|
ghostofbox posted:At least I can assume new D&D games will be based on the new rules, so I can enjoy them that way. Considering that we went through 4E's entire production cycle without ever receiving a notable Shining Force or FFT style turn-based strategy game, for a ruleset that could be ported directly into one with virtually no modification whatsoever, I don't know if you should ever expect another D&D game that hews to the rules again. The 5E game will probably be a F2P shooter available on Windows phone only.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
Grim posted:Really? I know that the 3.5 CO boards came up with some insane poo poo, but I hadn't heard of anything particularly excessive in 4E That's the point. Minmaxing 3.5 is trivial. 4E is the best because it presents a challenge, and generally doesn't break the game wide open. If you're interested in min-maxing, and being a respectful player at a table, 4E is the best. If not, either you just do it as theorycraft (OK, fine, but that's not playing RPGs), you don't actually min-max at the table (which sucks for you not getting to do what you like), or you're a total dick. The last aren't worth consideration.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:Considering that we went through 4E's entire production cycle without ever receiving a notable Shining Force or FFT style turn-based strategy game, for a ruleset that could be ported directly into one with virtually no modification whatsoever, I don't know if you should ever expect another D&D game that hews to the rules again. The 5E game will probably be a F2P shooter available on Windows phone only. Yeah the lack of a 4e video game is an tragedy. Regardless of which edition is your favorite, if you don't think 4e would make the best video game you're insane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
I just played in a gencon game with a few hundred people. About 90 tables of 6 players each+a dm. The room was sold out. It was chaotic as gently caress. They tried to have a somewhat coherent story linking everyone together. That didn't really work out, I'm still not sure what the big picture story was. But the game drove on and my table ran like a Seal team after playing together for a few days now. There was a lot of energy in the hall, everyone seemed to be having a good time. I switched my character up to a halfling assassin to try that out. Their racial hide ability got used almost every round to get me advantage. Turned out to be a murder machine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
moths posted:It's kind of an open secret that this is how 5e is actually meant to be played. That sounds more interesting than waiting for people to change their minds anyway. Zombies' Downfall posted:Considering that we went through 4E's entire production cycle without ever receiving a notable Shining Force or FFT style turn-based strategy game, for a ruleset that could be ported directly into one with virtually no modification whatsoever, I don't know if you should ever expect another D&D game that hews to the rules again. The 5E game will probably be a F2P shooter available on Windows phone only. Just think of the emulation projects that would spawn. I'm just waiting for another good Neverwinter Nights 1-style game. Probably won't happen. NWN2's camera was weird.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
ritorix posted:I just played in a gencon game with a few hundred people. About 90 tables of 6 players each+a dm. The room was sold out. Yeah, that's the same style Living Greyhawk and Living Forgotten Realms used -- they used to call 'em Battle Interactives, now I think they're Epics. Always chaotic, often enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Yeah this was Epic 1 for 5e.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Oh yes ritorix can you tell me the CR of the Ultroloth, Balor and Pitfiend. I want to know were the highest tier of fiends outside of the named ones lie. I havent really gone into Monster Manual details yet because I'm still in the middle of gencon. But here you go... They have the arcanaloth (jackle form thing), ultraloth (alien looking), nycaloth (demonic looking) and mezzoloth (insectoid). Ultraloth is CR13, with at-will teleport (60' range) and can hypnogaze AND triple attack all in one action. Balor is CR19 and pit fiend is CR20. The Solar is CR21. Ancient red dragon is CR24. Other things I noticed - Angel art has shifted from the 'faceless angel' style back to having a face. They look pretty badass. The Dracolich isn't a monster now, just a template you put on a dragon. It adds a bunch of undead resistances and bumps the CR. PC races don't have entries, for the most part. So there is no 'elves' page or 'dwarves' page. But they do have entries for the evil versions, drow and duergar. ritorix fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
My home group is going to take NEXT for a spin after our current 4E campaign wraps up. I was going to make a Fighter for it, partly as I still regret not making one for our 4E campaign when it started, and partly as I suspect that will be the quickest way for me to determine how much I want to play the system. A couple of questions: 1) What is the Champion for? Is it the newb option on the newb class? 2) There really isn't anyway to tank other than to give opponents disadvantage once (maybe twice with a BM maneuver)? I was concerned that I may be passive aggressively making a bad character, but there really isn't anyway to make a good fighter is there? If it leaves a sour enough taste, I may have to try the
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Battlemaster multiclassed with Wizard seems like it might be good. Or just plain old Eldritch Knight, honestly. Sade fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
