincinatti chili one more time and hours later I have a pot of pretty good but still flawed Cincy chili and I wonder when I'll be free of this curse. I am a terrible Texan. ... Oh, and uh, I'm wondering how martial characters will turn out in 5e once the math shakes out, etc. Yeah. I'm on topic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
If non-spellcasting classes aren't a big bag of rear end come release of 5E, I will be absolutely shocked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
I'm actually curious about the state of archery in Next. Is "basically just 3.5 status quo" the best we can expect? Also, what do paladins do well in Next? Has anyone played the last packet at any length ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
KirbyJ posted:I keep meaning to try making genuine southwestern chili at some point, but I keep getting all the fixins together and my brain tells me just try Cincinatti chili one more time and hours later I have a pot of pretty good but still flawed Cincy chili and I wonder when I'll be free of this curse. I am a terrible Texan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:I'm actually curious about the state of archery in Next. Is "basically just 3.5 status quo" the best we can expect? Paladins are a high dps murder machine as of the last packet. Thanks to buffs. They get half-progression spell casting as do rangers and bards. Archery is viable. There are no OAs for firing in melee, no penalties for firing into melee, no need for point blank shot or other 3.5 feats. The big dps feat in the last packet was Great Weapon fighting - it gives cleave and power attack together. Basically any build that can use it outdamages those that can't, like archery. No idea how it will turn out at launch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 09:26
|
|
|
The difference in effectiveness between a fighty character that takes the feat "lucky" and one that doesn't is almost as big as casters vs. martials. It makes power attack and cleave look like a trap option.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
I don't know about that. GWM can potentially give you a free action every turn. Even the 'take a -5, do double damage' is useful if you have advantage. Hard to compete with all that in one feat. Lucky gets you maybe get the equivalent of advantage or disadvantage on a roll, only 3 times a day. It may not actually do anything if you roll poorly, and its hard to quantify the DPS boost it gives. Next doesn't have Daily powers that would overly benefit from a clutch roll either. It's more of a defensive feat, something to save your rear end on an incoming attack or saving throw that you really need to make. What's really good is halfling luck. Reroll 1s? Good lord!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Lucky's power would depend quite a bit on whether the decision to spend a point happens before or after the first d20 roll. I think it's meant to be before the roll, but it isn't 100% clear. If that's the case, I wouldn't rate it all that highly. Certainly not anywhere near what spells can give.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
eth0.n posted:GNS theory is a categorization of game designs into three types, as well as a claim that "pure" designs are best. GNS posits that you are "going for" one of three things: 1. Coming up with a cool emergent/unexpected story, playing to see what happens. 2. Pitting your game skills against challenges or other people's skills. Playing to win. 3. Coming up with a story that fits in with a certain kind of tone and structure (e.g. if you are playing a star wars game then everybody needs to act like a star wars character and the result should feel like a Star Wars story). It also posits that you're best off if you pick JUST ONE of those things to focus on, letting the others fall where they may. Personally, I've always disagreed because I like to have all those things in equal measure, even though I understand that they conflict at some level (e.g. do I, as a player, do the mechanically optimal thing or do I do the thing that fits the tone best? Do I, as DM, narrate the thing that would definitely happen in the Star Wars universe or do I go along with it and let the players roll with their awesome - but tonally awkward - plan?). GNS is still useful to me because it points out those conflicts and makes me aware of potential pitfalls. Then more lately you've got guys like Vincent Baker who are talking about the "object of the game" more broadly, and are designing little games that have different goals. They effectively demonstrate the incompleteness of GNS - you can play games where you're going for something else that isn't on the list. D&D, in every edition, always tries to position itself so that players with any of those goals can have fun. It does this, in part, by being equally bad at all three. Stupid mechanics break the tone of the game if you're trying to emulate almost any genre. Stupid items and powers break the game balance. Stupid mechanics put up roadblocks and make playing to see what happens a disappointment. FOOD If you eat a ham, the next day you must do this with the bone: Fry up some onions, carrots, garlic and celery. Toss in a bunch of split peas. Toss in the ham bone and a bunch of thyme. Cover with water (water:pea ratio is 4:1). Simmer until it's a soft smooth texture, take out the ham bone and pick the meat off. Throw the meat back in, add salt and pepper. Eat soup.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
ritorix posted:I don't know about that. GWM can potentially give you a free action every turn. Even the 'take a -5, do double damage' is useful if you have advantage. Hard to compete with all that in one feat. The '-5, do double damage' is almost insulting in how pandering it is. It is clearly meant to be a riff on the smash fighter's maneuver from older editions, but it is horrible in comparison. It's another mop up skill for killing things that are already losing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
ritorix posted:Paladins are a high dps murder machine as of the last packet. Thanks to buffs. They get half-progression spell casting as do rangers and bards. Ugh, I hated the crappy version of magic rangers and paladins got in 3e. Cure light wounds is not a useful spell at level 9. If they're going down this route, paladins and rangers should have full spellcasting, but unique spell lists, so they're not just half a cleric/druid with a bit of martial ability. It's particularly obnoxious when you then give clerics and druids spells that let them be better at physical combat than paladins and rangers, while retaining their full spellcasting. Why is it okay for magic to give you fighting skills, but not the other way around?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
Paladins (and rangers) do get some unique spells. A first level spell for paladins gives +1d8 radiant damage on all weapon attacks for 10 minutes. And it's a swift-action spell. Combined with how dual-wielding works in Next you can put out some decent DPS at low levels. A lot of the paladin spells are smites. One of the high-level smites for paladins is a swift action spell that does 'deal 5d10 extra fire damage on your next melee hit, and if it reduces the target to 50HP or lower, the creature is banished to a location of the DM's choosing in the Nine Hells'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
