|
I've been following the "cool stuff fighters should be able to do" discussion here with a lot of interest. I've made my own potential list. It tends to be a bit more abstract than the stuff you've been writing - which tends to be my preference. Some owe a lot to the contributions of others on this thread. The idea is that each level, a martial character would choose one. It would be usable once per encounter (you could choose the same one multiple times to use it multiple times per encounter) - and most should be useful in and out of combat. Bestow Condition * action, concentration: A creature gains the condition that you name. You also do damage to them if you wish. Pursue: Name a creature. You move to its side. It cannot shake you off - if it flies away, you grab onto its tail, etc. - until one of you is defeated. Automatic Success: You succeed on a roll or check or a creature fails on a roll or check that targets you. Mythic * action: You do a mythical or abstract thing, like talking a door into opening or stealing a memory. Iron Mind * concentration: Nothing can affect your mind unless you want it to. You cannot be intimidated, persuaded, seduced, enchanted, frightened, etc. Legendary Ability * concentration: One ability of yours increases to 30. Ignore Disadvantage * concentration: No check or roll you make has disadvantage and no check or roll a creature makes against you has advantage. Let There Be Blood * action: Attack every creature within reach or range. Counter * reaction: If an enemy fails in their attempt to do something to you, you may attempt to do to them what they did to you. For example, you might reflect a spell back at them or make a riposte to their attack. If they failed to seduce you, you seduce them. Demand Answer: When you observe something, you may ask a question about it of the GM. The GM must answer truthfully. Labour * action: Do a hundred man-hours of work. State Fact: When you observe something, you may state a fact about it. This fact becomes true. Endure Effect * concentration: Choose an effect. It has no effect on you. Power Through * concentration: Choose a barrier, or a resistance that a creature has. Ignore the barrier or resistance. Alternatively, choose an immunity. Treat it instead as a resistance. Gain Resistance * concentration: You have resistance against everything. Prepared: Yourself and allies act in the surprise round, act first in the surprise round and act with advantage in the surprise round. Make Vulnerable * action, concentration: A creature has a vulnerability to an effect of your choice. Force Action * action: A creature must take the action that you select, though the other details are left to the creature. Extra Action: You take an additional action. dichloroisocyanuric posted:I'm not sure exactly how bad removing 4 possible outcomes from the d20 die roll will affect the math, but you could always do advantage = 4d6, disadvantage = reroll the highest and take the lower result. Thanks, I'll give that a go.
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Iron_Chef posted:I was going to suggest that 5e harkens back to the player characters being heroes and not all villagers will have classes, but those are racial abilities. Maybe only hero Elves gain racial abilities? Or maybe it's dragon elf games and no one messes with Elf City Half of the elves in elf city are busy turning the Mending cantrip into a thriving business. Orc reckoning is at hand, and all they have is a nicely repaired pot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Maybe someone who has combed through 5th ed more than I have can point out to me whats up with Warlocks? I am not getting the appeal of them as a class. Less spells per encounter, but get them back after a short rest is nifty, less they can do with the spells but can get familiars or some extra spells from the person they made the pact with. Basically...why them and not a sorcerer or a wizard in its place?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Sanglorian posted:
This would be the first thing I would take on my Int 8 Fighter. And I would have moments of brilliance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:Maybe someone who has combed through 5th ed more than I have can point out to me whats up with Warlocks? I have a warlock in my group right now actually. We just concluded our first game of 5e today and it went pretty well. The Warlock so far seems to bring a decent mix of martial and magic ability to the field, and his spells recharge fairly quickly so he isn't weighed down by having to be too selective of what to use. Flavor and narrative-wise, the warlock is a quirky and interesting class, and it was really enjoyable to play up the warlock's relation to his Elder God patron of Madness, who induces hallucinations and constantly niggles at him to pull pranks on people. As an Elder God devotee, he gets some interesting spells and poo poo too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:Maybe someone who has combed through 5th ed more than I have can point out to me whats up with Warlocks? Someone else said to basically think of them like a reflavored martial class/gish. They mostly just throw blasts, but they have a few spell slots at their disposal. If your question is "why them and not a sorcerer or wizard", then you can ask that about every class that isn't a sorcerer or wizard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