PLAYTEST REPORT: Rolling for ability scores is goddamn bullshit and I have no idea why "some player characters are arbitrarily permanently better/worse than others" is considered a self-evidently laudable design goal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Consider, though, that if you'd rolled good ability scores, you would have discovered through playtesting that rolling for ability scores works just fine!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
Grim posted:Really? I know that the 3.5 CO boards came up with some insane poo poo, but I hadn't heard of anything particularly excessive in 4E There's a build or two that revolve around liberal interpretations of "your range is now line of sight" to do things like teleport opponents into the sun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted:PLAYTEST REPORT: The point buy rules are right there, why would you ever roll them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
Sade posted:The point buy rules are right there, why would you ever roll them? The paragraph about it manages to imply that random is the real way and the standard array is "to save time". The Rulebook posted:You generate your character’s six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Point buy, on the other hand, is The Rulebook posted:At your Dungeon Master’s option
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
Sade posted:The point buy rules are right there, why would you ever roll them? Permissive DM let us roll a set first and then take either what we got or use the standard array. Everyone else got comically amazing rolls. Nothing below twelve, multiple 17s, that sort of thing. He let me re-roll three times to see if I could manage to get a set that at least wasn't worse than the standard array, and I finally got one that beat it by two stat points--which I later realized was only because I forgot to drop the lowest die from one of the results. I realize I'm a grown-rear end man butthurt about not getting enough points in a children's pretend game, but goddamn, unavoidable overwhelming failure before the game even begins is just kinda discouraging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:The paragraph about it manages to imply that random is the real way and the standard array is "to save time". The standard array is still good and no rolling is not the real way it's just an option that has been in D&D from the start. It even says if you don't like the idea of randomly rolling do this. You guys clearly don't like it so do the array or point buy like it says. 100% this is not something that is worth complaining about. ritorix posted:I havent really gone into Monster Manual details yet because I'm still in the middle of gencon. But here you go... Thanks. The Ultroloth sounds like it should have a higher CR. (If only because being the peak of Yugoloths I don't think it should be so much weaker then the Balor and Pitfiend.) I am guessing all of the High tier monsters you just named are legendary. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 09:33 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:31
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:I might be remembering some totally different incident but I think it was a drow who tried to use Darkfire (ie. what was once called Faerie Fire) to burn down a door. Chris Perkins had to explain to him that, despite the name, Darkfire is actually a glow and not real fire. I can't really fault Perkins for not allowing somebody to burn down a door with a glow stick. The fact that this power has the word "fire" in it is just one of those stupid D&D-isms that sound perfectly normal to veterans and trip up everybody else. It was called Darkflame Blast, I think, and the player wanted to use it to melt a door made of ice. I have no clue what Darkflame is in 4e, but Perkins asked to see the card it was printed on, thought a little, and then shut down the player because the card said, "Target: one creature". This is the kind of DMing Wizards wanted to represent 4e; 5e is proper hosed. Edit: Maybe they had a chat later about how Darkflame can't melt ice or whatever; I don't know, I shut the video down right there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
MartianAgitator posted:It was called Darkflame Blast, I think, and the player wanted to use it to melt a door made of ice. I have no clue what Darkflame is in 4e, but Perkins asked to see the card it was printed on, thought a little, and then shut down the player because the card said, "Target: one creature". Given the reception that 5e has been getting in most places that are not here and the fact that it's currently selling really well. I don't think it's hosed. On this scenario. Perkins is a pretty good DM from what I have seen of him. But no one is flawless everyone can make bad calls at times this was simply a bad call. This edition is more loose then 4e is anyway so situations like that are more unlikely. Though lots of you guys seem to think it being more rules lose is a flaw.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
MartianAgitator posted:This is the kind of DMing Wizards wanted to represent 4e; 5e is proper hosed. quote:Objects don’t have any universal resistances or vulnerabilities, but the DM might rule that some kinds of damage are particularly effective against a certain object—the object has vulnerability to that damage. For instance, a gauzy curtain or a pile of dry papers might have vulnerable 5 fire because any spark is likely to destroy it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
