|
goldjas posted:I have, twice even. It's fun in a way, but it is really silly. You have to go full crazy with it though and only take it about as seriously as an episode of DBZ or something similar. I think 4E epic worked a lot better actually because while it had some of the same insanity, the combat still more or less worked like it did at low levels just...more. Back in 1ste Lichs were super powerful. Demilichs were super powerful as well and a step above liches but not as big a step as they were in 3e for example. As I pointed out there is pretty much two Demilichs in the Monster Manual. A Demilich that is created when a Lich stops eating souls and eventually decays because of that and the Acererak style true Demilichs which are considered to be just as if not more powerful then normal Liches. AN ANGRY MOTHER posted:I'm just starting out and trying to figure out how my wizard works in combat and it's either vague or buried in flavour, but would a cantrip like Ray of Frost roll proficiency against the target's AC or does it automatically hit? Would a spell that the target can roll a save against, like Burning Hands, also need to pass a prof check? If Ray of Frost requires a prof check and has the chance of rolling a 1 with no modifier why not just have a light crossbow for the guaranteed damage? Google is pretty sparse on this kind of info but I'm probably phrasing it wrong. You are overcompensating things. It says in the spell how it works. Ray of Frost Evocation cantrip Casting Time: 1 action Range: 60 feet Components: V, S Duration: Instantaneous A frigid beam of blue-white light streaks toward a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, it takes 1d8 cold damage, and its speed is reduced by 10 feet until the start of your next turn. The spell’s damage increases by 1d8 when you reach 5th level (2d8), 11th level (3d8), and 17th level (4d8). Your attack bonus with a spell attack equals your spellcasting ability modifier + your proficiency bonus. So you are just making an attack roll against his AC nothing more nothing less. You have a slightly better chance of hitting with it over a Crossbow given that you will probably using your highest stat for the roll. I don't even think there is a thing in the game called a Proficiency check. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 08:08 on Nov 12, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:08 |
|
|
AN ANGRY MOTHER posted:I'm just starting out and trying to figure out how my wizard works in combat and it's either vague or buried in flavour, but would a cantrip like Ray of Frost roll proficiency against the target's AC or does it automatically hit? The spell description (PHB page 271) says "Make a ranged spell attack against the target", so you make a ranged spell attack - "Your attack bonus is equal to your spellcasting ability modifier + your proficiency bonus" (PHB page 206). AN ANGRY MOTHER posted:Would a spell that the target can roll a save against, like Burning Hands, also need to pass a prof check? No. Burning hands hits everything in its area of effect, and affected creatures get to save for half damage. AN ANGRY MOTHER posted:If Ray of Frost requires a prof check and has the chance of rolling a 1 with no modifier why not just have a light crossbow for the guaranteed damage? Google is pretty sparse on this kind of info but I'm probably phrasing it wrong. How are you getting "guaranteed damage" from a light crossbow attack? Admittedly, I might have misread something here but a light crossbow makes normal ranged attacks and those don't get any guaranteed damage. I'm pretty sure I don't understand the question. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Nov 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
AN ANGRY MOTHER posted:I'm just starting out and trying to figure out how my wizard works in combat and it's either vague or buried in flavour, but would a cantrip like Ray of Frost roll proficiency against the target's AC or does it automatically hit? Would a spell that the target can roll a save against, like Burning Hands, also need to pass a prof check? If Ray of Frost requires a prof check and has the chance of rolling a 1 with no modifier why not just have a light crossbow for the guaranteed damage? Google is pretty sparse on this kind of info but I'm probably phrasing it wrong. If the spell mentions using a "spell attack", then you need to roll [1d20 + Proficiency + WIS/INT/CHA modifier] and beat the target's AC for the spell to hit. Which modifier to use depends on which attribute your class uses for spellcasting. A Wizard uses INT, a Bard uses CHA, a Cleric uses WIS, etc. If the spell mentions using a "ranged spell attack", then you can roll to hit a target from range. If the spell mentions using a "melee spell attack", then you have to be within melee range/5 feet. Ray of Frost says "Make a ranged spell attack", so what I mentioned above applies: roll [1d20 + Proficiency + INT modifier] and if the result is equal to or higher than the target's AC, the target takes 1d8 cold damage and the target's speed is reduced by 10 feet until the start of your next turn. === In contrast, if the spell mentions making a "saving throw", then the spell will generally "just hit", and then the target needs to make a make a saving throw and get equal to or higher than a set Difficulty Class in order to mitigate or avoid its effects. A saving throw is a roll of [1d20 + attribute modifier]. The spell's description will tell you which attribute modifier to use: Fireball says to use DEX, ostensibly to represent jumping/moving to avoid the blast. It's also possible to be proficient in specific saving throw attributes - a Wizard gets to add his Proficiency when rolling to save against spells that use the INT and WIS modifiers. The DC, or the number that the saving throw has to beat, is [8 + (the caster's) Proficiency + WIS/INT/CHA modifier]. Which modifier to use depends on which attribte your class uses for spellcasting. Acid Splash says "A target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 acid damage." If it succeeds on the saving throw, then nothing happens. If it fails the saving throw, it takes 1d6 acid damage Fireball says "A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one." This is different from Acid Splash because damage is still dealt even on a successful save, but less. Yet other spells, like Charm, simply inflict effects, and usually this will be a binary result similar to Acid Splash - either the target fails the saving throw and the spell takes effect, or it does