|
Why do these things have to be presented as tables you roll on rather than just a list of rooms that you assign in a way that makes sense, goddamn right there on the first page it says rolling randomly is probably a dumb idea
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Darwinism posted:Why do these things have to be presented as tables you roll on rather than just a list of rooms that you assign in a way that makes sense, goddamn right there on the first page it says rolling randomly is probably a dumb idea DM's Choice  Why does the crab robot have a lever chart, but have NO random rolling guide? Because it's always been that way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Half the stuff from the DMG so far could have been presented as a PDF errata to the 1e DMG, with only the ACs and damage changed. Gygax has probably written as much of it as Mearls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Did that searchable online compendium of spells ever go back online? Or does anyone have a suitable replacement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:Why do these things have to be presented as tables you roll on rather than just a list of rooms that you assign in a way that makes sense, goddamn right there on the first page it says rolling randomly is probably a dumb idea AD&D was formatted like that because you were supposed to be able to generate a completely random hex/dungeon crawl game on the fly if you wanted to (although you certainly didn't have to and the book contains several paragraphs about the pros and cons). It didn't necessarily produce sane results, but it consistently produced something playable. I guess we'll have to wait for the book to be published to see if Next has actually done something like that, but even if it's present I'm not holding out much hope it will produce playable dungeons given what we've seen in (eg) the CR list. Moinkmaster posted:Why does the crab robot have a lever chart, but have NO random rolling guide? Because it's always been that way. It's stupid cargo-culted tradition with a whole lot of  , but it's still tradition. Take that, haters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
And everyone knows that tradition for the sake of tradition is the most important thing, that's why 3E barely resembled 2E AD&D
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:Why do these things have to be presented as tables you roll on rather than just a list of rooms that you assign in a way that makes sense, goddamn right there on the first page it says rolling randomly is probably a dumb idea AFAIK, it goes back to the idea that the DM was supposed to be this impartial arbiter of rules back when the hobby was new and nobody really knew how to DM beyond simply making sure the rules were implemented. If you weren't working off of a module/pre-written adventure, you were supposed to use the tables to create a dungeon out of thin air. It's also tied in with the idea that people should be able to play the same characters across multiple tables/DMs - random generation tables meant that you weren't going to have Jim the Monty Haul DM showering you with magical items everywhere and throwing off your character's balance whenever you took him to play with Bob and Rick as your alternate DMs. By now we know better - the dungeon should be interesting, it should be more or less customized to the players, and so on, but generation tables are still random anyway because that's how it's always been done. EDIT: 4E's DMG also makes the case that random generation is something you can use to make a "DM-less" game if all you really want to is to run combats. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
One of the best Paranoia handouts was the Mk IV warbot control panel, which was essentially the space shuttle cockpit diagram where everything was numbered. Players would say "Ok, I move lever #41" and the GM asks "Do you push it or pull it?" Then after ten seconds of thinking, a player says they push it, the GM checks a bunch of charts, and says it sounds like something fell off. Did Mearls seriously try to put that lightning back in a bottle?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Cassa posted:Did that searchable online compendium of spells ever go back online? Or does anyone have a suitable replacement. I use hardcodex.ru.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:Why do these things have to be presented as tables you roll on rather than just a list of rooms that you assign in a way that makes sense, goddamn right there on the first page it says rolling randomly is probably a dumb idea If you're designing a "death trap" dungeon then over a third of your rooms are going to be guardrooms. That means that for three consecutive rooms, there's about a 4% chance that they will all be guardrooms. If your deathtrap has 12 rooms, then there's something like a 20-25% chance that you end up with a guardroom to guard another guardroom that's guarding a third guardroom. gradenko_2000 posted:EDIT: 4E's DMG also makes the case that random generation is something you can use to make a "DM-less" game if all you really want to is to run combats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
After defeating the dragon, and his bodyguards, and his bodyguards' bodyguards, you open the chest to reveal... [rolls dice]... a healing potion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I'm only half-joking here, because that honestly sounds pretty loving fun. Well yeah, that sounds exactly like Basic or OD&D or full random AD&D, which were all fun games. Im not sure how fun they'd remain if character creation took longer than 10 minutes or if anyone started taking it more seriously than "not at all seriously".