dichloroisocyanuric posted:So you might say... It's up to the DM? As a Rolemaster guy, I can honestly say this is the absolute worst part of that system. Spread across 7 Companions, a couple other supplementary books, and even some parts of Character Law/Spell Law/Arms Law itself, are a cubic fuckton of "Optional Rules" governing everything from stat generation, race choices, degree of skill granulation, spell acquisition, weapon initiative modifiers, etc. It makes it so the game is basically impossible to play outside of your home table, because while the underlying "system" being used is the same (Roll d100, add modifiers, look it up on a chart), the game mechanics themselves vary wildly. A character who is completely legal at one table will be illegal at another. One will rely on a set of rules and assumptions that won't be used at another. Some will utterly break other peoples play styles (I've seen groups that just never, ever parry for some reason, and are curious why they never seem to have character live past 5th level). Old D&D could be this way, sure, but in Rolemaster if had actual printed and company endorsed support. This can be a slippery slope, if they start actually publishing optional rules that contradict other optional rules.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Spoilers Below posted:As a Rolemaster guy, I can honestly say this is the absolute worst part of that system. Spread across 7 Companions, a couple other supplementary books, and even some parts of Character Law/Spell Law/Arms Law itself, are a cubic fuckton of "Optional Rules" governing everything from stat generation, race choices, degree of skill granulation, spell acquisition, weapon initiative modifiers, etc. And this is exactly why I'm a fan of a singular core book that contains everything you need to know about the rules, and every other book is a supplement that directly adds to those. A lot of things can be said about Pathfinder, but even that was pretty good about it. At the very least, if some player showed up with a rinky dinky race they made for fun, they could say to the GM how many points they used with the system in the advanced races guide and the GM could give it a quick yes/no pass before even considering looking at it. And again, it plays into one of the reasons why this edition feels so wrong to 4e veterans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
With regards to the "fighter does cool stuff", I'm working on a system to (hopefully) implement that without breaking the game. I call it the Rewards system. By default, every character gains a reward at 1st level, and every other level afterwards, to a max of 10 rewards at level 19. These rewards can take several forms. Abilities like super strength and speed, your own castle, a legendary sword, and so on. They're divided into 4 tiers--1-4, 5-10, 11-16, and 17-20--as described in the book, with the higher the tier the more impressive it is. Great strength in the 5-10 (paragon) tier can mean you're as strong as 10 men (in carrying capacity and feats of strength, not attack/damage rolls), and the same reward at the 17-20 (Legend) tier means you're as strong as a thousand men. These rewards replace the standard magic items that players find, and they have one more catch. If you're a spellcaster, you can cast 1st and 2nd level spells just as normal. But, you need a reward to cast 3rd level spells. If you're 5th level and don't decide to get that reward, you can still supercharge a magic missile with a 3rd level slot, but no fireball. Each level of casting is its own reward, which means that to be a standard caster, you'll need to spend 7 of the 10 rewards on spell levels. This does two things. One, that's 7 extra things that fighters and rogues and whatnot get (4 if you're a paladin or ranger who wants 5th level spells) to tip the scales more towards their favor. Two, it sets a good benchmark. A typical Paragon tier reward should be about as useful as being able to cast 3rd or 4th level spells using your spell slots, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
dichloroisocyanuric posted:And this is exactly why I'm a fan of a singular core book that contains everything you need to know about the rules, and every other book is a supplement that directly adds to those. A lot of things can be said about Pathfinder, but even that was pretty good about it. At the very least, if some player showed up with a rinky dinky race they made for fun, they could say to the GM how many points they used with the system in the advanced races guide and the GM could give it a quick yes/no pass before even considering looking at it. And again, it plays into one of the reasons why this edition feels so wrong to 4e veterans. The basic building blocks of character should not require piles of ad-hoc rulings from the GM. A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Aug 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Question that occured to me: Some cantrips have effects that increase automatically based on your level, but is this tied to your total character level if you multiclass, or just your class level for the class you got the cantrip through? And in that case, what about cantrips gained from a race trait or feat?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:I'm not sure what kind of 4e veteran would prefer some dopey toolkit to the clear options based on race and (arguably) class available in 4e. I really doubt whatever system paizo came up with has any more merit than SKR's musings on point based feats. It was written by SKR, creator of both that and Savage Species, so...
