|
Warlocks aren't in the Rules Compendium, AFAIK they debuted in 3e. (And were house-banned everywhere because OMG they can do a thing ALL DAY LONG.)
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
Guys, There's Always a Chance has you covered. They have Warforged:  Warlocks:   Warlords:  And "Devilborn" which you could really easily reskin as Dragonborn: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Guys, There's Always a Chance has you covered. It's the one game at the moment that I'm actually sad about not getting to play.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Where can I find more There's Always a Chance info? Google's only showing me a weird melange of Dumb and Dumber quotes and 3x material.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
vuk83 posted:What other cool poo poo from the newer editions should be ported into becmi. I really like the shadowfell and the fey thingamagingi, so im gonna use that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
moths posted:Where can I find more There's Always a Chance info? Google's only showing me a weird melange of Dumb and Dumber quotes and 3x material. Direct link to the PDF
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
Right-Clicked > Saved-As. Thanks! This looks amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
moths posted:Warlocks aren't in the Rules Compendium, AFAIK they debuted in 3e. (And were house-banned everywhere because OMG they can do a thing ALL DAY LONG.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Yup. The Gazetteers added dozens of classes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
I do want to try TAAC, or try it again but likely use some of the optional classes, but man looking at the Warlock and those invocations are expensive. 2 con for Eldritch Blast, with each higher level invocation getting progressively more expensive, and you only restore 1 con after a Turn. So it takes awhile to recover. Still might be a bit more spammable than normal spellcasting classes, kind of. The Gazetteers did add a bunch of stuff, but most if not all of the optional classes seem fairly different and more based off modern 3.5/4e classes/races.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Speaking of warforged, are they in the 5e DMG? I thought they were supposed to be, but then they weren't for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
I forget does the "target audience" for 5e have some huge problem with warforged? I seem to remember a lot of whinging regarding player races in eberron and/or 4e.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
I think anyone interested in hacking BECMI should take a look at the Adventurer Conqueror King Player's Companion. It's got class creation rules and since ACKS is basically a BECMI derivative the rules should be mostly compatible with BECMI.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:I do want to try TAAC, or try it again but likely use some of the optional classes, but man looking at the Warlock and those invocations are expensive. 2 con for Eldritch Blast, with each higher level invocation getting progressively more expensive, and you only restore 1 con after a Turn. So it takes awhile to recover. Still might be a bit more spammable than normal spellcasting classes, kind of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 11:34
|
|
|
Rannos22 posted:I forget does the "target audience" for 5e have some huge problem with warforged? I seem to remember a lot of whinging regarding player races in eberron and/or 4e. I think the imagined target audience does, yes. In practice I think the problem was more Wizards' totally understandable policy that everything in the corebooks for 4e was required to have some place in every setting. Tieflings, warforged and dragonborn just became emblematic of this policy for people who didn't like it. Other than some minor grogs.txt "lol dragonmen, wtf" whining, I think it could have been anything other than the typical races. Of course, that's a problem in and of itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 11:37
|
|
|
I just mourn the fact that 4E is probably going to be the only official DnD that offered up Minotaurs as a fully supported PC race (Or any of the really cool, unique races that either were brand new or got completely overlooked in other editions). Sure, I could make them up for 5E but it goes straight back to "GM May I?" just like every other edition (To which the answer to "May I play a Minotaur?" was always an emphatic "No" in every game I ever played). With legitimate race support for all kinds of races you kind of have this level of empowerment where you just point at the core book its in and say "Yes, absolutely".
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Yup. The Gazetteers added dozens of classes. Is there a listing of which ones contained what classes? I've googled around and only learned that one of them contains "Merchant Sailor."
