|
AlphaDog posted:Like I said before, I think that's pretty unfair to the original core concepts, and even to the core concepts of AD&D through 2nd ed. To-hit bonuses and AC and HP are perfectly fine abstractions for combat. Ability checks to do hard stuff worked just fine in B/x and BECMI. This was one of Gygax's all time favorite movie scenes. And I can understand fully why: it's a drat good movie sword fight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L10fR31jC1w It also takes aprox. 2 rounds in old D&D combat (each round was 1 min. long), culminating in a critical hit, not the 70-80 that it would take if you tried to model each sword swing.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 05:47 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 22:49 |
|
Didn't we discuss exactly this a couple pages ago? (I straight up love that scene). e: This one too, the second sabre fight from one of my favorite movies, The Duellists https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOcxnQRUhMM Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Dec 10, 2014 |
# ? Dec 10, 2014 05:48 |
|
AlphaDog posted:That's the stupid loving pseudo-realistic bullshit that I've talked about before. That's not how shields work. That demonstrates that nobody took the time to find out how to use a shield before writing the detailed shield rules. You can most certainly use a shield to defend the opposite side of your body to the one you're holding it on. You don't need to use any special technique to do so, it's part of the basic principles of using a shield. The smart play is to totally ignore any and all facing mechanics and never use this subsystem ever. Ever.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 06:40 |
|
Having scanned through the original 4E DMG, I think I'm starting to get it now:4th Edition DMG, Page 154 posted:GOVERNMENT 5th Edition DMG, Page 17 posted:GOVERNMENT What's the difference, you ask? Well, in the 5th Edition DMG, right below that last paragraph I quoted, is a table for randomly rolling forms of government. 01-08 Autocracy 09-13 Bureaucracy 14-19 Confederacy 20-22 Democracy 23-27 Dictatorship 28-42 Feudalism 43-44 Gerontocracy 45-53 Hierarchy 54-56 Magocracy 57-58 Matriarchy 59-64 Militocracy 65-74 Monarchy 75-78 Oligarchy 79-80 Patriarchy 81-83 Meritocracy 84-85 Plutocracy 86-92 Republic 93-94 Satrapy 95 Kleptocracy 96-00 Theocracy
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 07:25 |
|
Even AD&D didn't pretend that randomly rolling the governments in your
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 07:57 |
|
Spoilers Below posted:This was one of Gygax's all time favorite movie scenes. And I can understand fully why: it's a drat good movie sword fight. I guessed exactly which scene this was, without ever even hearing that little D&D-related tidbit before (my second guess was obviously: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB8tiSMCwRE ) What a shame that D&D has never had rules for playing out such a dynamic and mobile fight. I mean "I (full)attack, roll to-hit, (maybe) roll for damage" is all those scenes are about, right?
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 09:49 |
|
OutsideAngel posted:What a shame that D&D has never had rules for playing out such a dynamic and mobile fight. I mean "I (full)attack, roll to-hit, (maybe) roll for damage" is all those scenes are about, right? I've heard... things about games like Burning Wheel - do they actually do a good job of simulating combat or do they end up like that one cowboy game where people end up orbiting each other like battlemechs?
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 10:38 |
|
Gort posted:I've heard... things about games like Burning Wheel - do they actually do a good job of simulating combat or do they end up like that one cowboy game where people end up orbiting each other like battlemechs? Burning Wheel isn't really the go-to system for swashbuckling combat. It does have a dynamic combat system in that there are lots of different interactions between the various maneuvers you can pull and being able to guess what your enemy is going to pull on you is an important part of the metagame, but it's not really suited for long exchanges where no one gets hit until one decisive strike takes them down, because it's more gritty.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 11:11 |
|
En Garde! is the best RPG for playing out dramatic swashbuckling swordfights, which is pretty impressive for a game that came out in 1975.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 13:34 |
|
I thought 4e did a good job of making combat more dynamic. In my players' game 4/6 players can be counted on to move each round, and the other two are ranged spell casters and will often reposition anyway. Throw in pulls, pushes, and slides, and the battlefield can quickly get pretty chaotic. E: if you're talking about the granularity to model each individual thrust and parry with a die roll, gently caress that. Combat is slow enough already
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 13:46 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:In the absence of empires or large kingdoms, power and authority in the D&D world are concentrated in towns and cities. here minor nobles cling to the titles their families carried under past empires—dukes, barons, earls, counts, the occasional prince, here and there a self-styled king. quote:01-08 Autocracy Jackard fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Dec 10, 2014 |
# ? Dec 10, 2014 17:12 |
|
Jackard posted:Did they bother explaining how to DM any of this? They explain what these words mean. For instance... Gerontocracy: Elders preside over this society. In some cases, long-lived races such as elves or dragons are entrusted with the leadership of the land. And that's it. There is no discussion on the benefits or drawbacks of these forms of government or anything like that. Strangely enough, the table is not quite in alphabetical order - as if they thought of most of the major forms of government first, alphabetized those, realized they had too few, and tacked the rest on at the end. The explanations on the other hand do appear in alphabetical order.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 17:29 |
|
Sage Genesis posted:They explain what these words mean. For instance... I personally love how all of these systems aren't mutually exclusive. One could have a Monarchical, Matriarchal, Bureaucratic, Feudal society, which is in a Confederacy with other Dictatorships, for example.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 17:42 |
|
Maybe they should have ditched the table for descriptions of how you can actually use these in-game and some sample plot hooks for each one!! printing goddamned useless definitions, like we don't own a dictionary... Jackard fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Dec 10, 2014 |
# ? Dec 10, 2014 17:46 |
|
Laphroaig posted:Anyone who thinks Healing Surges are a bad mechanic are broken people. The DM in my 5e game was like "one time I was playing 4e and I ran out of Healing Surges an I couldn't do anything and no one could heal me!" And I was like, "Yep..? Good job, dumbass..?"
