|
So how the gently caress are you supposed to kill this dragon, then? (It's by being a wizard, isn't it?)
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
Payndz posted:So how the gently caress are you supposed to kill this dragon, then? Pretty much, necromancy seems particularly good, able to stun it for 3 rounds straight (assuming it wastes is auto saves), you can bring massive DPR from skeletons (sure it can kill them but then it's not killing you) + After first round setup you can spam spells at it till it dies
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
Stormgale posted:Pretty much, necromancy seems particularly good, able to stun it for 3 rounds straight (assuming it wastes is auto saves), you can bring massive DPR from skeletons (sure it can kill them but then it's not killing you) + After first round setup you can spam spells at it till it dies Remember you have to hit it with the stun spell and you have to do so before it starts flying. If it goes first and wipes out your skeleton army that you wasted most of your spell slots on you are largely helpless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Payndz posted:So how the gently caress are you supposed to kill this dragon, then? Via ROLEplaying, I would trick it into tying its wings together its wings so it can fight a fair duel with me. When it did, I would fire it out of a catapult I prepared earlier over a really deep spiked pit I prepared earlier so that it fell to its death. If it tried to cast feather fall on the way down, I would have my DM rule that feather fall cannot target the caster because it's worded the same as True Polymorph. We are bros and he owes me so it would totally work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Cut to crestfallen fighter captioned "ROLL-player."
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
My dude is a fighter, though. He fights dragons. With trickery*, because what is steel compared to the etc? e: I'm being serious here. I feel that my solution plays to the strengths of the edition -Next supports ROLEplaying, unlike that other edition. I have used roleplaying while everyone else is talking about skeleton DPR like this is some kind of MMO. -Next wants the DM to make rulings, rather than just having rules. My solution is so edge-case that it will require many rulings. -Next uses natural language. My solution involves arguing about exactly what is meant in a spell description. -Next returns power to the DM. Without the DM saying "fine, fine, whatever" to a lot of stuff, my solution will not work at all. -Next is a well-balanced game. My solution will work no matter what class/level/race/alignment you are. *And catapults. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
Also you need a Wis caster or a Bard to cast Contagion. Wizards don't get it. They also don't get Pass Without Trace, and Transport Via Plants, which are if not the only way, at least a cool way to doom drop an army into a dragon's lair. If you don't get surprise than it'll get its legendary/lair actions which might make things hard for skeleton army.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:True Polymorph does not work on yourself anyway. MonsterEnvy posted:It targets other creatures you can see within 30 ft. You are not effected. MonsterEnvy posted:Reading the spell the intent is clear and it's to target creatures in sight. Shapechange is the spell for transforming yourself. 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. MonsterEnvy posted:Remember you have to hit it with the stun spell and you have to do so before it starts flying. MonsterEnvy posted:And you will have to save each time you get hit and eventually you will get a 1 and fail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
seebs posted: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. That's not what I'm asking. What I'm asking is, why should anyone care what you feel like changing the rules to? We're not talking about your version of the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
MartianAgitator posted: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." Actually this weekend our wizard used sleep during one of our encounters and got a (very slightly below average) total of 21 from the 5d8, which was the perfect amount to sleep 3 of the 5 or 6 goblins they were facing. It didn't end the encounter, it mostly made it manageable at which point the melee started churning through while the goblins were trying to wake up their comrades (an action to push/shake will awaken a sleeping creature)
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
Sleep is really super bad in 5e. You have a 94% chance to effect 1 Orc and a 9% chance to effect 2 Orcs. Against Goblins why would you not just Burning Hands? They have 7 HP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
You're smoking crack, Jack. It's potentially an AE power word kill from 90ft. Soften up the enemy with some ranged attacks and drop sleep. Burning hands is a good way to bet your life on a spell killing everything. It also sucks if an ally gets in the way at level 1, or low levels in general if you aren't an Evoker 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
slydingdoor posted:You're smoking crack, Jack. It's potentially an AE power word kill from 90ft. Soften up the enemy with some ranged attacks and drop sleep. At low levels you will just kill stuff though. At level 1 if you roll 4 on your weapon's damage di(c)e you kill a goblin. Against tougher enemies it's a lot better to focus fire than to spend multiple rounds softening enemies up while they attack you back. There could be some value in Burning Hands -> Sleep against some orcs but I dunno, I don't really want to cast 2 spells to kill some orcs unless the situation demands it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Sleep is really super bad in 5e. If you had actually done the math you would realize that a 5th Casterdition level 1 God-Wizard has a 96% chance of insta-killing up to seventeen orcs with a roll of 2 or higher. Just the eff was WotC thinking when they designed this piece of poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Ruckby posted:If you had actually done the math you would realize that a 5th Casterdition level 1 God-Wizard has a 96% chance of insta-killing up to seventeen orcs with a roll of 2 or higher. Just the eff was WotC thinking when they designed this piece of poo poo? With Sleep? On orcs which have 15 hp each? How are you going to roll 255 with 5d8?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:With Sleep? On orcs which have 15 hp each? How are you going to roll 255 with 5d8? He's joking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:He's joking. Oh right. You never know on the internet. I've seen some weird opinions out there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Sleep is really super bad in 5e. because unlike theoryland, our two fighters were keeping them penned in (most of the party had terrible initiative) and he didn't want to roast half the party
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
treeboy posted:because unlike theoryland, our two fighters were keeping them penned in (most of the party had terrible initiative) and he didn't want to roast half the party I suspect he could have just moved and cast it, but okay. I come bearing Monster Manual information!
Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
What happens if your each 0 in a stat? I remember for most it was paralyzation, except 0 Con meant dead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:templates. Oh good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:I suspect he could have just moved and cast it, but okay. you can't share spaces or move through enemy spaces, he could have moved closer to avoid hitting one of the fighters, but he was also at 2hp (from a single shortsword the previous round), so if he *didn't* kill the goblins in the front he would've provoked 2 AoO and likely would have died trying to back out of melee. He couldn't stay in melee for the same reasons. my players aren't idiots, and white box theory D&D breaks down quickly in actual play.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:* Half-Dragon and Vampire templates. Is this for monsters or PCs? idk how templates used to work since they weren't in 4e (on the player's side I mean). Generic Octopus fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
            
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
treeboy posted:because unlike theoryland, our two fighters were keeping them penned in (most of the party had terrible initiative) and he didn't want to roast half the party EDIT: Actually now that I think of it that is applicable to all editions of D&D but its arguably worst in Next.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Lich, Empyrean, and Erinyes   Lich is CR 21 and an 18th-level spellcaster (i.e. level 9 spells). Lair abilities include roll a d8 and regain a spent spell slot of that level or lower. Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
treeboy posted:Actually this weekend our wizard used sleep during one of our encounters and got a (very slightly below average) total of 21 from the 5d8, which was the perfect amount to sleep 3 of the 5 or 6 goblins they were facing. It didn't end the encounter, it mostly made it manageable at which point the melee started churning through while the goblins were trying to wake up their comrades (an action to push/shake will awaken a sleeping creature) I'm not really sure about the distinction you're making here. I fully appreciate that your fighters actually got to roll some dice, which is great. But really, the wizard took 50-60% of the enemies out of the fight and the remaining monsters spent their turns trying to bring the other half back into the fight. Whether it "ended the encounter" or just "made things manageable" both sound like different ways of saying that the wizard trivialized things - maybe the fighters actually got to roll some dice and maybe a few goblins were still alive in round 2 to make attack rolls, but c'mon. Personally I don't actually think that's the end of the world. 5 goblins probably shouldn't be the highlight of your party's adventuring day, and if the wizard burns a spell slot (I'm assuming this is pretty low level play) to trivialize that one fight, well, that seems reasonable as long as you're pacing things appropriately. But it sounds like the encounter was basically over when every monster spent an entire round scrambling to deal with the wizard's sleep spell. Anyway, another question, especially for people who seem to like 5E's design, since I am struggling with this. My group and I mostly got into D&D with 4th edition. We'd like to try 5th. How do you plan on making the martial characters interesting to play, especially as caster options balloon with higher level spell slots? Because rules as written, it seems boring as hell - your turn comes up, you swing/shoot at things a few times (turning on or off various personal boosts/modifiers) and that's it. I'm less concerned with making sure damage is balanced - that's the kind of thing I feel like I can easily tweak for myself via magical items/DM fiat to buff damage as necessary. I'm more concerned with the fact that, say, the Necromancer isn't just limited to the Animate Dead skeleton army; if that's not useful, he can load up on debuffs. If that's not useful, he can load up on AOE and direct damage. Hell, if *that's* not useful and the party isn't expecting combat, he can take a bunch of non-combat utility that gives him all kinds of cool wizardy poo poo he can do. I appreciate that this is a fixture of earlier editions - casters got flexibility and martials got...uh, well I'm not exactly sure what they got, but that's beside the point. The point is that my players come to D&D from 4E and they're used to everybody having interesting choices. Should I just tell them that they probably shouldn't play fighters, rogues, or rangers, or what? (Also, while I appreciate that 'don't play 5E' is a potential solution to this problem, let's assume that we're going to at least give it a shot, and I want to give it the best shot we possibly can.) branar fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Finally, I can be a half Dragon Dragonborn!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
branar posted:How do you plan on making the martial characters interesting to play, especially as caster options balloon with higher level spell slots? Because rules as written, it seems boring as hell - your turn comes up, you swing/shoot at things a few times (turning on or off various personal boosts/modifiers) and that's it. Right - especially Fighters, which bugs the hell out of me since they were my fave 4e class. branar posted:the Necromancer isn't just limited to the Animate Dead skeleton army; if that's not useful, he can load up on debuffs. If that's not useful, he can load up on AOE and direct damage. Hell, if *that's* not useful and the party isn't expecting combat, he can take a bunch of non-combat utility that gives him all kinds of cool wizardy poo poo he can do. Bear in mind that 5e's spell prep system is super permissive. If he preps utility spells he doesn't use, the slots aren't wasted, so he's free to do so without reducing his combat effectiveness in the slightest. He can also cast a large variety of spells as rituals outside of combat, without expending a spell slot. branar posted:my players come to D&D from 4E and they're used to everybody having interesting choices. Should I just tell them that they probably shouldn't play fighters, rogues, or rangers, or what? I'm afraid so, yeah. There's just no way to make those classes competitive with full casters in 5e except with some very extensive houseruling. Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