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
I Am The Scum posted:After defeating the dragon, and his bodyguards, and his bodyguards' bodyguards, you open the chest to reveal... [rolls dice]... a healing potion. As well as 1d10 bodyguards to protect it. No, Steve, I don't know how they were inside the dragon's chest, but dice don't lie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 08:19
|
|
|
A lot of the fun of the random dungeon thing is collectively building a stupid-funny story out of the results. A good way to handle that is to say "I dunno Steve, why don't you tell us?" Just saying "there's 5 orcs here to fight, gently caress knows why" is dumb and boring and also runs directly against the advice given about running earlier versions of the game. e: AD&D's monster-based random treasure tables were there specifically to make sure that you couldn't fight a dragon and receive a bent copper piece as treasure. Like, if you actually read the DMG it tells you to place treasures carefully and use the random treasure tables for random encounters. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 08:28 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Well yeah, that sounds exactly like Basic or OD&D or full random AD&D, which were all fun games. Im not sure how fun they'd remain if character creation took longer than 10 minutes or if anyone started taking it more seriously than "not at all seriously". Babylon Astronaut fucked around with this message at 08:58 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:BECMI by the book random actually works pretty well oddly enough. Some of the Judge's Guild stuff was too complicated to roll at the table though. Dungeon level wandering monsters were balanced almost perfectly. The gorgon is the main one that sticks out as above the curve. BECMI (at least the BE parts) is a pretty well-done game overall and holds up as a very fun, pretty balanced experience today. As long as you play it by the book, that is. Try to tell an epic fantasy story in it, and it's poo poo. Go down dungeons for the first 3 levels and then progress to going down deeper dungeons and maybe into a wilderness on your way there, and you're golden.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
So... Assassin Rogues score an automatic critical hit on any successful attack against a surprised opponent. Here's a question for you all: just when does the "surprised" label wear off? The PHB discusses surprise on page 189 and in the second paragraph it makes clear who is surprised; simply compare stealth and perception. Then the third paragraph tells us what being "surprised" does: it imposes restrictions that last until after your first turn. But those are only the standard consequences of surprise. The actual "surprised" label doesn't seem to disappear. This usually won't matter because it doesn't do anything anymore, but for Assassins... The above is of course somewhat tongue in cheek. I'm not so stupid that I honestly think this is how it works. But I'm a little disappointed to find yet again an instance of lazy writing where I have to do the writers' jobs for them. And back when I first got into D&D, back when I was around 14 and without English as my native language, yeah I totally would have thought that this is how it works. Assassins are just that good that they can exploit an opening and keep it opened up all fight long. Why did they even remove the surprise round? That's been a D&D tradition since the '70s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
I think this showed up earlier in the thread, but more time will be spent reading that rule than ever employing it at the table. Especially since more-than-half of the monsters need to be surprised for any of them to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
I personally enjoy things like Barb unarmored AC and Mage Armor setting your AC to a level plus your Dex. Mage Armor says it stops working with a shield. The Barb one doesn't say anything of the kind, and makes no mention of if shields will add or not. I mean, I can assume from prior editions and it not saying NO that it will, but gee golly, that isn't very helpful. I thought it was casters who were supposed to be broken and strange out of the gate, not the melee classes. I mean seriously, just change it to "sets AC to X plus Dex bonus (plus shield bonus if applicable)." That's it! five words!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Moinkmaster posted:I personally enjoy things like Barb unarmored AC and Mage Armor setting your AC to a level plus your Dex. Mage Armor says it stops working with a shield. The Barb one doesn't say anything of the kind, and makes no mention of if shields will add or not. I mean, I can assume from prior editions and it not saying NO that it will, but gee golly, that isn't very helpful. I thought it was casters who were supposed to be broken and strange out of the gate, not the melee classes. quote:Unarmored Defense mango sentinel fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:That line is completely extraneous unless the shield adds its AC bonus. It's extremely clear what it means. This was covered earlier in the thread, but it is not extraneous since abilities that require a shield can still be used even if the shield does not contribute AC. Unless there's something in the rules text of a shield that distinguishes it from the rules text of a suit of armor, I would rule that it does not, since there is no indication that it does.