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Agent Boogeyman posted:I just mourn the fact that 4E is probably going to be the only official DnD that offered up Minotaurs as a fully supported PC race (Or any of the really cool, unique races that either were brand new or got completely overlooked in other editions). Sure, I could make them up for 5E but it goes straight back to "GM May I?" just like every other edition (To which the answer to "May I play a Minotaur?" was always an emphatic "No" in every game I ever played). With legitimate race support for all kinds of races you kind of have this level of empowerment where you just point at the core book its in and say "Yes, absolutely". I greatly enjoy minotaurs, bugbears, crystal people, and the general rogues gallery that race selection turned out to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
Agent Boogeyman posted:Sure, I could make them up for 5E but it goes straight back to "GM May I?" just like every other edition (To which the answer to "May I play a Minotaur?" was always an emphatic "No" in every game I ever played). Maybe I'm just not hardcore or well-played enough, but I can only fathom making such prohibitions if it was completely gonzo or against the theme of the game I'm playing, and I've not yet encountered such a thing. The very first TRPG I ever DM'd one of the players wanted to literally be Starlord, so I just made up the class on the spot, taking cues from Bards and Illusionists; told him the 1d6 light ranged weapon was a gun and he could cast a 2d6 damage laser blast every day. Another player wanted to be a Dragonborn and I just went sure and gave him a bonus to STR and CON and a breath weapon and we just went on our way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Statting up a 5E race is as easy as going "+2 to this, +1 to that, and uh, one ability-thing" and you're off to the races.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
Agent Boogeyman posted:I just mourn the fact that 4E is probably going to be the only official DnD that offered up Minotaurs as a fully supported PC race (Or any of the really cool, unique races that either were brand new or got completely overlooked in other editions). Sure, I could make them up for 5E but it goes straight back to "GM May I?" just like every other edition (To which the answer to "May I play a Minotaur?" was always an emphatic "No" in every game I ever played). With legitimate race support for all kinds of races you kind of have this level of empowerment where you just point at the core book its in and say "Yes, absolutely". I agree that the corebook support is very helpful, but it's still at the whims of the GM. I've heard about 4e games where the GM decided that their awesome homebrew setting didn't have tieflings or elves in it, despite the "core is everywhere" approach of the game. Honestly, discussion is better than anything in any book could ever be. moths posted:Is there a listing of which ones contained what classes? I've googled around and only learned that one of them contains "Merchant Sailor." This post on The Piazza is what you're looking for. http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=8330 OneThousandMonkeys posted:I greatly enjoy minotaurs, bugbears, crystal people, and the general rogues gallery that race selection turned out to be. 100% agree. Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Maybe I'm just not hardcore or well-played enough, but I can only fathom making such prohibitions if it was completely gonzo or against the theme of the game I'm playing, and I've not yet encountered such a thing. The kneejerk banning of races probably has a lot to do with 2nd ed, where some of the things presented in (for instance) The Complete Book Of Humanoids was just broken as hell, or became broken as hell with a small amount of work especially if you ignore the racial level limits like everyone I ever played with did. The 2.5 Skills & Powers book introduced some really loving dumb poo poo too. Now, none of that matters if everyone's on board with it, but when you get a guy who says "I'll play a dwarf fighter, I guess" and a guy who's spent a couple of hours optimising his Ogre or Minotaur to do DPR equivalent to 8 or 9 levels above where he is while being nearly unhittable (or, memorably, a guy who just kind of stumbles into that by browsing the books for 10 minutes and picking race, class, and kit that sound like they'd go well together), it sucks. None of that applies to 4e though, because all those interesting-sounding races were pretty well balanced. Which somehow caused the "No minotaurs in my game, they're OP" crowd to cry about how bland it was. 
Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Ratpick posted:I think anyone interested in hacking BECMI should take a look at the Adventurer Conqueror King Player's Companion. It's got class creation rules and since ACKS is basically a BECMI derivative the rules should be mostly compatible with BECMI. moths posted:Is there a listing of which ones contained what classes? I've googled around and only learned that one of them contains "Merchant Sailor." MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
I just realized that the example character creation is someone named Bob making Bruenor Battlehammer. That's kind of fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:If you have issues with the 5E consultant issue you certainly don't want to buy ACKs. Got beef with Autarch?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:If you have issues with the 5E consultant issue you certainly don't want to buy ACKs. Out of curiosity, why? Who do they have who's more toxic than Pundit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:Out of curiosity, why? Who do they have who's more toxic than Pundit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Trip report time! One of our group is kind of an old school 3x/PF GM, so he wanted to try out the new edition. We all said sure. We made characters last weekend and last night was our first session. I hadn't done any playtesting and have just been following this thread for laughs, so this was my first "rubber hits the road" moment with the edition. In no particular order: -We rolled for ability scores and people got to reroll if their modifier total added up to less than +4, so we've got mostly above average characters. The barbarian had the only natural 18, so he's now at max STR. On the other hand I was kind of disappointed to see there were no races with +2 WIS. So since my highest roll was a 16, even with the +1 for being a wood elf I still have to burn 2 feats on getting it to 20. And there's only one feat that gives +1 WIS (though to be fair, Observant does seem kind of nice to have). -There were a lot of questions about how proficiency worked. Someone thought it gave you advantage on skills/saves, and another didn't understand the difference between saves and skill proficiencies. I think we've pretty much got it sorted after the one session though. -All in all, I'd definitely echo that it feels like a cleaned up 3.5. I liked not having discreet skill points, and the way proficiency both scales and is used for most things seems pretty elegant (if a little confusing). -Ad/dis was actually a pretty nice shorthand (though I think the GM mostly went by-the-book and didn't really ad-lib on handing it out). But at the very least it's handier than tracking lots of +2s. I don't think we added any pluses that weren't accounted for on our sheets the entire night. -1st level characters definitely felt like the apprentices they're billed as. My druid had an attack cantrip (Thorn Whip), and that's about all I got to do most of the session since the goblins saved against my Entangle and I used Healing Word on myself. -Combats are super dangerous. No one actually went down, but our second fight was just a few HP shy of starting a cascade that probably would have ended in a wipe or half the party fleeing. -I was the only source of healing and the only full caster in the group (druid, fighter, barbarian, rogue, warlock, ranger), and I only got the two spells. So I have to choose between (attempting) cool things and keeping people up. Hit dice are a nice help, but they're super random. All of this together is definitely making me miss the 4e HP/surge/leader system. And I'm not sure how you're expected to plan/GM combats when you don't know ahead of time how beat up your party is going to be, but thankfully I'm on the other side of the screen (though I guess that's how it's generally worked before 4e or optimized 3e). -There was an ogre in the goblin hideout helping them out but the warlock was able to parley with him and get him to switch sides for a few gold. Which is good, because he was flattening gobs with every swing and probably could have insta-murdered a few of us. A lot hinged on that one d20, but it made for a pretty cool moment (if a fairly boring fight). I had a few questions for the thread as well: Is there anything I can do to help out on healing? I really don't think my spells are going to be able to keep up with the incoming damage, especially since we hit level 2 now and HP totals have jumped a lot faster than my spell capacity. I'm not supposed to be adding my ability mod to damage for my cantrips am I? I didn't see anything about it so I haven't been, but the damage seems so anemic compared to weapon attacks. I'm kind of thinking I need to find myself a longbow since my druid is a wood elf with a 16 DEX (vs. my 17 WIS). I was originally thinking of going with Druid of the Land both for fluff reasons (my backstory involves a lot of plants) and to have more spells available. Is that a terrible idea? Moon druids seem really insane with the amount of punishment they can take. And if my spells are all going to go towards healing anyway...
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
