|
Supression Fire is really really good. Targeting a non-AC defense is powerful, area burst 3 is larger than some dailies and having a party-friendly attack roll penalty in a large zone is just icing on the cake. Unless I'm missing something there's also 0 reason for you to use Bomb Toss over it (edit: oh, I see bomb toss will gain effects through mod powers). Also it starts using damage die instead of weapon die at level 21? Spending a whole standard to summon your automaton is pretty punishing, especially if it shares the same action mechanics as other classes. I like the idea of the mod powers changing what your at-wills do. Some of the ammo mods are weirdly inconsistent though, in that only some of them are restricted to ranged basic attacks, whereas some apply to all your ranged attacks (including Suppression Fire I assume) which makes them a lot better. Also I'm not sure how "you're more effective when you stick to one kind of mod" - since you can only use one at a time, they're encounter-long and they last until the end of the encounter, it seems more effective to spread out your options so you can apply modifiers to all your at-wills.
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 12:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Quick question before I shell out any cash-- is there a way to get the monster info from DDI moved into Masterplan? I knew it used to be possible, but I've heard that Wizards cracked down on it. Don't want to bother with even looking at the digital tools since they'll probably disappear 6 months into Next's proper release, and my group seems super happy with 4E. After having run both new math and old math monsters, I much prefer the latter in play, but the selection is limited outside the Compendium, which is supposedly new math and design for even older monsters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
OmanyteJackson posted:Well i'm working on making an essentials style engineer class, with robots and bombs n' poo poo. I've only done levels 1-10 so far https://docs.google.com/document/d/13AJ9n1IA5WFBwZLsNa2EGKyByC0RoqAWjawj15ShLpk/edit#heading=h.pq9c39kvwqde Burst 3 At Will? There goes any chance of the DM running minions ever. And the automaton is going down hard, probably in the first fight. One healing surge worth of damage? And can't be recovered until an extended rest? Not going to survive. So most of the fight you're mixing up basic attacks, burst 1 bombs, and burst 3 bombs. Not the most fun combination. Also how is Fire Suppression a burst 3 weapon attack? What sort of weapon?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Quick question before I shell out any cash-- is there a way to get the monster info from DDI moved into Masterplan? I knew it used to be possible, but I've heard that Wizards cracked down on it. Don't want to bother with even looking at the digital tools since they'll probably disappear 6 months into Next's proper release, and my group seems super happy with 4E. After having run both new math and old math monsters, I much prefer the latter in play, but the selection is limited outside the Compendium, which is supposedly new math and design for even older monsters. http://compendiumimport.codeplex.com/
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
OmanyteJackson posted:Well i'm working on making an essentials style engineer class, with robots and bombs n' poo poo. I've only done levels 1-10 so far https://docs.google.com/document/d/13AJ9n1IA5WFBwZLsNa2EGKyByC0RoqAWjawj15ShLpk/edit#heading=h.pq9c39kvwqde Yeah, I feel Suppressing Fire should be Area 1 and limited to Ranged Weapons, probably Firearm/Crossbow restricted on top of it (although throwing a hammer to suppress foes sounds fun). Speaking as someone currently running a summon wizard, the automaton's gonna go down in a single hit out the door, having 7 hp at level 1 with 18 Con. So he gets half the HP compared to normal summons in exchange for keeping him around if nothing spits on him in the fight, otherwise he works just like the normal summons in that he's once an extended rest. Chain Armor Prof on a class who's main stat is Int is kinda pointless, even with a +4 Int Mod out the door with it Hide would give better returns. I assume the marking bit if you spec Automaton means the 'bot marks it, wordings a bit weird. Some of the mods are bad, Tether jumps out as a big offender. Dropping all damage to slide targets is not worth it to me, unless you have a ton of cliffs around all the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