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:Question that occured to me: Well in my game cantrips don't exist and you can't multiclass, but if you're a horrible non-D&D-fan who wants rules, not rulings then I guess The Rulebook, under 'multiclassing' posted:Each spell you know and prepare is associated with one of your classes, and you use the spellcasting ability of that class when you cast the spell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Well in my game cantrips don't exist and you can't multiclass, but if you're a horrible non-D&D-fan who wants rules, not rulings then I guess That really bones the Warlock. What do they and all the other full casters do for most of your games when they're hoarding their precious spells? Throw darts and shoot bows very ineffectually?? edit: less criticism and more wondering what do you do to fill the gap, because everyone else, while boring, at least has mechanics to support plowing through enemies with their boring stat blocks A Catastrophe posted:I'm not sure what kind of 4e veteran would prefer some dopey toolkit to the clear options based on race and (arguably) class available in 4e. I really doubt whatever system paizo came up with has any more merit than SKR's musings on point based feats. It's easy to put numbers next to words. Harder to make them mean something. And I say this as a fan of the Hero system, who also once created a fair approximation of Superman using the Ad&d 2e Skills and Powers book. I loathe the very idea of 'Mother May I' mechanics. Then again I can't really wrap my head around GMs who outright deny and cut off options other than throwing my hands in the air and yelling 'grognards'. Strength of Many fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Aug 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Strength of Many posted:That really bones the Warlock. What do they and all the other full casters do for most of your games, then? Throw darts and shoot bows very ineffectually?? Warlocks don't exist in my game either. Because I'm not DMing this system, nor do I intend to. Wizards throw darts as Gary intended.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Warlocks don't exist in my game either. Because I'm not DMing this system, nor do I intend to. Wizards throw darts as Gary intended. oh, well see that's different.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Is every 5E DM expected to be a game dev math wizard with there being so many optional rules?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Jackard posted:Is every 5E DM expected to be a game dev math wizard with there being so many optional rules? What math? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
Jackard posted:Is every 5E DM expected to be a game dev math wizard with there being so many optional rules? 5E is relatively tame so far, the only thing that you can really do is take a few fairly obvious trap options. As the game expands, everything that holds down casters will be stripped away, since the game is already set up that way. Fighter has a choice of class options and some feats--wizard has all that and two spells per level that can do literally anything and need not have any coherent theme with each other.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Well in my game cantrips don't exist and you can't multiclass, but if you're a horrible non-D&D-fan who wants rules, not rulings then I guess Ability != level. That rule you're quoting is just saying that a multiclass sorcerer/cleric still has to use wisdom for his cleric spells. Mearls has said on twitter that cantrips scale with overall level- not with a specific class level. I don't have a link though 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
Elmo Oxygen posted:Ability != level. That rule you're quoting is just saying that a multiclass sorcerer/cleric still has to use wisdom for his cleric spells. It sure would be nice if he'd put all this stuff in the rulebook instead. That section of the rules also contains a stupidly complicated way of working out how many spell slots a ranger/wizard/warlock/fighter(arcane trickster) might have. Can you confirm whether or not Mike changed any of that via twitter, and if so, to what?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
 Does anyone understand how hiding is supposed to work? e: Oh, Mike... 
Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Aug 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 10:40
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Does anyone understand how hiding is supposed to work? This seems like a pretty straight forward kind of ruling. Let's say my player wants to generate advantage so they roll stealth and hide behind a tree with some level of concealment during combat. The next round they want to use that concealment for advantage on their attack, which would reveal their position. Then hiding again would be more difficult (disadvantage). Nothing super crazy there. If your question is "how does stealth work" generally...I dunno what to say really, like in every other edition? Kinda weirdly and not as useful as you'd think it'd be?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
I vaguely recall that Stealth didn't work at all, RAW, in 3e.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I vaguely recall that Stealth didn't work at all, RAW, in 3e.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Quadratic_Wizard posted:With regards to the "fighter does cool stuff", I'm working on a system to (hopefully) implement that without breaking the game I really like this idea and I'd love to see you post it once you've got it worked up. One question: is re-training an available option? I ask because let's say my paladin just hit level 17. He's super excited to get his first legend-tier Reward. He also wants level 5 spells. But since Legend-tier Rewards would presumably need to be tuned to have as much power as level 9 spellcasting, picking up level 5 spellcasting as a Legend-tier Reward would kind of suck. It'd be better if the paladin could give up one of his earlier Reward slots (e.g., the Reward slot he'd get at level 9, which is when a full caster would get level 5 spells) and spend his Legend-tier reward instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Has anything been said about treasure? The DMBasic has magic items but nothing I can find about how to award anything beyond XP
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
It's up to your DM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:It's up to your DM. But...I'm the DM...I...I can do anything...anything
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:
Mike Mearls has a macro programmed into his keyboard so he can just press a button and have it type out "DM's call". It's because he needs the use of both hands to eat his string cheese, you see. A Catastrophe posted:The basic building blocks of Fixed that for you. I don't think I'd have as much as a problem with 5e if it was the only RPG out there. Problem is, there are so many other RPGs out there that do a lot of things better than 5e that I really don't see much of the point of the system. WotC already poo poo the bed with the OGL and doomed themselves to playing second fiddle to Pathfinder, so there's not a very compelling reason to retread that ground. If people are still playing 2e, after weathering both 3e and 4e they're still going to keep playing 2e at this point. In terms of making a narrative game (which if people are still trying to fool themselves that an RPG based off of a wargame's rules is more narrative in scope than other RPGs, I salute your delusion), I think FATE's a far superior system (let alone the other niche elfgames out there). As a murderhobo dungeoncrawler, 4e has pretty much every other edition of D&D beat. I suppose D&D's place in the system is what a lot of people have been saying - a cultural ambassador of RPGs. Except nowadays it's like your incompetent boss that has long hit the Peter Principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle) and merely occupies this spot not because there aren't enough competent people out there to replace them, but because they're the son/daughter of the CEO. D&D is the child of WotC who are by far and away the richest, most powerful company out there in boardgaming with an even larger conglomerate known as Hasbro behind them. D&D will always be the ambassador simply because of this, and I think it's disappointing because RPGs deserve a better ambassador. But that really isn't going to change any time soon, so I guess we all just have to live with it. treeboy posted:If your question is "how does stealth work" generally...I dunno what to say really, like in every other edition? Kinda weirdly and not as useful as you'd think it'd be? This is truth. I feel like very few RPGs have ever really done stealth well, and regardless of edition stealth has always been a hand-wavey thing in D&D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
treeboy posted:But...I'm the DM...I...I can do anything...anything Anything is possible at zombocom. I've always preferred the idea of magical weapons that do unique and interesting things over +x. Maybe that's for a module though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