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 20:40 |
|
Also, not actually accurate. Anything that lets you spend a surge always resets you to at least 1hp, even if you have no surges. A healing surge will ALWAYS get you up and fighting, even if it's only with one hit point left.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 21:04 |
|
After playing 3.5 for about 7 years, the only thing that really grinds my goonards is the Weapon and Armor Tables in the 5th Ed DMG. It was really clean and I enjoyed the +N Weapon with X, Y and Z options that equals some total bonuses. Last night I was really irked having to trudge through 30 pages of stupid niche items just to try and find weapon modifiers. I'll probably just create my own tables or start crafting items before hand but I just needed to vent because I really missed that structure and separation instead of these lame premade items of fish command.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 21:46 |
|
Fish command? When would that be useful, for sahuagin?
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 21:51 |
|
Jackard posted:Fish command? When would that be useful, for sahuagin? It's actually usable against any beast with a swim speed.
|
# ? Dec 10, 2014 21:55 |
|
Ah yes, with my sceptre of fish command I will force these beavers to build a dam
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 00:26 |
|
Boing posted:Ah yes, with my sceptre of fish command I will force these beavers to build a dam Let's be fair, in a world of owlbears and perytons and stuff,maybe beavers are fish.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 01:05 |
|
So... I found an article. http://boingboing.net/2014/12/09/the-awesome-glory-that-is-dung.html?utm_source=moreatbb&utm_medium=nextpost&utm_campaign=nextpostthumbnailsquote:In 1577, the Spanish Carmelite nun Teresa of Ávila wrote a prayer manual called The Interior Castle, which describes her path to union with God as a kind of epic single-player Dungeons and Dragons game. quote:I literally cannot get my head around what it must be like to be a child or teenager now, raised in a completely digitized world -- where fantasy and long reverie have given way to the instant gratification of electronic media. quote:I'm still staring at a computer -- we're using the excellent online role-playing tool Roll20.net
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 01:06 |
|
Monstrosity seems to be a combined magical beast/monstrous humanoid type. I guess it sort of makes sense, but the name seems off and I don't quite get the logic of how they used it. Centaurs are Neutral Good "monstrosities", as are mimics (despite aberration still being a type). Edit: Also, the tarrasque is challenge 30 but still has no way to actually fight flying enemies with longbows (and there's no regeneration, so you just have to slowly whittle away its 676 hp), and brooms of flying and winged boots are both uncommon items. (The broom doesn't even require attunement.) Roadie fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Dec 11, 2014 |
# ? Dec 11, 2014 01:22 |
|
I Am The Scum posted:So... I found an article. http://boingboing.net/2014/12/09/the-awesome-glory-that-is-dung.html?utm_source=moreatbb&utm_medium=nextpost&utm_campaign=nextpostthumbnails Not seeing anything specifically wrong with those last two quotes. Theyre not inherently contradictory. The first quote just doesn't make sense out of context. Also this isn't the grognards.txt thread.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 01:32 |
|
Roadie posted:Edit: Also, the tarrasque is challenge 30 but still has no way to actually fight flying enemies with longbows (and there's no regeneration, so you just have to slowly whittle away its 676 hp), and brooms of flying and winged boots are both uncommon items. (The broom doesn't even require attunement.) Doesn't the 4E Tarrasque have a "gently caress you fliers, get on the ground" aura? I seem to recall reading that in the 4E monster manual years ago.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 04:25 |
|
Omnicrom posted:Doesn't the 4E Tarrasque have a "gently caress you fliers, get on the ground" aura? I seem to recall reading that in the 4E monster manual years ago. Yep. The 5e one completely lacks that.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 04:27 |
|
Boing posted:Ah yes, with my sceptre of fish command I will force these beavers to build a dam The truth comes out about D&D Next's hidden Catholic agenda.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 05:20 |
|
I Am The Scum posted:So... I found an article. http://boingboing.net/2014/12/09/the-awesome-glory-that-is-dung.html?utm_source=moreatbb&utm_medium=nextpost&utm_campaign=nextpostthumbnails Boy, and here I thought all the nerds used to (maybe) read too much into St. Teresa's writing and interpret her as having dirty fantasies about God... I guess you could read The Interior Castle as a D&D campaign, rather than as yet another example of a really really long tradition of allegorical and metaphorical writing that extended back to the very origin of the religion (and even long before that) by an extremely devout Christian saint.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 06:47 |
|
Roadie posted:Yep. The 5e one completely lacks that. When the 5e Tarrasque was first previewed people pointed this out. Many of the responses were along the lines of, "people trying to use flight to stay out of reach of the walking apocalypse are cheating and I don't play with cheaters." I am not even remotely kidding.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 11:52 |
|
I feel really bored in 5e combat, and since our encounters group is big on that it kind of blows. What bothers me is that I don't see it getting much more interesting at any point, as a non fighter I am already at my second attack so I won't even be rolling dice more frequently. I have a legit 5e question though involving reach weapons and people moving around within your reach: My paladin has polearm master and mage slayer as feats. Mage Slayer lets me smack a spellcaster if they cast within 5ft. If I am wielding a polearm though my reach is 10ft and I can only hit them with an AoO if they leave my reach. This means that a mage can take a move action to move 5ft away from me but remain in my reach and cast a spell with impunity. As it is it seems like using a polearm in this build is a detriment and that makes me very sad. Am I reading this right or should I be taking AoO as soon as the mage moves away from our base to base contact?