AXE COP posted:Supression Fire is really really good. Targeting a non-AC defense is powerful, area burst 3 is larger than some dailies and having a party-friendly attack roll penalty in a large zone is just icing on the cake. Unless I'm missing something there's also 0 reason for you to use Bomb Toss over it (edit: oh, I see bomb toss will gain effects through mod powers). Also it starts using damage die instead of weapon die at level 21? neonchameleon posted:Burst 3 At Will? There goes any chance of the DM running minions ever. And the automaton is going down hard, probably in the first fight. One healing surge worth of damage? And can't be recovered until an extended rest? Not going to survive. So most of the fight you're mixing up basic attacks, burst 1 bombs, and burst 3 bombs. Not the most fun combination. Yeah, I think I'll drop that power, I forgot I made both the suppression fire power and the suppression ammo mod power and I think it works better as a mod. neonchameleon posted:And the automaton is going down hard, probably in the first fight. One healing surge worth of damage? And can't be recovered until an extended rest? Not going to survive. I was thinking of making it more like the shaman's spirit companion as far as the AXE COP posted:Spending a whole standard to summon your automaton is pretty punishing, especially if it shares the same action mechanics as other classes. Changing that to a minor action, thanks. AXE COP posted:I like the idea of the mod powers changing what your at-wills do. Some of the ammo mods are weirdly inconsistent though, in that only some of them are restricted to ranged basic attacks, whereas some apply to all your ranged attacks (including Suppression Fire I assume) which makes them a lot better. that must be a typo i need to chang, the ammo mods only work for range basic attacks with crossbows and firearms AXE COP posted:Also I'm not sure how "you're more effective when you stick to one kind of mod" - since you can only use one at a time, they're encounter-long and they last until the end of the encounter, it seems more effective to spread out your options so you can apply modifiers to all your at-wills.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:This is new, and AFAIK has not been cracked down. Does it also download and save the data? I'm interested in making an offline version of the data for when Wizards inevitably shuts the whole thing down to push people into Next.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Oh crap an area burst 3 is huge! Fixing that now,
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
I am about to begin running a group of people who are really excited to play RPGs and hang out and make dick jokes and roll funny sided dice. I've been playing since 2000, and the group runs the gamut from "This is his first game" to "they started playing with me in 2000, but haven't been so active recently". I was all set to run a 3.5 game, because that's the system I know the best, and started reading the "Gamer Experiences" thread in TradGames here. The consensus seems to be that 3.5 blows goats and Pathfinder and 4th Edition are way better. Now, I'm not defending 3.5 against critics, because I honestly don't know. I got the 4th ed book last night and have been slowly reading through it, and it seems cool, but what exactly makes 4th ed easier/more fun to play than 3rd/3.5? And I know this is likely putting my dick in a hornet's nest, but is 4th Ed better than Pathfinder? What's up with this Dungeon World game people keep mentioning? Edit: The new way of running spells/magic seems fuckin' awesome. rotinaj fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:I am about to begin running a group of people who are really excited to play RPGs and hang out and make dick jokes and roll funny sided dice. I've been playing since 2000, and the group runs the gamut from "This is his first game" to "they started playing with me in 2000, but haven't been so active recently". I was all set to run a 3.5 game, because that's the system I know the best, and started reading the "Gamer Experiences" thread in TradGames here. The consensus seems to be that 3.5 blows goats and Pathfinder and 4th Edition are way better. I have trouble really finding a functional difference between 3.5 and pathfinder. Anything anyone says is broken about 3.x, it's broken in Pathfinder too, exact same way, sometimes worse. 4e is easier to play because there are fewer trap options and less character paths your players could go down that would limit the other players options or experience. A fight in 4e is generally a fight, it is never just "no fight occurs" - the wizard. For the DM, 4e is easy because you don't have to work as hard at distributing fair and balanced loot, the loot system is codified and highly functional. It will also be easier to plan your encounters, the monster math has been well balanced (as of the MM3 anyway, and there's always the "MM on a card" math if you need it. No more putting down a CR 3 monster and then realizing it can summon a CR 14 or something. Just remember to houserule in the weapon expertise math fix feat so that everyone gets it, and remember that the best thing about 4e is how easy it is to reskin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
