|
AlphaDog posted:Please quote the rules text that says this. It targets other creatures you can see within 30 ft. You are not effected.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:It targets other creatures you can see within 30 ft. You are not effected. I just read it. It doesn't use the word 'other' and it doesn't say you can't use it on yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
S.J. posted:I just read it. It doesn't use the word 'other' and it doesn't say you can't use it on yourself. Reading the spell the intent is clear and it's to target creatures in sight. Shapechange is the spell for transforming yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:It targets other creatures you can see within 30 ft. You are not effected. *pulls out PHB* Actually it says 'choose one creature or nonmagical object that you can see within range'. That includes yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
My god, it's like we're actually playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
See also the 'targeting yourself' section on page 204. It's legal.Ferrinus posted:My god, it's like we're actually playing. It's got that D&D FEEL.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Reading the spell the intent is clear and it's to target creatures in sight. Shapechange is the spell for transforming yourself. Intent  Ferrinus posted:My god, it's like we're actually playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Well even if you can use on yourself at least it's weaker then Shapechange in that situation. Still I am going with RAI and saying it can't be used on self.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Well even if you can use on yourself at least it's weaker then Shapechange in that situation. Still I am going with RAI and saying it can't be used on self. Yes. Yes! Feel the power flow through you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Well even if you can use on yourself at least it's weaker then Shapechange in that situation. Still I am going with RAI and saying it can't be used on self. Obviously they intended to write the rules different in multiple different places. obviously
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:52
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Well even if you can use on yourself at least it's weaker then Shapechange in that situation. Still I am going with RAI and saying it can't be used on self. My post was aimed straight at you, by the by.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Man I'm actually sort of excited about Next, despite knowing it's not a great system. My problem is that I really wish people could talk about how much they like 5th without immediately talking about how 4e was a lovely MMO for babies. There's a couple of local (normally reputable) stores in my area that have made blog posts about how glad they are that 4e the lovely MMO edition is dead. I feel like I'm going to be fighitng the 4e edition war well into 7th edition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You get what I'm saying, though, right? The basic problem is that fighters are boring and the solution isn't to make all the classes on the same rough level of boring. The problem is D&D is a really and has always really been awful at this sort of mythic poo poo (The wizard that alters reality, the fighter that can sever a mountain or scare the wind away), for what D&D is good at bringing the wizard down into sane territory makes sense, as it is and will always be a dungeon crawling murder treasure simulator? Would I like a Game about playing mythical warrior men and women yes, is D&D ever going to be that game? (no)
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'm one of those people who doesn't really care for the solution to D&D's capability disparity between fighters and wizards to be "give the Fighter a bunch of hangers-on and a keep" because to me it just seems to be another outgrowth of the same mental roadblock that stems from not being able to imagine something fantastical that isn't the result of a guy in a pointy hat waving a wand. What's a legendary Fighter like? Eh, he has a bunch of guys with him I guess. I'm not saying that's the ultimate solution, just that no one in D&D has really been interested in balancing the fighter and the wizard since 3e (except that whole 4e, but I'm pretty sure the 5e design team wants to believe it didn't exist).
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Man I'm actually sort of excited about Next, despite knowing it's not a great system. Well I have never compared it. Mainly because I feel they should not be. They are very different games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
For the record I'm totally fine with the Fighter having the option to pick up a retinue and have a keep somewhere just like I'm cool with the Rogue getting a thieves' guild or the Cleric having a church and a bunch of followers/zealots/whatever. I think that bookkeeping is a valid concern and that you'd want some competent designers to make managing your domain something that's cool and fun but also doesn't turn into doing your fantasy taxes every time you want to go to war or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Still I am going with RAI and saying it can't be used on self. Can the caster be affected by Feather Fall? What about Darkvision?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
Also the area of effect for Shape Change in 2E was "The caster" and the target for Shapechange in 3E was "You". This edition is firmly rooted in tradition, so the RAW and RAI both mean Shapechange can effect the caster. Further: To see how looking up spells can bog down play, look at the Nerd Poker podcast. They started out with 4E, but don't use a grid, which is honestly better for a podcast format. They break, mangle and misunderstand rules constantly, but their abilities seem to inspire them and it creates something fun to listen to. At first, they look up their powers every time they come up, but later a player prints out sheets from the character builder and they are all handy and available. Eventually, they got tired of dealing with 4E rules, and went back to 2E rules because they are more familiar with those. Their grasp on even these rules (which they have played for years) is tenuous. At first they thought casting time was in rounds, rather than initiative count. They were corrected there, but still allow casters to rememorize spells if they have 10 minutes times the spell level to study, basically giving them an endless supply of magic. But the worst part is looking everything up. "What's the range on that?" "What does that do, exactly?" "How many people does that work on?" followed by them flipping through books for a couple minutes. (Edit: Someone sent them a copy of 13th Age recently.) People are not always going to read all the rules. People are not always going to be prepared. The game should be designed to people play it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
jigokuman posted:...but still allow casters to rememorize spells if they have 10 minutes times the spell level to study, basically giving them an endless supply of magic. If you have a 2e PHB around, have a look at the bottom of the first column / top of second column on page 81. The language is really convoluted, and it's easy to see how you might interpret it like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
I can easily see interpreting the rules like that. The only reason I know better is having played so many D&D CRPGs. But this is an illustration of how easy it can be to misunderstand even something that seems like a no-brainer to people with experience. But I will admit obfuscation and miscommunication are a pretty large part of the D&D feel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Interestingly an adult red dragon is only a medium encounter for a party of five level 17 adventurers. Adding a Red Dragon wyrmling boosts it to a Hard encounter for the same party, a deadly encounter is decidedly more interesting with up to five smaller monsters of low (2-4) CR. Because of the relatively flat math however, the low CR enemies still have a decent chance to hit and deal damage to those level 17 characters, and some can be pretty nasty. The game doesn't actually think much of a solo adult dragon on level. It would clearly have at least a buddy or two based on the encounter budgets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:My god, it's like we're actually playing. This IS the game. Imagine those poor fuckers who spend hours making characters, slaving over text, trying to wring bloody comprehension from contradictory turnips and cludging together what they think is a fun, creative, capable character. Then the first level wizard says, "I cast Sleep." That's a short roller coaster ride that ends in mud. Theorycraft bitching, though, is the gift that will keep on giving with every new Dragon Magic splat they ejaculate into the pedantic world. No other D&D activity fully engages every part of the autism spectrum. People may or may not play much 5e: gently caress them. 5e isn't for them. It's for the people who feel validated or delighted by Pun-Pun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Not to rob this derail of any momentum, I am enjoying it immensely. But what's the point of a spellcasting focus?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Cassa posted:Not to rob this derail of any momentum, I am enjoying it immensely. If you have a focus, you don't need to expend material components on spells that list such things (unless those materials have a listed cost, like 500gp diamond or whatever).