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 15:39 |
|
Holy gently caress, dirtycajun. I was just thinking about how I hadn't seen you in ages (at least, anywhere I go!). Good to see you're still kicking!
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 15:55 |
|
dirtycajun posted:I feel really bored in 5e combat, and since our encounters group is big on that it kind of blows. What bothers me is that I don't see it getting much more interesting at any point, as a non fighter I am already at my second attack so I won't even be rolling dice more frequently.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 16:48 |
|
I wrote a short guide for myself to compile all of the Actions and conditions and Next-specific terms into a single document, and also to write-up level 1 character examples for quick character creation and kind of got carried away. Maybe someone will find it useful. Feedback would be appreciated
gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Dec 11, 2014 |
# ? Dec 11, 2014 21:14 |
|
dirtycajun posted:I have a legit 5e question though involving reach weapons and people moving around within your reach: Let's see.... PHB p168 posted:Mage Slayer... Doesn't say "reach" or "melee range" (or "opportunity attack", actually). What does the book say about reach in general? PHB p147 posted:Reach. This weapon adds 5 feet to your reach when you attack with it. PHB p195 posted:Used in hand-to-hand combat, a melee attack allows you to attack a foe within your reach. And opportunity attacks? PHB p195 posted:You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach. Doesn't say "...or moves within your reach". For what it's worth, I guess this will generally work out in favour of the PCs. So yeah, a wizard standing next to you can move back 5' and cast so that Mage Slayer doesn't activate and they don't provoke OA. Which is dumb as hell, yeah. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Dec 11, 2014 |
# ? Dec 11, 2014 21:32 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I wrote a short guide for myself to compile all of the Actions and conditions and Next-specific terms into a single document, and also to write-up level 1 character examples for quick character creation and kind of got carried away. Maybe someone will find it useful. Feedback would be appreciated This is very cool, forwarded it to my players because as much as I've played of 5th so far, specifics still elude us (Concentration Checks/Grappling). For dirtycajun, I would just suggest asking your DM to make Mage Slayer count as "Casts Spell within Reach" rather than 5ft. Just seems like a narrow oversight on WotC's part. OfChristandMen fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Dec 11, 2014 |
# ? Dec 11, 2014 21:49 |
|
A few questions about actions and bonus actions. Does a bonus action have to be a bonus action? Could you do 2 "bonus actions" in a single combat round by using your action? I want to cast 2 spells in one round, both spells are "bonus action". Is quaffing a potion an action or a bonus action?
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 22:08 |
|
AlphaDog posted:
But 5 foot steps are a thing of the past, so backing away would draw the OA.
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 22:19 |
|
for the polearm thing: If this was 4E it would work this way. Reach adds +5 feet reach when you attack with it, you don't exist in a constant state of +5 foot reach. Polearm Master makes them provoke when they enter your adjacent square then, and when they leave your adjacent square they also provoke. You can make attacks with a space between you and your foe though. Mage Slayer should probably say Reach not 5 feet though. Garl: He is saying if the polearm made your reach 10 feet instead of being +5 feet "when you attack". Frankly this whole edition has badly writing wording so hey guess what its RULINGS NOT RULES play the way YOU feel Polearm Master and Reach should work!!
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 22:24 |
Garl_Grimm posted:But 5 foot steps are a thing of the past, so backing away would draw the OA. PHB p195 posted:You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach.
|
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 22:24 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 22:49 |
|
Lets ask Mike Mearls and he can post about how he spent his lunch break swinging a broom around the D&D offices and its time to make some changes to the rules...
|
# ? Dec 11, 2014 22:27 |