I'd argue that 4e is good because it took the only codified thing in D&D (combat) and made explicit rules about it, then used that framework to build a game. Consequently, there is far less out of combat stuff considered by the rules. If you feel ok flying by the seat of your pants in out of combat scenarios, but want a deeply tactical skirmish game, 4e is for you. Pathfinder seems to find a lot of traction on the idea that it is customizable, and the ten trillion options support this. There are only a handful of viable, not completely broken builds, but because the lovely options exist, it gives the game depth of field. Like 4e, this game is completely about combat, but for some reason denies this fact. Apparently using feet instead of squares makes this happen. Pathfinder has a better stable of published adventures, and can always fall back on 3.x stuff. 4e is a more mechanically sound game that suffers from the fact that most of the published adventures suck, and the non combat stuff is thrust upon the DM wholesale. Mechanically, both are broken. I would venture to say that 4e is less broken than d20 framework. As for which to play... I'd recommend Gamma World. E: on the GM side of the screen, 4e is so much less work and hassle. Making enemies in 3.pf is like doing your taxes in triplicate. God forbid you think CR actually corresponds to anything. Dr. Lunchables fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Purely from a DMing perspective, putting together a 4e encounter takes like a tenth of the time of putting together a 3.5/Pathfinder encounter, and it's vastly easier to figure out whether the encounter will actually be an appropriate challenge for your party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:4e/PF/DW I like 4e for the combat system, people have issues with time management it seems but that will vary from group to group/person to person. There can be a lot of situational bonuses to track. That said, in combat, everyone has a role and no one should feel like dead weight because they wrote the "wrong" class on their sheet. Check out Gamma World for a version that's less headache and less involved as far as feats/powers/ability scores go. I don't have much experience with PF/3.5, but the gulf between what a fighter or rogue can do and what a wizard/cleric/druid can do turned me off of it completely. Dungeon World is reeeeeally free-form; there's no initiative, no turn order, people just say what they want to do & when and the DM adjudicates. I've had a lot of fun with it. The core classes all work pretty well from what I've played (some minor math balance concerns on the damage output of the Paladin but honestly it's not a big deal). It's also not d20, but the resolution mechanic (2d6 + modifier, 6- failure, 7-9 success with consequence, 10+ great success) is fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
I sort of started a group with more or less the same composition as yours, and the reason I picked 4E is that the only common thing was that everyone loved was playing board games, and 4E was the closer thing to a board game that was also an rpg (yes, there is also WHF3E, but 4E was the cheaper option and we also like moving small dudes on a board). I was also considering Dungeon World, but the reason I didn't pick it was because it's the complete opposite of a board game (not a bad thing). On the other hand, if you just watched something like that D&D episode of Community and thought that playing D&D would be fun, I would suggest Dungeon World instead. Rexides fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
I have a storm sorcerer player in my campaign, who uses longswords as implements. I understand weapon-as-implement stuff is poorly supported, but the way I'm running it is like this: 1) Proficiency bonus does not apply to implement powers, of course, 2) Via modified He can deliver any spell as a melee attack, targeting AC instead of NADS and adding in the proficiency bonus in this case, 3) and I don't even think about 1[W] damage ever unless he's doing an MBA. Is there anything particularly problematic about this? The player said he'd settle for "it's just a reskinned wand" but I think it can work like this, via a modified Sorcerous Blade Channeling feat. If later on, he ended up going with two-weapon fighting (roleplaying reasons) what would be some cool stuff (magic items, alternative rewards) to give him? Other than the obvious joy of "you are shooting lightning out of two swords"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
