|
Nihilarian posted:It's probably up to the DM. So if you cast raise dead on a brain eaten warrior in a box do you have to consider the warrior for all intents and purposes both alive and dead at the same time until you collapse the wave form by asking your DM what you see when you open the box? edit: At this point we should have a :5th edition: emote that's just a picture of Mike Mearls and the words "Ask your DM". Vorpal Cat fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Sep 12, 2014 |
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
Yeah that's kinda the thing with modules: they need a skeleton to attach to. This is a really eye-opening time to get back into 2e. The player's / dm's option books actually present honest-to-God modules as chapters, complete with a summary page and a "is this right for my campaign?" paragraph that summarizes the mod, addresses foreseen consequences, and helps you decide if that's something you want to bring to the table.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:This is just reminding me of that dude on ENWorld who said it was literally impossible to lose limbs in D&D because there were no rules for it (since rules are physics), and that any DM that introduced an NPC with any missing body part at all was breaking verisimilitude because "missing limbs don't exist in setting".
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy, I know you've said you've got a disorder so you may not understand the hostility towards you. If this is the case, I genuinely feel for you. Lemme try to put this in a way that's easily digestible. *Think about how many times you've stated a ruling, and someone has posted the passage in the book that proved you wrong - usually to the detriment of the player, more often than not a Fighter. Imagine if you were playing a fighter, and these issues just. kept. coming. up. like they have been in this thread. When the DM points out that these things don't work out like you thought, that isn't being a bully; they're following the rules as they are written in the $50 dollar book(s). But the conflict comes up so much that you and the DM are getting very frustrated with each other. [The Conflict being you, MonsterEnvy, assuming the rules do what they're supposed to and allow your Fighter to be awesome {VS.} the actual rules printed in the book(s).] What's more, these conflicts aren't just with Fighters, but with dozens of problems that litter the PHB like teeny caltrops waiting to derail an evening. What's more, it's happening again with the Monster Manual. Imagine if you were a DM, and a player kept correcting you on rules. And their corrections were wrong - in fact, the opposite was true. How would you feel about that player? That's where we are now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:in 2e iirc it came down to a Sword of Sharpness, a Vorpal Blade, or being bitten by a Tarrasque. Any amputee you meet in adnd2e has faced one of those things and survived, so you'd best act with respect. I could swear there were extra called-shot rules somewhere that let you remove limbs. I want to say it was the Fighter's Handbook, but I'm far from sure and I might just be thinking about Hackmaster, so... moths posted:Yeah that's kinda the thing with modules: they need a skeleton to attach to. Yeah, 2e's modularity is a pretty interesting look at what could have happened. You're talking about the 2.5-ish Skills and Powers and Combat and Tactics ones, right? If you included all that stuff, you got a completely different game from core 2e, which was a kind of weird thing at the time. Even before that, there were add-on books. I mean, nobody could say that 2e's Fighter was a complex class, but get the Complete Fighter's Handbook and you can make it very complicated if you like. If the quality of the Complete Book Of series wasn't so variable, it could have been a good example of how to do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
All the Skills and Powers stuff was an effort to backsolve, and shows the limitations of that approach. Much Like the best Palladium TMNT PC was large but semi-humanoid, the best dnd2e Skills and Powers points-built character was from a cleric base- they were built on the most points. A real modular system would start it's framework on day one. 4e was not bad in this respect- action economy + adventure economy allows for a lot of bits ot be swapped in and out. While the two main efforts at this (psionics and essentials) were not very popular, you can at least see the basic modular concept being used: your turn/standard action, your encounter, your day all line up pretty well with other pcs. Not perfect, often flawed, but it's there. Even a 3e style level system could work, if properly constructed. Take a level here, take a level there, everything adds up. But the foundation and the basic values have to be in place, and have to be respected. AlphaDog posted:I could swear there were extra called-shot rules somewhere that let you remove limbs. I want to say it was the Fighter's Handbook, but I'm far from sure and I might just be thinking about Hackmaster, so... A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:The last few posts have mostly been "posting about posting," so how about we change gears to something a bit more palatable? Since the DMG stupidly won't be out until much later, what are people doing for Magical / Wondrous items? I've made up almost two dozen loot cards for my players ranging in usefulness from "a decanter of endless boiling water" to "a greatsword that deals an extra 1d6 damage to draconic foes and gives you a 1/day 'legendary