|
ProfessorCirno posted:Every now and then people say I go to far when I talk about D&D actually hurting people, and then someone talks about experience points being an actual physical thing that needs to be given realistic attributes and all I can d is point at that and make funny faces. Yeah, reading that conversation all I could think was "...you realize XP isn't a magical level-up juice, but the game's mechanism for connecting the narrative of 'you get more powerful' with the narrative of 'some things are harder than others' using the mechanics of numbers and hit points, right?"
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Is there a thread for people who are just having fun and playing D&D and want to talk about it? The rules of this game have basically always been lovely and this thread is exhausting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Bhaal posted:Yeah, you silly people quantifying intangible, made up abstractions just for a game universe. "Hit Points"? "Levels"? People who try to quantify HP and make it realistic in D&D deserve just as much mockery. Classes actually used t be somewhat quantified in earlier editions when each class level had it's own name. Meat Street posted:Is there a thread for people who are just having fun and playing D&D and want to talk about it? The rules of this game have basically always been lovely and this thread is exhausting. Few actually enjoy D&D, they enjoy hanging out with their friends and using elves as an excuse. In light of this 5e is the best edition for not engaging with he game and just hanging out with your friends instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Few actually enjoy D&D, they enjoy hanging out with their friends and using elves as an excuse. In light of this 5e is the best edition for not engaging with he game and just hanging out with your friends instead. The only type of play that ever seemed to really work to any degree in 3E IMO was "player who knows a caster class really well breaks the game while everyone laughs". This can be a really fun type of game for your friends if the DM is cool with it, and most positive stories I've heard of the 3E era center around this type of play. 4E unceremoniously killed it with things like "balance" and "sound design", but it's made a comeback in 5E it sounds like, so I guess it's not really surprising that some people are happy about that? EDIT: I mean seriously the last two positive 3E stories I heard were "DM did a flyover with the Big Bad just to show him off for narrative reasons, a dragon that was metal for some reason, wizard dimension doored onto his back, polymorphed into a rust monster, and murdered him" and "Druid murdered mark by shrinking a cow and then convincing mark to wear it as a fashionable hat". 30.5 Days fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Oct 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Bhaal posted:How was I in any way defending 5e's encounter design or XP math? My last few posts I've been complaining about how difficult they've made it. I'm just saying the broader argument about tracking XP vs. going by milestones is one of those preference battles where it's useful to hear what other people prefer and why it works for them, but that's about it. Saying one method is the only good one boils down to saying "You're having fun THE WRONG WAY". I was just poking fun at how your 'unavoidable downside' of one system is just as true (if not more true) for the other system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
I was skimming through and saw the power "assess enemy" and read it as "assless enemy," which I believe would be a great feat or trait for a skeletal horde. Lacking asses, skeletons cannot get their butts kicked. This gives them a +5 bonus to resisting intimidation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I was skimming through and saw the power "assess enemy" and read it as "assless enemy," which I believe would be a great feat or trait for a skeletal horde. No, but they can get their bones rattled 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Meat Street posted:Is there a thread for people who are just having fun and playing D&D and want to talk about it? The rules of this game have basically always been lovely and this thread is exhausting. Sadly, not that I know of. At least not on SA ProfessorCirno posted:Few actually enjoy D&D, they enjoy hanging out with their friends and using elves as an excuse. In light of this 5e is the best edition for not engaging with he game and just hanging out with your friends instead. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
I hear if you go to RPGnet and put a "[+]" in your thread title that it keeps people from saying bad things about whatever it is you're talking about so maybe Ettin, with his magical moderator thread title changing powers, should make this a [+] thread for a while just to see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
Meat Street posted:Is there a thread for people who are just having fun and playing D&D and want to talk about it? The rules of this game have basically always been lovely and this thread is exhausting. What exactly do you want to discuss? Because there's plenty of people here who are interested in talking about character building, adventure building, how to houserule or rewrite things so that the game gets better, etc. If you just want to talk about how much fun you had playing D&D and what happened in your game, then guess what? You can, right here. Nobody's going to mock you for having fun playing They'll mock you for saying the game's well-designed, but it looks like you realise it's not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I hear if you go to RPGnet and put a "[+]" in your thread title that it keeps people from saying bad things about whatever it is you're talking about so maybe Ettin, with his magical moderator thread title changing powers, should make this a [+] thread for a while just to see what happens. Hell, the 4th edition thread specifically bars making GBS threads on it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 12:39
|
|
|
Since the game is actually out and not called D&D Next, why don't we just start a new thread for positive discussion of the game?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
D&D 5e - It's not Next (POLLYANNAS ONLY!) [+]
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Seems this thread is currently free for taking about it or talking about a different place for taking about it
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
You can't ask people to look at criticism of products they like, that's just cruel
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