One of my favorite games ever used the Amber Diceless system. Dungeon World sounds like something I'd dig. But I'm gonna keep reading the 4th Ed rulebooks, see if I like 'em.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:I am about to begin running a group of people who are really excited to play RPGs and hang out and make dick jokes and roll funny sided dice. I've been playing since 2000, and the group runs the gamut from "This is his first game" to "they started playing with me in 2000, but haven't been so active recently". I was all set to run a 3.5 game, because that's the system I know the best, and started reading the "Gamer Experiences" thread in TradGames here. The consensus seems to be that 3.5 blows goats and Pathfinder and 4th Edition are way better. The best thing it has going for it (over 4e) is on the player's side of the screen. And that's just the sheer amount of options you can take (assuming you allow 3.5 material). Of course, half of them are traps. Here's the Pathfinder thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Beware the feat bloat! Beware the situational modifiers! Bewaaaare! Really though, all options are fun for D&D categories. If you're looking for something somewhere in the middle of 4e and Dungeon World, 13th Age might also be up your alley.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Roctavian posted:I have a storm sorcerer player in my campaign, who uses longswords as implements. I understand weapon-as-implement stuff is poorly supported, but the way I'm running it is like this: There are a couple of ways to do this RAW if you don't want to muck around with custom rules. Arcane Implement Proficiency feat allows you to be proficient in an implement used by any arcane class. Swordmages can use heavy blades as implements, and are arcane, so there you go. If he has Con and Int 13+ and hasn't taken a multiclass feat yet, he can also take Heart of the Blade and multiclass into Swordmage. In addition to being able to use heavy blades as implements and picking up another trained skill, he gets swordbond - quote:SWORDBOND which your player may find cool. Nothing that I'm aware of makes 2) happen, but if he wants to do that I'd let him; it's far from unbalanced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Sorcerers have a series of blade channeling feats that let you use any power as range melee through a dagger, changing that to a heavy blade doesn't functionally change much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Honestly, I'd probably go for reskinned daggers - not only are the Sorcerer dagger powers really good, but since he's Storm he can also make good use of several of the Superior Implement daggers, Lancing especially.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
I want to make my Avenger good but then I look at feats and powers and I can't help but think 'what if I picked Ranger instead?'
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
You'd get a completely different class with similar (probably slightly better) potential at Epic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
killstealing posted:I want to make my Avenger good but then I look at feats and powers and I can't help but think 'what if I picked Ranger instead?' Githzerai with Monk multiclass. Of course you could do that with a Ranger too. Or just make a Monk to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
I need some help with Wizards' website. I created an account to get access to D&D Insider, and was able to purchase a one-month subscription. Now, when I try to sign in on the main D&D splashpage to access this it tells me that it doesn't recognize my username and password. If I click on "Account", I'm taken to a different screen where I can log in with my email address and password and it doesn't recognize it either. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
gently caress knows. Email their customer service, but good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
A couple sessions ago we were trying to access the character builder and it was all whack. At first we couldn't get to our characters, then finally we got access to some random dude's characters. I don't know what wizards is doing but proper account management is not their thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:Githzerai with Monk multiclass. Of course you could do that with a Ranger too. Or just make a Monk to begin with. I'm a warforged which is incredibly fun flavor but the base stats are starting to show. Thank god I'll be able to feat into a Fullblade soon for +2 to hit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
How does a fullblade get you +2 to hit ?!