yeah I actually have very little complaint about Paladins so far in Next, their spell lists are limited but interesting and and they get some pretty neat class features as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
God, the latest GWF thread is hilarious. I've been dropping in and out of it all day. loving 800 posts of the same 5 or 10 people going 'nuh uh' 'yuh huh'. How do these people have so much TIME?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
ritorix posted:What's really good is halfling luck. Reroll 1s? Good lord! Can someone define the mathematical benefit of this? My figuring comes out with a +0.5 to your average die result. Am I wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Can someone define the mathematical benefit of this? The average isn't its only potency, it increases your odds of all higher numbers. On a D20 for instance you go from 5% chance to ~5.26% chance of rolling a 20. On a d4 your odds shoot up to 33% of getting a 4. It skews your results upwardly on everything and prevents critical failures. Beneficially it also only applies to the worst possible outcome and is a re-roll not a flat increase. If it were "on a 1, pretend its a 2" it'd be very middling and only taken to avoid critical failure. Instead you get to reroll and therefor 2.5% of the time instead of failing in the worst way possible you will succeed. God help you if there is an ability that has "flip a coin, on heads x on tails y" because that sounds like auto get whatever you want. Barudak fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Jan 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
"Turn a 1 into maximum value for that die" would be cool IMHO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
I am not sure I would ever take Lucky myself, that said in my Mines of Madness game it did pretty much save Killroy Jenkins' life. Speaking of me running DnD Next adventures I have a recruit up for Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle if anyone is interested, it is a series of adventures that starts at level 1 and ends at level 10 or so. Great Weapon Fighter and Damage on a Miss are terrible hot buttons on the WotC forums, and of course EnWorld where a lot of the same arguments are repeated by the same exact posters. I am too annoyed by it, and by specific posters who always harp on it and derail pretty much any thread into those issues, to bother reading the new thread that is already massive. Personally I would like to try some more Next, particularly higher levels where I can try out some of those high level features that might change things around. But no one seems to run it, much, let alone at high levels. Still hopefully people will get to try a little higher level stuff, though unfortunately still mid levels, if my new recruit manages to continue long enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:"Turn a 1 into maximum value for that die" would be cool IMHO. It'd be a neat skill but 10% chance to critical and 55% accuracy before any other items, stats, or abilities are factored in is a bit ridiculous. Don't forget if you have an ability which relies on a pile of smaller dice instead of big ones your average damage output just skyrocketed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
So...what happens if you roll another 1? do you just keep rolling never crit failing? or is it simply one additional reroll? The description seems kinda ambiguous. I could interpret "must" use the new roll as literal, but at the same time it says "whenever you roll a natural 1"
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
treeboy posted:So...what happens if you roll another 1? do you just keep rolling never crit failing? or is it simply one additional reroll? The description seems kinda ambiguous. I'm assuming you keep rolling forever until its not a 1 based on wording. I'm sure it'll be errated to clarity but as it stands its really good, if its one re-roll its still pretty good, and anything less than that and you should probably pass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Can someone define the mathematical benefit of this? If it also applies to damage rolls then phrasing it as +0.5 damage per die is accurate, but doesn't tell the full story. Rerolling ones is actually better than just adding 0.5 to all rolls because it drastically reduces your number of "bad" rolls. Again it's an increase in reliability, which gives you more benefit than pure math can describe*. And, again, you then multiply this all by 1.05 due to your increased to hit chances. This is all assuming you can only reroll it once per roll, if you just keep rerolling until you roll not a one then that's amazing. *this is a lie you can describe it mathematically but that would take a long time and involves scary words like "standard deviation". \/ cheers. Yeah, even just the first part of what I wrote is nothing to sneeze at from a math perspective, but the fact that it keys off a 1 makes it actually sound fun \/ Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Jan 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
It's a single reroll on ability checks (skills), attacks and saves. Open-ended rerolls on damage would make it like the 4e Brutal property. Still it's great for a racial ability.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
the more i look at other races, even with +1 to all attributes, Humans look really dumb, uninteresting, and not-good in comparison. edit: for instance many races get resistance (half damage) to various forms of poison/disease/element, advantage on pretty common saves or skill checks, or can do crazy poo poo like talk to animals, see in the dark, or breathe fire. but hey...+1 to dump-stats! treeboy fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Jan 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Diving into Next design gets ugly, you are warned. You see, in theory each race gets +2 to ability scores, and racial traits worth +4 in ability scores. Humans get the whole +6. They do the same for feats. You either get a +2 ability score increase or a single feat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
Wow uh Humans are kind of the Master Race in Next. With an array/point buy and the +1 to all stats you can get 16 16 16 10 10 10 which is pretty good for just about any class. Seriously humans are as strong as pretty much any strong race, except for half-orcs. As hardy as a dwarf, as dexterous as a elf, etc. None of these races that are normally considered better at a stat than humans are actually better than humans at it, with the exception of Half-Orcs since they actually get a +2 to Str. Resistance is nice, when it comes up. Breathing Fire is kind of meh, it would be different if it was at will but it is an encounter power. And they didn't even give all the rules necessary for it, such as determining DC. Ryuujin fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jan 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 22:40
|
|