Chaltab posted:Or Chris Perkins just made a mistake and I rather doubt it was meant as a statement of intent. Because while I don't have any rulebooks handy I did find this on the Comendium: Yeah, it was a mistake. But this was for advertising purposes: he needed to show off the dungeon the way he thought most players would play it. He decided that forcing these new gamers down the pre-planned path was more important to advertising D&D than validating their creativity and showcasing the real beauty of the medium. This is a pure example of railroading. We know it is a mistake. Does he? And I don't understand your Compendium quote. It seems to back the idea that he should have given the ice door some fire vulnerability. So what's your point?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:100% this is not something that is worth complaining about. Ok. I'm still going to complain that point-buy is locked behind "at your DM's discretion", because that's hilariously dumb. MonsterEnvy posted:But no one is flawless everyone can make bad calls at times this was simply a bad call. This edition is more loose then 4e is anyway so situations like that are more unlikely. Though lots of you guys seem to think it being more rules lose is a flaw. In this edition where the DM must make more rulings, the DM will necessarily make fewer bad rulings because Edit: Fire Bolt, Fireball, Fire Storm, Flaming Sphere, and Meteor Swarm all explicitly "ignite flammable objects that aren't being worn or carried", but not Flame Strike. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 10:33
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Ok. It's unlikely that a DM would say no and point buy pretty much gives you the same scores the array can. Sometimes the DM making a ruling won't be bad or good it's just going to be how it works. Lots of times one ruling will be fine and another will be fine as well. If it's bad there is nothing wrong with talking. Most games have house rules anyway leaving stuff up to interpretation lowers those as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
quote:It's unlikely that a DM would say no No it isn't. quote:Sometimes the DM making a ruling won't be bad or good it's just going to be how it works. Lots of times one ruling will be fine and another will be fine as well. If it's bad there is nothing wrong with talking. The rulebook (and the designer) says "DM's call". It doesn't say "have a discussion". quote:Most games have house rules anyway leaving stuff up to interpretation lowers those as well. How the everloving gently caress does leaving more stuff vague result in fewer houserules?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 10:53
|
|
|
Having to make a billion house rules (or any house rules really) is good for a rules lite game like Dungeon World, it is not good for a rules-heavy game like any edition of DnD (Note that this is a problem I have with every edition of DnD, they are all, even 4E, pretty much unplayable without a decent set of house-rules going in, one of the things I was hoping 5E to fix was this bullshit, instead of fixing it it's loving relying on it, so it's making a bad problem worse).
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 11:32
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I was concerned that I may be passive aggressively making a bad character, but there really isn't anyway to make a good fighter is there? The good Fighters were renamed "War Clerics" and "Warlocks," just like the good Rogues were renamed "Bards." Hwurmp fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:How the everloving gently caress does leaving more stuff vague result in fewer houserules? I suppose by not having rules the DM actually has to make up rules rather than houserules. This is a mark of a good game because
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
For the record, the power itself didn't actually involve any fire. It's the drow illusion racial ability that momentarily shadows an enemy's eyes. It lacks the Fire keyword. It would be like a wizard casting Faerie Fire to melt some ice. Perkins made the right call, just for the (very) wrong reason. Sade posted:The point buy rules are right there, why would you ever roll them? WotC has been rather explicit that rolling them is the "proper" way. Point buy is the optional path, and it's half finished to boot (no way to buy stats over 15). Every twitter post has reinforced that in 5e, you roll your stats, and you only use the other options if your DM "lets you." ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 11:51 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:For the record, the power itself didn't actually involve any fire. It's the drow illusion racial ability that momentarily shadows an enemy's eyes. It lacks the Fire keyword. It would be like a wizard casting Faerie Fire to melt some ice. Exactly, like I said earlier. There is no power called Darkflame Blast or anything similar. The only one that comes close (I checked DDI) is the Darkflame power, which is the faerie fire analogue I talked about. It's an illusion, not real fire. That said, pointing out that it can only target creatures was garbage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 12:57
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted:I realize I'm a grown-rear end man butthurt about not getting enough points in a children's pretend game, but goddamn, unavoidable overwhelming failure before the game even begins is just kinda discouraging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
Everyone in the group wants to play a char with a 17 or 18, so just fiat everyone one in their primary stat and roll the rest. Random rolling sucks because it's inevitable one player gets screwed by the RNG which isn't fun and makes it harder to balance encounters, and ad-hoc fudging via rerolls is silly because it's preferential. At least in 4e you were paragons so it was easy to justify. Not sure about 5e but it'll likely be "whatever, it's just a game".