save' power." My players are enjoying the odd items I've cooked up, so what, if anything, have other people come up with? I'm foolishly running a solo game, so I gave the intrepid Fighter a longsword that sheds daylight and burns with sunfire (2d6 fire damage on hit, sheds sunlight up to 30 feet and dim light another 30 feet beyond that, any enemies vulnerable to sunlight take their assigned penalties), a bunch of potions and some scrolls free of use, and splint mail armor. Might seem like a bit much at level 3 but, again, its a solo game with a Cleric NPC on stand-by to be a sort of Gandalf figure slash healbot when necessary. I'm playing with the idea of the longsword unlocking eventual Legendary actions or something else fantastical as the character grows in power and prestige. Also because I hate the idea of having a cool iconic weapon and then throwing it away for the next one that comes along because its +1 higher than the previous. mango sentinel posted:So am I having difficulty understanding Pact of the Blade or is it just really poorly described in the PHB? You choose that pact and you get a weapon that just poofs into your hand at will as an action, and later you can improve it with real weapons? Play a Bard of Valor. No, seriously. Get away from the Warlock. Its a stinky pile of poo poo and badly executed ideas. You'll do the same things but a million times better as a Bard. I'd advocate it over the Eldritch Knight, too, save for specific niche builds that let the Eldritch Knight become super tanky though lacking in ability to actually force things to target you makes self-buffing feel utterly pointless - thanks WotC! Strength of Many fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Father Wendigo posted:MonsterEnvy, I know you've said you've got a disorder so you may not understand the hostility towards you. If this is the case, I genuinely feel for you. Lemme try to put this in a way that's easily digestible. I get what you mean. I know I got issues with letting stuff go. Honestly I look at some of the posts here and I know responding to them will make everyone think less of me. But it just bugs me to let it go at that. Anyway I do not believe I was not wrong or lying on the last page. But I don't want to argue about it so I will take your advice and drop it here. I don't care about Fighters that much. But I want people to know that casters are not flawless unbeatable gods in this edition as well. They are still very good but they don't utterly outclass everything and make them obsolete like they used to. As for the monster manual after posting the List of Monsters by CR. I was not even trying to defend it. Just pointing out why some stuff was like it was. The intellect Devourer was were I started arguing again. Just because I was trying to point out it was not an instant kill. Anyway I will try and focus on better things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
Strength of Many posted:Something something legendary qualities with a weapon Yes. I love the idea of a weapon being defined by its user, and in turn partially defining its user. Depending on the player's actions, I think it would be awesome to have the longsword take on properties that mirror its wielder. I have a whole thing like that set up for my fighter and barbarian in my 5e campaign. The weapon becomes an extension of themselves, and so gains magical properties that complement their powerful owner. ie: A hot headed warrior's sword becomes warm to the touch when in the presence of people who have gotten off scot-free for their crimes. A barbarian concerned with creating a prosperous future for his people eventually imbues his axe with a passive buff to diplomacy rolls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:Yes. I love the idea of a weapon being defined by its user, and in turn partially defining its user. Depending on the player's actions, I think it would be awesome to have the longsword take on properties that mirror its wielder. I have a whole thing like that set up for my fighter and barbarian in my 5e campaign. The weapon becomes an extension of themselves, and so gains magical properties that complement their powerful owner. In the case of my game, the character's mom was a famous dragon slayer and champion jouster. There are some other unexpected twists I won't be revealing for awhile, but needless to say it will have something to do with dragons and the communing or killing of them -- depending on what route the player goes down.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Vorpal Cat posted:edit: At this point we should have a :5th edition: emote that's just a picture of Mike Mearls and the words "Ask your DM". I assume it would be based on  Huh, there are a lot of those ghost smilies now. Well, regd08.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Vorpal Cat posted:Well then couldn't you rez someone who died to brain eating if you put the stomach of the Intellect Devourer into the corpse's skull? That way the brain isn't missing, its just chewed up and partially digested
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I get what you mean. I know I got issues with letting stuff go. Honestly I look at some of the posts here and I know responding to them will make everyone think less of me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Selachian posted:The 1E rakshasa art is one of Trampier's cooler pieces though. Whatever our opinions are, most of us can agree that the 5e art is pretty cool. So I just wanted to point something rather fun out about this 1e art. Take a look at this badly taken picture of the 5e Rakshasa. 
MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Most of us agree that the 5e art is pretty cool so far. So this is just a fun thing I want to point out. Somewhere along the way that Rakshasa grew a cat mullet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Take a look at this badly taken picture of the 5e Rakshasa. Yeah, this is really awesome. Seeing that picture actually makes me want to buy the MM. I can't wait to see art for other creatures.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
dichloroisocyanuric posted:Yeah, this is really awesome. Seeing that picture actually makes me want to buy the MM. I can't wait to see art for other creatures. I'm torn about that. On the one hand, I like the art, I prefer to own physical copies, I love my LGS (buy it through them, support their success) and i'm intrigued by some of the entries (see: dragons, Lair actions, etc.) On the other hand I do not want to reward them for producing lovely content. On the third hand I do not want another 5-10 years of loving Pathfinder as the dominant spokesman for TTRPGs. Even this mess is.. arguably ..better than that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:I assume it would be based on I was thinking something more like this  .
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Strength of Many posted:I'm torn about that. I'm not sure it's "arguable." I own a few 3.5 manuals and have played a bit of Pathfinder and even that small taste practically gave me an aneurysm. I'm comfortable enough with 5e that I can DM it. I'm probably grogging but Pathfinder is just a heaping pile of poo poo in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I get what you mean. I know I got issues with letting stuff go. Honestly I look at some of the posts here and I know responding to them will make everyone think less of me. But it just bugs me to let it go at that. AlphaDog posted:No, you are continuously understating the problems the game has, and you do it by MonsterEnvy, it's really frustrating for people in the thread to consistently see you make claims about how the rules work that are quickly proven to be false in every sense of the word. You seem to be ignoring all these responses to your claims that people like AlphaDog are giving you using the actual rules as the book states them. You make your opinion on these incorrect statements and then basically ignore all of the posts giving you evidence to the contrary. We know you like the game, and that is fine. We get that, and most of us agree that we'd have fun playing with friends! But once again, its really frustrating to see you constantly try to claim the the criticisms being leveled against 5e are false or wrong even when they include the relevant parts of the book that are problematic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:I'm not sure it's "arguable." I own a few 3.5 manuals and have played a bit of Pathfinder and even that small taste practically gave me an aneurysm. I'm comfortable enough with 5e that I can DM it. I'm probably grogging but Pathfinder is just a heaping pile of poo poo in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:All the Skills and Powers stuff was an effort to backsolve, and shows the limitations of that approach. Much Like the best Palladium TMNT PC was large but semi-humanoid, the best dnd2e Skills and Powers points-built character was from a cleric base- they were built on the most points. I always liked how the S&P character point total for a cleric gave you juuust enough points that you could eschew all clerical spells and turning undead in favor of being able to cast all wizard spells as a cleric. With five points left over, even, just in case you wanted a couple of actual cleric spells.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:I'm not sure it's "arguable." I own a few 3.5 manuals and have played a bit of Pathfinder and even that small taste practically gave me an aneurysm. I'm comfortable enough with 5e that I can DM it. I'm probably grogging but Pathfinder is just a heaping pile of poo poo in my opinion. I am in the same boat. If its the only D&D edition that's going to see regular play now, well, at least its not Pathfinder. I can handle playing or even running 5e. My attempts at running Pathfinder or 3.5e again had me writing up pages of house rules and then still becoming so infuriated by its mechanics that I gave up and ran 4e instead. I was much happier with that decision, though I do find 4e fatiguing to run after awhile.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
dichloroisocyanuric posted:Yeah, this is really awesome. Seeing that picture actually makes me want to buy the MM. I can't wait to see art for other creatures. You are in luck then. Because of the way I like to make my tokens for my games. (I use the official art and make a token out of the face area.) I have been pretty good about getting pictures from the artists of the art they made for the book. I will upload Pics of all the art I got. Here is a link http://imgur.com/wE9lFaO,JTRtaW6,MD...RQflc2k,GgByTx4]
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:MonsterEnvy, it's really frustrating for people in the thread to consistently see you make claims about how the rules work that are quickly proven to be false in every sense of the word. You seem to be ignoring all these responses to your claims that people like AlphaDog are giving you using the actual rules as the book states them. You make your opinion on these incorrect statements and then basically ignore all of the posts giving you evidence to the contrary. I was not wrong about Greater Restoration. Nor was I wrong about raising them fixing it. You just have to use a higher level bring back the dead spell like Resurrection. To Aphla Dogs 2nd comment about me defending stuff. I was talking about when I posted the CR List but before the Intellect Devourer. Anyway lets focus on the cool art and fun stuff like the custom magic items, instead of the stuff the argument that I can't explain very well, cause I am a lovely writer and a much better talker. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