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:So... Assassin Rogues score an automatic critical hit on any successful attack against a surprised opponent. If you're talking about Death Strike, then not even. It's not an automatic critical hit because you still have to pass through AC. It's not an automatic critical on any successful attack because it can still try to make a CON save. I mean, even if you were absolutely right and the surprised "tag" never goes away because they never specific how and when it goes away, Death Strike is just "whenever you hit an enemy, the enemy has to make a CON save; double the damage of your attack if the target fails its save" Another similar boondoggle is the game having the Loading mechanic for crossbows, never elucidating just how Loading is actually performed, or how a crossbow is reloaded, or if you need a free hand to (re)load, which means the third clause of the Crossbow Expert feat: "When you use the Attack action and attack with a one-handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a loaded hand crossbow you are holding." can mean everything or nothing depending on how you/the DM decides to read it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If you're talking about Death Strike, then not even. It's not an automatic critical hit because you still have to pass through AC. It's not an automatic critical on any successful attack because it can still try to make a CON save. No, I'm not talking about Death Strike. I'm talking about Assassinate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 13:56
|
|
|
I played a shortish oneshot over IRC on the weekend. We were level 6. I was a Moon Druid and I was ridiculously tanky. The ability to go "oh, I'm taking damage, guess I'm a polar bear now" and get an extra 42 hit points and being able to expend a spell slot to heal myself 1d8/level ended up effectively meaning that I couldn't be killed by stuff that was flattening other PCs. My bear form was killed at one stage, but since I pop back up at my original hp and then turn straight back into a bear, who cares? 1d8+5 and 2d6+5 damage each round is pretty helpful too. I didn't actually cast a single spell, being a self-healing bear was good enough. One problem I did have was the question of whether or not my proficiency bonus applies when in bear form. The DM went with "yes" because we couldn't find anything about it. e: ...and I just found it now, right where it should have been. So I guess I should have been using the bear's +7 to hit instead of +7 +3? PHB page 67 posted:Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast, but you retain your alignment, personality, and Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. You also retain all of your skill and saving throw proficiencies, in addition to gaining those of the creature. If the creature has the same proficiency as you and the bonus in its stat block is higher than yours, use the creature’s bonus in stead of yours. But what's a Polar Bear's proficiency bonus? It gets a +5 to-hit from its strength, but it's total bonus is +7 to-hit. I'd have to assume that the extra +2 comes from its "proficiency bonus", but that's not actually in the stat block. Is it the same as its CR, which is also 2 (comparing other beasts, it seems not)? Does the bear not have a proficiency bonus, so my number should have been +5 (Str) + 3 (my bonus)? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
You asked your DM and they said +10 so I guess it's +10.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:But what's a Polar Bear's proficiency bonus? A monster's proficiency bonus is determined by its challenge rating, which you can find in the Monster Manual on page 8. But basically it's the exact same table as the one in the PHB, just extrapolated to include higher and lower levels. It's always at least +2 and can climb up to +9. The rules for transformation don't say you retain your own proficiency in attacks though, only skills and saving throws. So for the bear's attack, you just use the bear's attack.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:You asked your DM and they said +10 so I guess it's +10. Well yeah, that's what we did. In the post-game discussion, we tried to figure out the right way though. Being a nigh-invincible murderbear was fun and all, but it was also kind of stealing the spotlight and making fights somewhat easier than they should probably have been. Sage Genesis posted:A monster's proficiency bonus is determined by its challenge rating, which you can find in the Monster Manual on page 8. But basically it's the exact same table as the one in the PHB, just extrapolated to include higher and lower levels. It's always at least +2 and can climb up to +9. Thanks, that looks right. I'm sure that if I'd sat down last night and poked through the books I would have come to the same conclusion, but trying to do it while actually playing isn't as easy as it could be. So, all that said, it was a pretty fun game although I still hate IRC as a gaming medium. The OP-ness of the moon druid wasn't really in the attacks, more in the huge hp pool you end up with when you transform, and the ability to heal yourself. I guess it's supposed to be a powerful tool, but it manages to effectively more than triple the hp I can burn through in one fight before I start using the self-healing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Question on multiclassing: The PHB doesn't specify if gaining the benefits of a class requires class levels or just levels. For instance I'm statting a 6 fighter / 4 barbarian warrior chief and I don't know if the cumulative 10 levels would grant him the second tier of the Totem Warrior path or if he needs 6 Barbarian class levels. Anyone know specifically? The book is
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