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Everyone in the group wants to play a char with a 17 or 18, so just fiat everyone one in their primary stat and roll the rest. Gamma World did this and it worked perfectly fine. You could make a character in 5 minutes and they'd be just about as competent as everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Given the reception that 5e has been getting in most places that are not here and the fact that it's currently selling really well. I don't think it's hosed. How do you know it is selling well? Got any links or data? WoTC generally don't release that information. As per the usual circular nation of things, people who didn't like 4th kept insisting it was not selling well despite all indicators that it was doing good. Agreed - by all accounts Perkins is a really good DM and was one of the holdouts internally supporting 4th. It's just on that particular day he made a good call but didn't frame it well. My buddy who DMs for our group (4th edition and a bunch of other different systems) has spoken to Perkins a lot of times as he has written a bunch of adventures for Dragon and he always says how easy going he is and the advice he gives is to err on the side of fun and improvise
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:The good Fighters were renamed A Horde of skeletons just like the good Rogues were renamed "Bards." I'll have you know. Also it's amusing that summoned monster wizards don't even need good primary stats to function
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
Like that example was probably Perkins at his worse, but you look at some of the inane bullshit he not only put up with but immediately played with and built on with Acquisitions Incorporated and you can see him at his best. I remember grogs on ENWorld getting angry that he "let too much slide" and that he was demeaning DMs everywhere by allowing some of the goofier parts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
Was it Chris Perkins who wrote an article about giving your villains character depth by having them eat babies?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:WotC has been rather explicit that rolling them is the "proper" way. Point buy is the optional path, and it's half finished to boot (no way to buy stats over 15). Every twitter post has reinforced that in 5e, you roll your stats, and you only use the other options if your DM "lets you." And then in Adventurer's League, the official 5e organized play, they explicitly ban rolling for stats. Go figure. So I feel like I should write up a bit about AV play and the modules I played through this week at gencon. I played all the adventures they had and progressed from about level 1 to just enough to hit 4. Defiance in Phlan: This was 5 short missions wrapped into an adventure, we did 4 of them, each took about an hour. I played a wild sorc at first, and some of the mini-adventures were more narrative, mysteries or the like with little combat. A few were decent but nothing to write about. One was a rescue mission that involved a pretty difficult fight vs goblins and a hobgoblin riding a dire wolf. Here Sleep was really effective (duh) in taking out the minions. That was about my only option as a level 1 sorc. Sokol Keep: This was the Bad Adventure. Just rather dull, then a stupid trap pit at the end of the dungeon with spikes and a dex check to get across a wet walkway (numerous folks fell into spikes). At the bottom of the pit was 4 ghouls, but we didn't trigger them, so instead they waded into our final skeleton battle at the end. This was the almost-wipe I talked about earlier. I tried to hold off the ghouls for a few rounds with a combination of Dodge and Shield; it worked for about 2 rounds then a lucky shot killed me. 2 party deaths here, and this is where we got to experience the terrible death rules that Adventurer's League has. I think I talked about that earlier. After that I switched to an assassin, the other dead guy to a life cleric (with heavy armor mastery feat). Shadows on the Moonsea: This was the Good Adventure. Villages along the coast are being sacked by a 'dracolich'. You ride out to investigate, find the next target - a backwards, isolated fishing village. Neat NPCs like the old crones that run the town and speak in riddles. You eventually figure out the town's ancestors made a pact with Tiamat and lost their souls in return for the town's safety. So the dracolich shows up on a foggy night (after we had "Ewok'd" the town full of traps and defenses) with an army of skeletons. Yeah, those skeletons were kobolds dressed up in bones to look scary. The dracolich was 2 kobolds peddling a bike with a fire-belching contraption strapped on. Hilarity. Cleared them up, got to the kobold's boat, then that boat gets rammed by *another* pirate boat. Yeah, those pirates that made that pact with Tiamat? We inadvertently broke their soulpact by defending the town so they escaped from hell (with the boat of course). Giant 3-way boat battle with infernal pirates, cultists of the dragon+kobolds, and our party. Fun stuff. Kryptgarden: Highlight here was an aerial battle with our 6 players riding 3 griffons (2 per griffon) against some corrupted eagles or whatever. We played this TOTM-style (used a grid most of the con). My co-pilot 'gave me the gunnery solution' (Aided me) so I could snipe from griffonback. Yeah we had a lot of fighter pilot jokes during this one. The final battle of the con involved an enemy wizard, a few clerics, and some fodder. During that fight (with typical crowd-control bullshit like Hold Person and Command) an event GM was going around the tables and playing an Ancient Green Dragon. So at one point he swooped down on our group and did a drive-by attack, and we all got to hit back (damage to the dragon accumulated over multiple tables, I think?). Well not all, since he swooped down when 2 players were Held. We didn't die or anything since 'story elements' prevented the dragon from just splattering us. After that thing left we handily murdered the other enemies and that was the end. Magic items: over the duration we got an amulet of health (sets CON to 19), ring of evasion (gives you same as a rogue ability, and adv. on dex saves), wand of detect magic (unlimited uses, tap a thing to see if magic), and a +1 longsword that no one wanted since we were dex builds; the greatsword fighter took it to have an option against normal-weapon-immune monsters. There were also a half-dozen or so healing potions which don't really count, and a potion of climbing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
MartianAgitator posted:It was called Darkflame Blast, I think, and the player wanted to use it to melt a door made of ice. I have no clue what Darkflame is in 4e, but Perkins asked to see the card it was printed on, thought a little, and then shut down the player because the card said, "Target: one creature".
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:It was Darkfire, it's the Drow racial power, and it doesn't deal any damage, it just makes the target glow so you or your allies can hit it more easily. Were I the DM I would have said the exact same thing. You probably would have too. Yeah, it's this. Chris Perkins' DMing is pretty good from what I've seen of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
I think their best dm is Greg billisland (sp?) as far as rulings and table fun goes. He is pretty laid back and entertaining. Or I just didn't watch anything groggy from him yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 14:58
|
|