moths posted:Warlocks aren't in the Rules Compendium, AFAIK they debuted in 3e. (And were house-banned everywhere because OMG they can do a thing ALL DAY LONG.) BTW, BECMI Warlocks are part of the Witch class in the Glantri Gazetteer. They are one of the Seven Secret Crafts of Glantri, which also among many others awesomely includes Cryptomancers (rune wizards) and Dracologists. They're "folk/hedge magic" types, who make philters, specialize in charm magic and make cursed dolls, that sort of thing. The D&D warlock as we think of it now is definitely a product of 3.5 MadScientistWorking posted:Are you familiar with Gamergate and what happened with The Escapist? Oh man, I had no idea Macris and Tito were both the founders of the Escapist and supportive of Gamergate. Yeah, ETHICAL GAMES JOURNALISM and you use your site to promote your own game without disclosing this! Wow. gently caress 'em. I feel cheated now. Ugh, and the demihuman class stuff from ACKS is so cool too. EDIT: I found some posts saying Tito is actually anti-GG, he just feels that they shouldn't be banned outright from his site. Although that whole idiotic "roundtable" that involved James Desborough makes me quite suspicious of whether or not that's actually true, or if it's more that he isn't rabid enough. Then again, he straight up deleted Roguestar's statements in that article. It just seems like a weird situation all around. Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Oh man, I had no idea Macris and Tito were both the founders of the Escapist and supportive of Gamergate. Yeah, ETHICAL GAMES JOURNALISM and you use your site to promote your own game without disclosing this! Wow. gently caress 'em. I feel cheated now. Ugh, and the demihuman class stuff from ACKS is so cool too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Macris I know is in charge of the Escapist and Tito was a journalist. The major problem I have is that Macris said that he didn't know Desborough was a harassing sack of poo poo and then it turned out that yeah he kind of avidly followed him. Macris does seem to be a piece of poo poo, apparently he donated to the Gor indiegogo too. Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:I'm not supposed to be adding my ability mod to damage for my cantrips am I? I didn't see anything about it so I haven't been, but the damage seems so anemic compared to weapon attacks. I'm kind of thinking I need to find myself a longbow since my druid is a wood elf with a 16 DEX (vs. my 17 WIS). Correct, you're not supposed to add your attribute modifier to your Thorn Whip's damage. Thorn Whip: [d20 + 3 WIS mod + 2 proficiency bonus] vs AC, 1d6 damage if you hit; 1.925 DPR vs an AC 15 target (like a Goblin) Longbow: [d20 + 3 DEX mod + 2 proficiency bonus] vs AC, 1d8+3 damage if you hit; 4.125 DPS vs an AC 15 target When you get to level 4, you can increase your WIS to 18/19 for a +4 modifier (for a total +6 attack bonus), but the Thorn Whip will still be behind at 2.1 DPR When you get to level 5, your Thorn Whip will start dealing 2d6 damage and your proficiency bonus will increase to 3 (for a total +7 attack bonus) and your Thorn Whip will start putting out 4.55 DPR, which will just barely edge out the longbow's 4.50 DPR (since it'll also benefit from the proficiency bonus getting to 3)
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
Wow, thanks for doing the math for me. I knew it was low, but that's pretty abysmal. Ah well. Looks like it's back to basic attacks for me! Though honestly with how boring cantrips are it's not like saying "I attack" and "I cast Thorn Whip" are all that much different.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Wow, thanks for doing the math for me. I knew it was low, but that's pretty abysmal. Thorn Whip does have a few benefits to it though. 1. It doesn't run out of ammo. Ok, so this is a corner case since most tables won't keep track of ammo anyway, but it can come in handy. 2. It can pull people closer. This is a big one. Drag people off ledges, into pits, into the waiting arms of your Fighter, into a cloud of scalding death you conjured, etc. Situationally very useful. 3. It's a melee attack, meaning it doesn't suffer from certain penalties like ranged attacks (most notably attack roll disadvantage in close quarters). 4. Many creatures resist or are immune to the damage of non-magical weapons. Thorn Whip is a spell, not a weapon, so it bypasses that. And since it doesn't use saving throws it's also unaffected by magic resistance, and it also doesn't use an energy type of damage that might be resisted such as fire or necrotic. So in terms of reliability it's got the best of both worlds. I don't think there's any monster currently in the game that has any sort of special protection that would count against Thorn Whip. That said... yeah, keep that longbow handy. In many situations it will be better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Thorn Whip does have a few benefits to it though. The pulling was the reason I took it over Produce Flame, but in our actual session I found it extremely situational. A 10" pull on a 30" spell brings them dangerously close to squishy old me. I don't think I actually pulled anyone during the game. Good call on the magical damage though, I'd not thought of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Rannos22 posted:I forget does the "target audience" for 5e have some huge problem with warforged? I seem to remember a lot of whinging regarding player races in eberron and/or 4e. 'Dumb robbots' is about the only objection, in most cases. There's a lot of apparent whining about Warforged sourced from LFR, because there was a running joke about whether warforged are legal or not and people pretended to whine about it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
It's split. A lot of pre-3e grogs hate Eberron and everything in it for RUINING THE MAGIC OF D&D or whatever such nonsense, but a lot of 3e ones liked Eberron because Eberron was 3e's only unique setting (that went on to be better done in 4e  )
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
I love that the same people who bitch about what a kitchen sink setting Forgotten Realms is fall all over themselves for Eberron though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
CaptainPsyko posted:I love that the same people who bitch about what a kitchen sink setting Forgotten Realms is fall all over themselves for Eberron though. It's mainly that familiarity breeds contempt and people are sick of FR modules where the plot is "Do some chores for Untouchable NPC From Book Series while he does actually important things"
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
It also helps that the Eberron sink isn't full of J.R.R.Tolkien's dirty dishes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 22:24
|
|