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
DM told me I get +1 from the exotic weapon proficiency feat and I'm using a Greataxe now (+2 prof mod) so that's an increase of 2. I'm not sure the +1 from the feat itself is legit, I didn't check.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:I am about to begin running a group of people who are really excited to play RPGs and hang out and make dick jokes and roll funny sided dice. I've been playing since 2000, and the group runs the gamut from "This is his first game" to "they started playing with me in 2000, but haven't been so active recently". I was all set to run a 3.5 game, because that's the system I know the best, and started reading the "Gamer Experiences" thread in TradGames here. The consensus seems to be that 3.5 blows goats and Pathfinder and 4th Edition are way better. As has been said, 4E has clearer and stronger rules for encounter and adventure building. It's a lot easier to build a good challenging fight in 4E. 4E also does a better job of balancing the classes across all levels. It really fixes the "linear fighters and quadratic wizards" problem and let's everyone feel like a total bad rear end. 4E's weaknesses can be its lack of non-combat development, the length of its combats, and analysis paralysis from the sheer volume options. Good old roleplaying can address the first. Later monster books (MM3 and beyond) adress the second. And the stripped down Essentials classes and/or experience playing address the third. It may take a little more work to develop a character concept in 4E, but that character is much less likely to be dead weight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
killstealing posted:DM told me I get +1 from the exotic weapon proficiency feat The increased proficiency bonus IS the +1... That being said, Fullblades are probably the best Avenger weapons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:I am about to begin running a group of people who are really excited to play RPGs and hang out and make dick jokes and roll funny sided dice. I've been playing since 2000, and the group runs the gamut from "This is his first game" to "they started playing with me in 2000, but haven't been so active recently". I was all set to run a 3.5 game, because that's the system I know the best, and started reading the "Gamer Experiences" thread in TradGames here. The consensus seems to be that 3.5 blows goats and Pathfinder and 4th Edition are way better. 4e is a vastly superior system as a DM because you can actually run a monster from its stat block without having to also consult six different pages' worth of feats or spells to know what it can actually do in one round. In 3e, God forbid you ever wanted to use a classed NPC or a dragon without having built in from scratch in advance; in 4e, dragons and same-level PC-race NPCs are actually usable straight out of the book. That, and you don't have to worry about save-or-die/save-or-suck effects randomly eliminating a PC or ending what was meant to be a cool encounter halfway into the first round of combat. The main flaw with running 4e blind out of the box is that the first two years' worth of mechanical and adventure support for DMs aren't very good: the monster math in MM1 & MM2 gives monsters too much HP and has them deal too little damage (and the flavor text in MM1 is almost deliberately bland); most of the adventures published in 2009-2010 are either a dreary slog or are brutally one-sided; and skill challenges, especially in the early materials, tend to be a great idea in search of a more engaging and tangibly meaningful means of execution. If you want monsters and aren't using DDI, skip the first two Monster Manuals and instead get the Monster Vault; if you want more monsters after that, either get Monster Vault: Threats to Nentir Vale or the Monster Manual III. The first DMG is still worth getting for the DMing advice (IMO), even though the mechanical elements in it have since been superseded by material in the DM's Kit. 4e character creation can be fiddly as hell, but you can alleviate 90% of that pain by restricting feat/power options to what's in the core rules (i.e. the PHBs and the Essentials core books), unless a player finds and brings in something that looks really cool and doesn't look like it'll make combat drag out. (Which, if you only have the core books and aren't using DDI, is what you're going to be doing anyways.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
HerpDerp I'm a poop who didn't read the OP. Cerepol fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
The Dark Sun monster book and even the Gamma World sets also use the later formulas if those three books aren't enough monsters for you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:But I'm gonna keep reading the 4th Ed rulebooks, see if I like 'em. Don't "read" 4th Ed, just loving play it, once. This is the best advice I can give anyone who is on the fence, especially if you're a 3.X holdout. 4e manuals are not bathroom reading material, and I can assure you that you will get almost no feel for anything the game does just by reading about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