not. EDIT: Burning Hands works the same way as Fireball - everything in a 15-foot cone must make a saving throw using their DEX modifier (and their Proficiency bonus if they are proficient in DEX saves). If the result is equal to or higher than [8 + your Wizard's Proficiency + INT modifier] then they take half of 3d6 damage. If they failed the save/the result is less, then they take the full 3d6 damage. === To be clear, if the spell calls for a "spell attack", then the caster rolls a d20 and tries to beat the target's AC; if the spell calls for a "saving throw" then the target rolls a d20 and tries to beat the caster's spell DC. Comparing Ray of Frost against a light crossbow, it's [d20 + Proficiency + INT modifier vs AC] for Ray of Frost, and then it's [d20 + Proficiency + DEX modifier vs AC] for the light crossbow. Ray of Frost is 1d8 damage + slow, whereas a light crossbow hit is 1d8 damage + DEX modifier. Neither is "guaranteed" damage, although whether the specific damage-per-round of Ray of Frost is higher than the light crossbow is dependent on your attribute allocation. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Nov 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:How are you getting "guaranteed damage" from a light crossbow attack? Admittedly, I might have misread something here but a light crossbow makes normal ranged attacks and those don't get any guaranteed damage. Your damaging spells will generally use a spell attack roll OR the enemy can roll to resist. Outside of unusual circumstance, your wizard doesn't want to use a crossbow. Mechanically using Ray of Frost is the same as attacking with a crossbow, you just use more bonuses for your spell and do better damage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
The reason some spells in D&D make you roll to hit and other spells make the targets roll to dodge and yet other spells work in different, completely batshit ways is because it was all made up as it went along, the rules were band-aid fixes for specific scenarios that didn't make sense and it's now very clear that they weren't thought through with any consistency of theme or application. 4E completely fixed this and then 5E decided to unfix it again because it's traditional D&D.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Sounds like he thought he had to roll a hit, then beat a save if it hit. Yeah, I can see how you'd mess it up if you hadn't played much/any D&D. I really wish the language used was more newbie-friendly (ie, clear), but learning D&D by reading a clearly-written rulebook that presented concepts in a logical and fun way wouldn't be traditional now, would it?  Pictured: Not traditional Dungeons & Dragons. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 12:03 on Nov 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:As I pointed out there is pretty much two Demilichs in the Monster Manual. A Demilich that is created when a Lich stops eating souls and eventually decays because of that and the Acererak style true Demilichs which are considered to be just as if not more powerful then normal Liches. Other than Next, which MM has the weaker demilich?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
demi-prefix 1.half; half-size. "demisemiquaver" 2.partially; in an inferior degree. "demigod" So if 5e is the only edition where demilichs are weaker then Lichs, then it's the only edition that is using the prefix demi correctly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
moths posted:Other than Next, which MM has the weaker demilich? I dunno. Has anyone tweeted Mearls yet about this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
moths posted:Other than Next, which MM has the weaker demilich? That is up to your DM.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Clinton1011 posted:
It's this one, although only the lich's corporeal form is diminished. It's grown old (and powerful!) enough that all which remains of its initial form is a collection of relics - it's like a profane "saint" of necromantic magic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Clinton1011 posted:demi-prefix The other ones are using demi as in half-size. Old-style demiliches have managed to compress their arcane might into just a skull, which is a lot harder to hit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
goldjas posted:I have, twice even. It's fun in a way, but it is really silly. You have to go full crazy with it though and only take it about as seriously as an episode of DBZ or something similar. I think 4E epic worked a lot better actually because while it had some of the same insanity, the combat still more or less worked like it did at low levels just...more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:information on spells Thanks this really cleared it up! And thanks to everyone else, too. As for the last part, I shouldn't have said guaranteed, I meant a higher guaranteed minimum with dex modifier for the xbow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
A demilich is a dark wizard who took on the form of Demi Moore to achieve immortality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Clearly instead of 100% Lich a Demilich is 50% Lich 50% ???.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Dragon, probably. Or human. One of those.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:Clearly instead of 100% Lich a Demilich is 50% Lich 50% ???. They're half lich and half ling, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:If by "more" you mean "two goddamn hours more" then I agree. 4e epic combat took wayyyyy too long and, combined with the plainly obvious (even back then) fact that 5e wasn't going to be what I was looking for, was the reason I started making Strike in the first place. Where can I find the Strike rules?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
In the Strike! thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3656713 In other news, they also previewed how to create races: http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/DMG_286.pdf It boils down, apparently, to 'gently caress I dunno, make something up I guess'. Also, Eldarin (which for some reason are in the DMG and) which, precisely as expected, are as unique and magical as 'your racial ability is casting this wizard spell once per rest. gently caress. Off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:In the Strike! thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3656713 My favorite part is that the race they chose to represent creating a whole new race? Aasimar. And they specifically state that they're just gonna try and mirror the tiefling abilities. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Also, Eldarin (which for some reason are in the DMG) This will go well with half the races in the PHB being out of alphabetical order with the other half because *faaaart*