I can't wait for the inevitable splatbooks with optional feats to let wizards concentrate on two spells at once. Right now I can only trap enemies in an indestructible wall of force or suffocate them to death with a horrifying poison cloud, and not both at once. I feel like i can get so little done. Fortunately my barbarian friend has just gained the ability to impose disadvantage on attacks against anyone but her 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:You can't ask people to look at criticism of products they like, that's just cruel Wow, why would people not want to wade through a morass of negativity about a game they are playing? Especially when said negative Nellies don't even play the game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Wow, why would people not want to wade through a morass of negativity about a game they are playing? Especially when said negative Nellies don't even play the game. criticism isn't negativity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
You could always just be the change you want to see. If there are some good design elements you want to discuss, I'd love to see that. Unfortunately, the uniquely "good" Next content boils down to the art and maybe advantage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Boing posted:I can't wait for the inevitable splatbooks with optional feats to let wizards concentrate on two spells at once. Right now I can only trap enemies in an indestructible wall of force or suffocate them to death with a horrifying poison cloud, and not both at once. I feel like i can get so little done. Fortunately my barbarian friend has just gained the ability to impose disadvantage on attacks against anyone but her Sounds like D&D isn't the game for you, as it has a storied history of powerful wizards bending reality to their whims. Perhaps Dungeon World is something you'd enjoy more. Realtalk though; Barbarians are friggin awesome, and I can't wait to play my new one this Friday. The new Rage mechanics are awesome, you're nigh unstoppable via damage (doubly so if you're a half-orc) and the ability to do all of this in a leather thong and shiny metal bracers is pretty sweet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:criticism isn't negativity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
moths posted:You could always just be the change you want to see. If there are some good design elements you want to discuss, I'd love to see that. Which is why nobody wants to talk about play experiences, things they want to do with the game, house rules, or pretty much anything other than how much the game sucks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Sounds like D&D isn't the game for you, as it has a storied history of powerful wizards bending reality to their whims. Perhaps Dungeon World is something you'd enjoy more. Wizards & Clerics get stupid powerful in DW, idk what you mean here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Especially when said negative Nellies don't even play the game. You know, except for how some of the most articulately and elaborately critical posters have and do play(ed) the game on top of crunching math. Just because you choose to pretend they haven't repeatedly said that, you don't make it true. Unless you rolled a wizard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Well there actually is a thread for discussing play experience, though it may be more geared toward PbP play since PBP is in its title. It is in The Game Room and is stickied so it should not be hard to find if you have actual play experience you want to talk about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Which is why nobody wants to talk about play experiences, things they want to do with the game, house rules, or pretty much anything other than how much the game sucks. I've seen a bit of that, but it usually prompts helpful suggestions of other games that do XYZ better. I mean, Next's slipshod design is always going to be the elephant in the room. And frankly, it's nice to see it discussed openly instead of endless positivity blurbs about how "real D&D is finally back!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
Tell me about the fighter options. I'm throwing together a dwarv(f)en fighter for a new campaign, and after looking over the options it seems like one is completely atrocious while two are reasonable. Eldritch Knight seems awesome, but if I'm going for a low-int fighter I'm not sure how many worthwhile buff options there are. Still, I'm glad it's there as an option. Battle Master also seems awesome, by giving fighters something to do other than "I hits it with my sword again." But Champion seems really boring. Is it just the "I don't know what to pick, that doesn't look terrible and gets crits" option? Is it designed as multi-class bait, where you go far enough in fighter to get the crits, then stop taking fighter? What am I missing? I'm probably going to end up running a Battle Master, possibly Eldritch Knight once I take another look at buff spells. Champion just seems atrocious, unless I'm missing something really obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
ascendance posted:it seems like all people want to talk about here is design elements and other things that are broken and/or suck. I was mentioning the hand crossbow fighter build to some of my group that will be starting a Next game shortly. I think I have another 2-3 people on board for a Ferguson cop squad game, which is going to be hilarious to play and we are going to have a blast. Unless of course we don't roll correctly, in which case I don't know what we are going to do. Maybe Skeletown or something.  Yahoo, fun times will be had! Next is still a poorly designed game and everyone who contributed to it should be embarrassed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I was mentioning the hand crossbow fighter build to some of my group that will be starting a Next game shortly. I think I have another 2-3 people on board for a Ferguson cop squad game, which is going to be hilarious to play and we are going to have a blast. Unless of course we don't roll correctly, in which case I don't know what we are going to do. Maybe Skeletown or something. Do you guys roll for stats or use arrays? My DM insists on using 4d6 drop lowest, but he understands that low rolls can gimp a character and lets us rolls sets of attributes until we get one we like.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:Do you guys roll for stats or use arrays? My DM insists on using 4d6 drop lowest, but he understands that low rolls can gimp a character and lets us rolls sets of attributes until we get one we like. We've been using the point buy system, and it's worked out really well. It makes adding stats and giving yourself a feat every four levels a hard decision.