I have a question that I haven't seen brought up anywhere, at least not that I could find anyway, and I'm kind of tearing my hair out trying to get some outside opinions and input with those who may be more knowledgeable. I'm planning on running a Dark Sun game for a 3 man party with the fixed enhancement rules, but also want to use the Rules Compendium's setup for randomly generated treasure. How exactly do these two things work together? Or do they simply not? While not explicitly stated (but implied if you already know the DMG parcel system), it seems as if you can reverse engineer the random generation rules as: for each parcel removed due to party size lower than 5 as per the standard NON-random method for doling out treasure parcels, add a -2 modifier to the d20 rolled when generating treasure. With a 3 man party, not including the fixed enhancement rules, the modifier to the d20 is -4. Therefore, since fixed enhancements would remove an additional parcel, that would make the modifier a -6, but here is where I have the problem: It is now entirely too difficult to generate ANY treasure. I literally ran through the 40 dice rolls for treasure parcels via Rules Compendium and generated not a single piece of treasure. Are you supposed to re-roll any parcels that DON'T generate any of the four kinds of treasure until you get the expected amounts of treasure (In this case, 7 parcels worth)? I'm kind of dismayed and confused since the rules don't seem to expect you to NOT get any treasure and kind of blatantly say the exact opposite.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
gtrmp posted:4e character creation can be fiddly as hell, but you can alleviate 90% of that pain by restricting feat/power options to what's in the core rules (i.e. the PHBs and the Essentials core books), unless a player finds and brings in something that looks really cool and doesn't look like it'll make combat drag out. (Which, if you only have the core books and aren't using DDI, is what you're going to be doing anyways.) This right here is bad advice. Many classes (Paladins struggle without Divine Sanction, Avengers are godawful with Dragon, etc etc etc) simply don't work even in low-op play without splats and Dragon material. Just read the handbooks on CharOp and get thoroughly used to the idea of reflavouring. 90% of the lovely and obsolete material is from the PHB series. And yeah, the books, by and large, are not things to be read on the loo unless you're a colossal nerd who's been playing for a few years and can actually parse and rate statblocks at a glance. Few of them have any worthwhile flavour in them at all (Heroes of the Feywild being a notable exception). If you don't have access to a digital CB (and aren't willing to get the one SA has, as a goonswarm, slightly stolen) then it's better advice, as it's somewhat more difficult to build from books in 4e, but don't restrict it to PH and Essentials, pick up what splats you can as well. With the advent of 5e, a whole bunch of people are ebaying their 4e stuff you can probably get it for cheap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:49
|
|
|
Agent Boogeyman posted:I'm planning on running a Dark Sun game for a 3 man party with the fixed enhancement rules, but also want to use the Rules Compendium's setup for randomly generated treasure. How exactly do these two things work together? Or do they simply not? While not explicitly stated (but implied if you already know the DMG parcel system), it seems as if you can reverse engineer the random generation rules as: for each parcel removed due to party size lower than 5 as per the standard NON-random method for doling out treasure parcels, add a -2 modifier to the d20 rolled when generating treasure. With a 3 man party, not including the fixed enhancement rules, the modifier to the d20 is -4. Therefore, since fixed enhancements would remove an additional parcel, that would make the modifier a -6, but here is where I have the problem: It is now entirely too difficult to generate ANY treasure. I have 5 players, soon to become 6, though, so it's a little different for me. The idea is obviously that 3 characters need less money and items that 5 would - whether that really works out is anyone's guess, but the inherent bonuses/fixed enhancements are there specifically to compensate for a lack of enhancement bonuses from items, so in theory you could be fine entirely without items. In my experience it balances out and compared to the DMG's parcel system even comes out noticably in favour of the PCs. Mine have had stretches where they found only minimal amounts of cash for an entire adventure, but now they've got a few parcels coming up where they get more for six encounters than they would have for the entire level under the old system. So it seems to work out in the long run without any rerolling or fudging. e: all that being said, if I came out with absolutely nothing for an entire level, I'd reroll the whole shebang. Below average is fine, as is above average (and by nature of the system you're going to end up either far below or far above average for each parcel), but nothing at all, nope. And if the second roll comes out with nothing as well, consider reducing the penalty to -1 per missing character and see how that works out. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 09:53 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
I don't suggest randomly generating treasure parcels, put stuff in them you'll know your characters can use, unless you just like giving them vendor trash/straight up useless stuff I guess (I had a guy try to do an all random loot in the loot tables in 4E once, we ended up having basically no good weapons, a bunch of random armor with nothing useful on them besides their generic + value, and like 20 pairs of boots and gloves that no one needed ever, and we couldn't really sell the stuff either). I like throwing a lot more consumables / weird wondrous type items (like your ever burning lanterns, infinite chalks, endless bottle of waters, etc. of the worlds) then normal, because it's something fun to play with that's not necessarily just either gear I will use or gear I will sell/never use.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:37
|
|