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Another DM preview, this time for wondrous magical items http://io9.com/some-wondrous-magic-items-from-the-5th-edition-dungeon-1657365274
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Another DM preview, this time for wondrous magical items Mayonnaise-generating magic item. I don't think any more needs to be said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
An uncommon item that can produce anything you want as long as it's useless.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:An uncommon item that can produce anything you want as long as it's useless. What is a Table Top Role Playing Game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:Mayonnaise-generating magic item.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:Mayonnaise-generating magic item. I feel like you can't pour two gallons of mayo out of a jar in a minute. Immersion ruined.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
S.J. posted:What is a Table Top Role Playing Game? I can't get enough of this post!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 08:38
|
|
|
Apparatus of Kwalish starts taking crush damage at 900 feet underwater but doesn't take extra crush damage from going deeper than that. Immersion ruined.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Apparatus of Kwalish starts taking crush damage at 900 feet underwater but doesn't take extra crush damage from going deeper than that. Has anyone ever used that thing in a game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 09:50
|
|
|
Boing posted:The reason some spells in D&D make you roll to hit and other spells make the targets roll to dodge and yet other spells work in different, completely batshit ways is because it was all made up as it went along, the rules were band-aid fixes for specific scenarios that didn't make sense and it's now very clear that they weren't thought through with any consistency of theme or application. 4E completely fixed this and then 5E decided to unfix it again because it's traditional D&D. At first I thought it was supposed to be a class feature: a caster gets to select a target's AC, or a specific saving throw, depending on what the target is weak against (meanwhile a martial class always has to go through AC, or maybe an opposed skill check), but you're probably right that it's more because some spells used saving throws, some spells used "touch attacks" or checked against AC, other spells "just happened" and then 5E takes a page from more contemporary game design and actually gives casters "at-will" spells and those have to check against AC too and it's all this confusing mishmash because Fireball always has to be a save against half-damage I'm kind of more annoyed that saving throws are still an inversion of the "attacker rolls against the target's DC" when 4E already fixed that and 3.5 had a variant rule for converting it over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 09:51
|
|
|
Amulet of Planes: Make an Intelligence check. On a failure, either restart the campaign or watch your DM get angry. EDIT: Outside of "FILLER, GOD PLEASE, FILLER," is there a purpose for that chart and the "ONLY TWO LEVERS" thing for the Apparatus? Is there any DM who looks at that and sincerely goes "yes, this is a thing I will be enforcing." ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 12:15 on Nov 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:11
|
|
|
Pulsedragon posted:Has anyone ever used that thing in a game? Yes, me. In AD&D. We were 13 or 14 years old and it's a magic crab-tank-robot-submarine. Do the math. e: Because of the way AD&D artifacts work, ours was a magic plane travelling crab-tank-robot-submarine which could shoot fireballs. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Nov 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Amulet of Planes: Make an Intelligence check. On a failure, either restart the campaign or watch your DM get angry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
Holy poo poo they wasted 2/3 of a page on copy and pasting the apparatus chart from the 1e DMG.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
Good thing it was in 1e! Hopefully that means some OSR folks could tell me what the ~neutral positions~ on poo poo like lights on/off, windows open/closed, or claws and legs extended/retracted are? What does it all mean?  This is important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Good thing it was in 1e! Hopefully that means some OSR folks could tell me what the ~neutral positions~ on poo poo like lights on/off, windows open/closed, or claws and legs extended/retracted are? What does it all mean? It's just so that if you've triggered "legs out", "go forward", "lights on", and "windows open" you can't tell which levers you actually pulled to make that happen or easily reverse what you did. The whole thing was AD&D as gently caress*. Player 1: "Go backwards! Go backwards! We're going to run the wizard over!" Player 2: "Which lever was backwards?" Player 1: "I don't loving know, Dave has the notes and he's not here this week!" DM: "Well, which lever are you pulling?" Player 3: "You'd better not run me over" Player 2: "Umm.... lever 5?" DM: "Two claw attacks on the wizard." Player 3 (deceased): "gently caress you guys." That's if you didn't completely overlook it in the first place because it's a campaign-shattering artifact that's sitting there looking like a plain old barrel. *Which is to say, it was fun and all in AD&D at age 13. It doesn't look like much fun now, and I don't know anybody who would want to play in the style where it would be fun any more. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 12:41 on Nov 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Oh, thanks, that makes sense -- in a 'well, this item makes no sense' way. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:08 |
|
|
Pulsedragon posted:Has anyone ever used that thing in a game? Me. I described it as part of a pile of dragon loot just to see if the PCs would do anything interesting with it. The answer: Not really. Also I've had it used by a DM as a link in a chain of fetch-quests.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 12:49
|
|