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Tell me about the fighter options. If you want to go E-Knight, you're better off just taking wizard levels instead for better spells/spell progression, or ideally rolling a Bard from the outset. Battlemaster is okay-ish (your strongest powers are probably Goading and Menacing in terms of control) but you'll probably want short rests to be shorter than an hour so you can get your dice back so you can use your abilities more. You may want to look at Monk as an alternative, since you can start Stunning everything you hit at level 5, which is much better control. Champion is the worst and most disappointing thing in the game, you're not missing anything. Literally no one should ever take it or consider it an option, multiclass or otherwise; it's bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Boing posted:I can't wait for the inevitable splatbooks with optional feats to let wizards concentrate on two spells at once. Right now I can only trap enemies in an indestructible wall of force or suffocate them to death with a horrifying poison cloud, and not both at once. I feel like i can get so little done. Fortunately my barbarian friend has just gained the ability to impose disadvantage on attacks against anyone but her In fairness, Mearls has outright said that the one concentration spell at a time thing is something the design teams feels is a critical balancing element, and he sees no possibility of it being relaxed in the future. Does that mean that it won't be? Of course not. But there at least appears to be a recognition within the design team that something needed to be done to tone down caster supremacy, and even if things are still imbalanced, they can't remove the concentration limits without completely nuking any semblance of balance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Tell me about the fighter options. Champion is intended to be very simple and accessible. I think it's being generous to suggest it even for multi-classing purposes; the build just doesn't have a lot going on, frankly. Giving it the best-possible-spin, I think it's intended for people who are genuinely intimidated by a lot of mechanical decisions to make at the table. (Worst possible spin: I don't know why they wasted the page space.) For Battlemasters: Personally I think they're pretty good at low-to-mid levels, but at higher levels they have some issues. The core of the problem is that the maneuvers scale terribly, and it's not like there are "high level" maneuvers - the first few maneuvers you pick at level 3 will probably be your best, and every time you get to pick new ones you'll be picking from a list of progressively worse options that you've already considered and discarded multiple times. So you don't get a clear sense of "wow, my guy can do all these new awesome things!" It doesn't help that the maneuvers aren't very well balanced against one another, so that the first 3-4 you pick will just be straight-up more useful than the rest. I don't really know about Eldritch Knights; haven't played alongside or run a game for anyone playing one yet. If this is a campaign starting at or going to pretty high levels I probably wouldn't play a fighter at all; once you hit higher levels I think bards, monks, paladins, and barbarians all end up accomplishing some version of what fighters can do but in much cooler ways. For a low-to-mid level campaign I think the Battlemaster is a pretty solid choice, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I was mentioning the hand crossbow fighter build to some of my group that will be starting a Next game shortly. I think I have another 2-3 people on board for a Ferguson cop squad game, which is going to be hilarious to play and we are going to have a blast. Unless of course we don't roll correctly, in which case I don't know what we are going to do. Maybe Skeletown or something. Edit: If I did a Great Weapon Paladin with the polearm feat, what would be my best Oath choice?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
Thanks folks. I think we're starting at first level and moving up, and I have no idea how long the campaign lasts. We might get high enough level that it's somewhat boring, but we'll cross that bridge when we get there. I was thinking of running a Paladin or Barbarian instead but didn't spend much time on that. Paladin wasn't my favorite because my character concept isn't really tied up in a particular god. Barbarian I just hadn't thought about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Its cool that whenever something is proven to be horrifically and irreparably wrong with D&D Next its supporters play the "this thread is nothing but negativity!" card. I'm sure you can go to almost any other rpg forum and find a thread about 5e where saying anything bad about it will result in being banned if that's what you're looking for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Thanks folks. I think we're starting at first level and moving up, and I have no idea how long the campaign lasts. We might get high enough level that it's somewhat boring, but we'll cross that bridge when we get there. I was thinking of running a Paladin or Barbarian instead but didn't spend much time on that. Paladin wasn't my favorite because my character concept isn't really tied up in a particular god. Barbarian I just hadn't thought about. I don't have the PHB, but I was under the impression that paladins were a lot more flexible in this edition? I thought that was mentioned at some point in the thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:I don't have the PHB, but I was under the impression that paladins were a lot more flexible in this edition? I thought that was mentioned at some point in the thread Much more. They seem to be more aligned with a philosophy than with any particular god.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:I don't have the PHB, but I was under the impression that paladins were a lot more flexible in this edition? I thought that was mentioned at some point in the thread Yeah, they don't really need to pick out a god or domain or anything. Power Player posted:What's the skeleton gimmick again? Skeleton gimmick is a caster casting Animate Dead to have a skeleton horde. I'd lean toward Devotion just because of the "+Cha to hit" thing it has, but I also haven't looked much at what each Oath gets as spells so I'd look at those and see what you prefer. Honestly not wowed much by most of the Oath-specific features.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Talmonis posted:Much more. They seem to be more aligned with a philosophy than with any particular god. I've always wanted to try a paladin but the strict alignment code and the general experience of my group is that playing a paladin (in previous editions) is basically going to slow the game to a chug as the paladin and the other players argue about codes of chivalry and blah blah blah blah. I just wanna be a harbinger of justice against those who oppose me 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:44
|
|