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
S.J. posted:Nope. When you get knocked to zero, any excess damage from the attack will go to your new (original) form, but unless that damage knocks you below zero again, you're fine. I am totally aware of the *general* polymorph rules. But if I were running a game, my reading of True Polymorph would be that, once it becomes "permanent", that is the New Way Things Are, and it has *become* your "original" form for all purposes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
moths posted:Yep, skeleton has to be holding the book when you cast it. And then the skeleton has to stay within ten feet of that spot. You can't send them out after the dragon. Note also the 200gp material component which the spell consumes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
I don't want to be an adult red dragon anymore! I want to be Debbie!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
seebs posted:I am totally aware of the *general* polymorph rules. So what?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
seebs posted:And then the skeleton has to stay within ten feet of that spot. You can't send them out after the dragon. Note also the 200gp material component which the spell consumes. seebs posted:I am totally aware of the *general* polymorph rules. The rules are the rules so your thing won't work. The rules aren't the rules, so your thing won't work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
I don't have time to read all these posts, I'm a busy man. Is this game good, yes or no? NO CONTEXT PLEASE.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
It's up to your DM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
Dexters Secret posted:I don't have time to read all these posts, I'm a busy man. Is this game good, yes or no? NO CONTEXT PLEASE. Attorney at Funk posted:- do you currently play and enjoy d&d 3.5 or pathfinder but wish it ran smoother or was less egregiously broken.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
S.J. posted:So what? So there's no other form to "revert back to" when damaged to 0 hit points. You're no longer under a polymorph effect which can end; you're just in a new form.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
jigokuman posted:It's up to your DM. A very good answer, partially because it's funny, partially because it's true, partially because it encapsulates a whole lot of things about the game. I am pretty sure I would enjoy playing this with a good group more than any previous edition. I wouldn't play any edition with a bad group, because I'd rather just not game than do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
Dexters Secret posted:I don't have time to read all these posts, I'm a busy man. Is this game good, yes or no? NO CONTEXT PLEASE. How much do you like spellcasting?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
I'm in a weird place right now: as much as I hate some of the design decisions made with regards to 5e, some of the stuff in the game actually seems really fun: I like the idea that I can write Mountain Dwarf Wizard on my character sheet and, provided my DM is cool with refluffing, have them wear armor and wield a warhammer and narrate all of their spells as really stupid anime fighting majicks. I like the unintended skeleton army. I like the fact that a Bard can steal a Ranger spell to suddenly become one of the more viable ranged combat characters. I even like the video gamey lair abilities on the Red Dragon, because video games are awesome and D&D would do well to steal more from them. I probably won't buy the game, because I've got enough versions of D&D on my shelf already and I don't see 5e doing anything differently enough to warrant a purchase, but the free nature of the basic rules coupled with just enough new ridiculousness means I'd play it and at least try to have fun with it in the process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
seebs posted:And then the skeleton has to stay within ten feet of that spot. You can't send them out after the dragon. Note also the 200gp material component which the spell consumes. Untrue. Unless we assume all D&D happens on planets that the sun rotates around, (and good luck explaining seasons) we should read movement and place as relative to its immediate surroundings. A book in the wizard's tower is fine, but mowed into his lawn would not be, since the planet's rotation is the nearest relative movement. So a book in the trunk of the Wizard's car would be "in the place it was cast" regardless of where the car drives, but a mural on the side of his van wouldn't be. Pop up books in the skeletons' hands would work, scrimshaw directly onto the skeleton would not. Edit: Actually the wizard's lawn would be fine, but you couldn't inscribe one large enough to be seen from space. moths fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:- do you currently play and enjoy d&d 3.5 or pathfinder but wish it ran smoother or was less egregiously broken. Belongs in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
moths posted:Untrue. Unless we assume all D&D happens on planets that the sun rotates around, (and good luck explaining seasons) we should read movement and place as relative to its immediate surroundings. I'm going to go ahead and assume that it needs to be in a particular place relative to a point on the earth rather than relative to the wizards luggage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
It's more so you can't tear that page out and use it as a mall bomb or draw one on a shield.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:09
|
|