Strength of Many posted:I am in the same boat. If its the only D&D edition that's going to see regular play now, well, at least its not Pathfinder. I can handle playing or even running 5e. My attempts at running Pathfinder or 3.5e again had me writing up pages of house rules and then still becoming so infuriated by its mechanics that I gave up and ran 4e instead. I'll play 5e. I'm not going to play 3.x or Pathfinder though. As far as running a game, I can get a similar experience to 5e out of 2e, and I already know how the game might break and what to do to fix it. I'm tempted to spend some time looking at what would happen if I ported Advantage (or non stacking +2/+5 major/minor bonuses) back into 2e in place of the many +/- things, but I'd probably be better served by doing it to BECMI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Thank god these low level adventurers fighting the brain beast can afford greater restoration and resurrection. And am I a total loving idiot, or was it not pointed out that greater restoration would not restore a brain, and that resurrection wouldn't work without a brain present?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I was not wrong about Greater Restoration. Nor was I wrong about raising them fixing it. You just have to use a higher level bring back the dead spell like Resurrection. You said MonsterEnvy posted:Also Recovery from this does not require a 9th level spell. It requires a 5th level spell Greater Restoration. Wish can do it as well, but that is kind of a waste. You must have mistook that the party needs a 9th level cleric or Bard, for needing a 9th level spell. Greater Restoration doesn't work like that. You were wrong. You said MonsterEnvy posted:But they can always raise you after and that brings back the brain. But Raise Dead does not work like that, you were wrong. Resurrection does work like that, but that's not what you said. You were wrong. Now you're lying about having been wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:Thank god these low level adventurers fighting the brain beast can afford greater restoration and resurrection. Greater restoration solves the Int Drain, Resurrection solves the lack of the brain thing once the body dies. No low level adventurers would not have access to those things however. But fighting the brain beasts at low level is pretty unlikely as they are mind flayer dogs. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
"Ugh man, Next sucks balls...buuuut it has some pretty pictures and isn't Pathfinder sooooo" Here, let me help you all struggling with this off the horns of this tricky dilemma. 1). Don't buy, or play, D&D Next. 2). Don't buy, or play, Pathfinder. 3). Buy and play better games instead. There, problem solved.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Greater restoration solves the Int Drain, Resurrection solves the lack of the brain thing once the body dies. No low level adventurers would not have assess to those things however. But fighting the brain beasts at low level is pretty unlikely as they are mind flayer dogs. Oh my god, no they don't. we are literally quoting rules at you they don't work like that! Greater Restoration posted:Greater Restoration Intelligence DRAIN. DRAIN. not MISSING BRAIN. DRAIN. Raise Dead posted:Raise Dead
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Quote's not edit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Now, just to be clear, the spell Resurrection totally states that it restores missing body parts, as a level 7 spell, typically out of the price range of low level adventurers.Resurrection posted:7th-level necromancy
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:Oh my god, no they don't. we are literally quoting rules at you they don't work like that! quote:Resurrection Grimpond posted:Now, just to be clear, the spell Resurrection totally states that it restores missing body parts, as a level 7 spell, typically out of the price range of low level adventurers. Which I just posted after you wrote this. And I just stated that it was out of the league of Low Level Adventuerers. Hell it was the spell I name dropped as the one that solves the 2nd issue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Whatever our opinions are, most of us can agree that the 5e art is pretty cool. Well except the halflings. Just wow, it was literally the first page I flipped too when I bought the book. What a terrifying first impression. Most of the other stuff is cool beans though, I love the picture of the bard just being awesome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
For fucks sake, you have also been using the word raise interchangeably with resurrect, which is loving confusing when both of these things have similar but still different effects.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Ok in order to end this once and for all I am going back to the post that started this mess and going through my though process. Give me a sec to collect the posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Ok in order to end this once and for all everybody shut up for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Alright, that's long enough. Thread back open! It would be great if you guys could poo poo up the thread less now. That includes posting about posting and "  Now that I've said my piece, let's just drop this!" posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
What is everyone's guess for the first supplement after the PHB/DMG/MM are out? If that's already common knowledge, then does anyone know what it is?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 07:30
|
|