branar posted:I appreciate that this is a fixture of earlier editions - casters got flexibility and martials got...uh, well I'm not exactly sure what they got, but that's beside the point. The point is that my players come to D&D from 4E and they're used to everybody having interesting choices. Should I just tell them that they probably shouldn't play fighters, rogues, or rangers, or what? That does seem like the simplest solution to me. A balanced party that's easy to build challenges for is either going to be all 9-level casters, or none.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Well with multiclassing, you can have people start as martials and then level as casters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:I have a feeling that if your fighters were keeping them penned in then the encounter design just sucked. Something I learned from playing Dead in Thay is that if your in close quarters combat you're kind of screwed. So either 1) Fighters suck or 2) Encounter sucks. Right. For what its worth the fighters bottlenecked them in a cave opening and proceeded to hack their way through them in pretty short order. The wizard got one spell off, almost died, slept a chunk of the group which took a couple rounds for the boss goblin to wake up while the fighters and bow rogue dealt with the rest. The cleric generally stood there rolling like crap, he eventually killed one goblin on his third Sacred Flame attempt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Wait undead aren't immune to diseases?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Sweet, now I can have the part encounter a shadow and if they don't kill it, it'll go to a hamlet and start shadow town during the night.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
branar posted:I'm not really sure about the distinction you're making here. He didn't trivialize the fight. The Fighters were grateful for the assist (the goblins he slept had bows) and the rogue felt like a badass since she was one shotting goblins left and right (she almost killed the boss in a single round). The boss simply spent an action each turn to wake up one of the goblins which replaced their fallen comrades and kept wearing away at the party. All said it was about 3-4 more rounds after sleep was cast that the encounter ended. Sounds like a decent, but engaging fight and my players seemed to be having a blast and were very engaged even in each others turns. edit: also there was a question about group stealthing, the rules deal with stealth/surprise rounds. The rogue had been able to recon the room and report back, so the others tried stealthing up. The players who rolled equal to or greater than the goblin's passive perception got the surprise round when combat began. That's how it's stated in the rules. treeboy fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
I'm curious, now the PHB is out, what's the Oath of Ancients paladin like? I really liked primal characters in 4e, especially Wardens, so I guess I'm kinda stuck with a OaA paladin if I want to play something similar, but I don't really know what they're like, flavour or mechanics wise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
S.J. posted:That's not what I'm asking. What I'm asking is, why should anyone care what you feel like changing the rules to? We're not talking about your version of the game. I'm not proposing a change, I'm telling you what I think the rule currently is. I might be wrong, but usually when I'm wrong on a rule, people explain why rather than making insulting remarks about changing the rule. FWIW, I will totally concede that it's ambiguous, and that a clear statement either way would be less ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Well with multiclassing, you can have people start as martials and then level as casters. Is there a purpose to this? Won't they just end up as slightly-less-effective-casters? (Genuine question - like I said, most of my experience is with 4E, so the 5E-style multiclassing is something of a mystery.) treeboy posted:Sounds like a decent, but engaging fight and my players seemed to be having a blast and were very engaged even in each others turns. I mean, hey, that's the goal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Is the MM really THAT regressive? Seriously, now to go along with the spell casters not having their abilities listed we also have a bunch of templates, which may or may not be applied both to PCs and NPC, ability score damage which requires at-table recalculation and more 'natural' language than you can shake a 10-foot pole at. God, these pages make me dislike the edition more than almost anything so far. It looks bloody awful to run.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:08 |
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:God, these pages make me dislike the edition more than almost anything so far. At least the art looks pretty good. branar posted:Is there a purpose to this? Won't they just end up as slightly-less-effective-casters? (Genuine question - like I said, most of my experience is with 4E, so the 5E-style multiclassing is something of a mystery.) I'm psure you can take 1-2 levels of Fighter to get stuff like armor/second wind/action surge to survive low levels a little better, and then level up as a caster without missing out on too much at the high end. It's at least better than the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster stuff fighters and rogues get as far as I can tell, someone correct me if I'm wrong. Generic Octopus fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 18:01
|
|