Pretty sure the only thing that's based on total aggregate character level is your Proficiency Bonus, and the effect of some Cantrips.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:Question on multiclassing: The PHB doesn't specify if gaining the benefits of a class requires class levels or just levels. For instance I'm statting a 6 fighter / 4 barbarian warrior chief and I don't know if the cumulative 10 levels would grant him the second tier of the Totem Warrior path or if he needs 6 Barbarian class levels. Anyone know specifically? The book is Class levels unless I'm gravely mistaken. It'd be really overpowered the other way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Class levels unless I'm gravely mistaken. It'd be really overpowered the other way. I wrote the stats as if it were based on aggregate levels and yes, it looks super loving OP. My bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
CaptainPsyko posted:and the effect of some Cantrips. I was under the impression this might only be based on caster levels..? But that might be from someone in my homegame mis/not-reading the rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:I was under the impression this might only be based on caster levels..? But that might be from someone in my homegame mis/not-reading the rules. There's no such thing as a 'caster level' in 5E. You have your proficiency bonus. You have the level of slot the spell is cast from. And you have the relevant stat. Cantrips are always cast from a '0' level slot, but scale independently with character level in some cases, where it is specifically noted within the Cantrips description. (See, for example, Eldritch Blast.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
Tales Trees Tell is alright. I know this is the edition of ROLEPLAYING but I was kind of upset that murking a people-eating witch was not the best option.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
So I'm lined up to run a one-shot and possibly an unrelated campaign in this system, and I'm kind of excited about it. I mean, I know the system is ridiculously busted, but I've got Stockholm syndrome or something. Every time I come across something in the rules that seems completely, utterly stupid, instead of getting upset I get a little knowing smile, like watching an uncoordinated child trying to ride a bike for the first time. Sure, they don't really know what they're doing, but they've got heart and you really want them to succeed. Actually, I think I might just have bad taste. I got Dragon Age 2 for six bucks this weekend and have been really liking it, and I've already burned through the first three Legend of Drizzt books with the Icewind Dale trilogy sitting on my shelf.* * The LoD books are surprisingly awesome, thanks to whoever recommended them to me. I was skeptical after reading years of horror stories about dual-scimitar-wielding drow PCs in games, but Salvatore seems to really know how to write a fun, light fantasy romp.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
There's an ENWorld thread about someone that reportedly managed to get a DMG from a store that broke the release date. Picking out the information:quote:I quickly glanced through the customization options and I've noticed that they are very brief. For example, under the rest options, it merely says that you can make short rest 5 minutes and long rest 1 hour, but there is little discussion of the ramifications. There are suggestions to limit spell recovery after 1 hour, but I seem to remember that we were told that we would see stuff like second wind being changed to temp HP. quote:Yes[, there is an optional rule for spell points]. You get a number of spell points (and the maximum level that you can cast) depending on your level. You get 4 at 1st level, 6 at 2nd, 14 at 3rd, 64 at 10th level and 133 at 20th level. You can only cast a spell of each level per day at 6th and above, no matter how many points you have. quote:There are rules for recurring expenses, crafting magical items, building a stronghold, running a business, carousing, selling magic items, gaining renown, performing sacred rites, sowing rumors and training to gain levels. There are some suggestions to create further downtime activities. quote:There are rules for using squares and hexes which include flanking, more precise rules for cover and facing (the 1-2 diagonal optional rule is also present). quote:Treasure tables are used according to the CR of the creature. quote:No gestalt rules or further options for multiclassing. quote:The rules [for creating magic items] are optional. A character needs a formula and possibly special materials and locations (left to the DM). Common items cost 100 GP and require 3rd level; uncommon 500 GP and 3rd level; rare 5,000 GP and 6th level; very rare 50,0000 GP and 11th level; legendary 500,000 GP and 17th level. quote:Healing potions: Unfortunately the OP went to bed before they could tell the forum about monster creation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
I have a pretty big stack of dice, but I don't have 10d4. What the gently caress? Spell points sound like they will be super annoying and probably garbage in other ways, but that's in keeping with the finest D&D traditions so whatever. I'll be interested to see the morale rules. I liked them in BECMI, but I can't think of any other D&D where they were a good and fun addition to the rules. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Edit: I am tired and bad at first grade arithmetic. This was a dumb post.
Chevy Slyme fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
...No it doesn't? 10d4 has a minimum of 10. 4d10 has a minimum of 4. Plus the curve is so wild it would be completely different in practice. What stores are supposed to have the DMG on Black Friday? Did I just imagine that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
It's just... 10d4? My whole table probably doesn't have that present on a normal night.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 05:58
|
|