LuiCypher posted:This is truth. I feel like very few RPGs have ever really done stealth well, and regardless of edition stealth has always been a hand-wavey thing in D&D. 4e's stealth & hiding rules are pretty detailed, and provide a solid base for a few hiding-focused rogue & assassin builds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:Anything is possible at zombocom. I condor that's why the system should support it in terms of math. Something along the lines of inherent bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:4e's stealth & hiding rules are pretty detailed, and provide a solid base for a few hiding-focused rogue & assassin builds. But still revolves entirely around some type of concealment in order to even activate, which at higher levels isn't too hard (between powers and wondrous items), but at lower levels requires DM permission (yes that bush is big enough, no that tree is too thin, yes it's dark but not dark dark.) It's (concealment) also something you can lose at the drop of a hat. I actually much prefer stealth in 5e since it doesn't pretend to be much more than what it's always been. Also the surprise rules are actually really good and make ambushing worthwhile even if you have the unstealthiest person in the world in your party.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
You can get a fully functional perma-hidden character online by level 4, level 2 if you're human. The concealment you get this way is from Shadow Walk, which you actually can't just get stripped away from you unless an enemy specifically has something to do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:e: Oh, Mike... I'm pretty sure if Mike Mearls didn't have a twitter account the game, in its current state, would actually seem better. It's hard to watch the lead designer constantly state how he'd "house-rule it like X" when he wrote the original rules, and it suggests he doesn't really believe in the final product.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
QuantumNinja posted:I'm pretty sure if Mike Mearls didn't have a twitter account the game, in its current state, would actually seem better. It's hard to watch the lead designer constantly state how he'd "house-rule it like X" when he wrote the original rules, and it suggests he doesn't really believe in the final product. How is organized play going to work for this edition, anyhow? It's starting to look like any "collection of official house rulings for OP" document will be at least as big as one of the core books... (Or are they actually putting as much discretion in the hands of OP GMs as they want to foist onto nromal ones??)
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
QuantumNinja posted:I'm pretty sure if Mike Mearls didn't have a twitter account the game, in its current state, would actually seem better. It's hard to watch the lead designer constantly state how he'd "house-rule it like X" when he wrote the original rules, and it suggests he doesn't really believe in the final product. Does the PHB have a section anywhere that lays down a 'Rule Zero' type thing that makes it clear that the rules written in the book are how poo poo works 'by default' but that whenever a situation is a little abnormal the DM should feel free to bend them? I really do think there's a defensible style of "DM's call" game design, but I'm still not clear on if D&D actually takes advantage of it or not. Also, there do seem to be a pretty decent number of situations that really should be spelled out. Attacking from a hiding spot, then hiding again so you can do the same thing next round is going to be a pretty universal action for anyone with a sneak attack, and how it gets ruled is going to have a huge impact on class balance. That's the type of thing that, even if you leave the ruling up to the DM to some degree, you need to explain the significance of different types of rulings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
OtspIII posted:Does the PHB have a section anywhere that lays down a 'Rule Zero' type thing that makes it clear that the rules written in the book are how poo poo works 'by default' but that whenever a situation is a little abnormal the DM should feel free to bend them? I really do think there's a defensible style of "DM's call" game design, but I'm still not clear on if D&D actually takes advantage of it or not. in this example (sneak attack) rogues almost always have it available anyway since it activates if there's an ally within 5' of the target. Stealth would be more about trying to gain advantage for the reroll
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Sanglorian posted:I was thinking about switching from using 1d20 to using 3d6, to create a bell curve. What should advantage and disadvantage look like in this scenario? Presumably 4d6(take the highest 3) would be too minor a benefit, but would 6d6(take the highest 3) be too great a benefit? 6d6 choose three actually exactly matches the average/expected values of d20 ad/disadvantage. Normal = 10.5; advantage = 15; disadvantage = 6. d20 d6 Of course, it drastically reshapes the probability curve, but I assume that was your goal in going 3d6 in the first place. dichloroisocyanuric posted:I'm not sure exactly how bad removing 4 possible outcomes from the d20 die roll will affect the math, but you could always do advantage = 4d6, disadvantage = reroll the highest and take the lower result. That's equivalent to 4d6 choose 3, which only bumps the expected result down a couple points. See, ad/disadvantage in 5e is HUGE. Such a limited shift would barely be noticed in play. (Changing the number of dice could be interesting, though. 4d6-1, 3d6, 2d6+1...)
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 17:40
|
|
