|
isndl posted:Surplus? Did the kingdom purchase too many dicks from the lizard dick factory and is now selling them for coppers? Why'd they put out an order for lizard dicks in the first place? It was actually supposed to be an order for "wizard disks" aka Tenser's Floating Discs, but the person writing the invoice has terrible handwriting, it was a real embarrassing situation all around really.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
isndl posted:Surplus? Did the kingdom purchase too many dicks from the lizard dick factory and is now selling them for coppers? Why'd they put out an order for lizard dicks in the first place? Adventurers delved the dungeon of the Bad Dragon and the loot was just a cornucopia of miscellaneous dongs. Gotta unload them somehow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
isndl posted:Surplus? Did the kingdom purchase too many dicks from the lizard dick factory and is now selling them for coppers? Why'd they put out an order for lizard dicks in the first place? No no, it's at the manufacturer level. He went out and harvested lizard dicks because dicks are an assumed cash crop. Then no one wants to buy lizard dicks so he's stuck with a bunch of them. And it's not like the government is issuing dick farm bills to subsidize the proud American dick harvester, so he's left out in the cold, destitute! Peddling lizard dicks door to door in a crude garment made of a barrel and leather straps, lizard dicks falling out of his samples briefcase as he stutters out a tremulous sales pitch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
See, this is why people prefer skeletons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Games > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Subsidies for lizard dick farmers
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Realtalk, the worst bits about this thread have been people bringing up poo poo like "hey can my sorceress give herself an abortion for incredible cosmic power?" and I'm fairly certain that "hey guys let me tell you about my dick-harvesting operation in D&D in case you're interested" is closely behind that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:See, this is why people prefer skeletons. Skeletons sell themselves! It's gold, Jerry! Gold! PublicOpinion posted:Adventurers delved the dungeon of the Bad Dragon and the loot was just a cornucopia of miscellaneous dongs. Gotta unload them somehow. Sorry, that dong has the imprimatur of a different dildographer and I can only trade it for sheep or bread from the local baker, but you can always risk taking it to the local black market, where shadowy figures sell shadowy wangs and you may get dicked in the butt as like as dealt with fairly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Veering into Oglaf territory here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
So yeah, anyway, on a topic unrelated to Kitchner's weird gore fetish... I was thinking more about a Grappler/Brawler thing, and I was wondering what the best implementation would be. One option would be to make it an archetype for monks, fighters or both(a multi-class archetype should be pretty workable, in my mind), but limiting someone to only doing grappling-related stuff seems like it might eventually get a bit one-note. Maybe it'd work better as a Feat like Martial Adept that has the Grappler Feat as a prerequisite and gives access to some Grappling related throws/locks etc. as maneuvers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Monk archetype that lets you use martial arts to inflict status effects on grappled enemies instead of damage?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Yo did Kitschner just call gredenko unconstructive? Did that happen?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Like, gredenko.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Like hey guys you'll never guess what the guys at the pub said about lizard dicks- oh what's going on in here? Useful house rules? Get the gently caress outta here with that unconstructive bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
goatface posted:Monk archetype that lets you use martial arts to inflict status effects on grappled enemies instead of damage? That could work, but too many status effects lead to more maths and numbers to keep track of in fights, which could bog things down, and there are more ideas you could wring out of it than just status effects. But, status-effect wise, the most obvious ones would be silence(headlock/choking), various limb locks(can't move now, fucker!), maybe dazing/stunning effects from slamming an opponent into the ground or a terrain feature. I also don't think it would be too absurd to permit some sort of throws, letting a character hurl an appropriately grappled and subdued enemy(perhaps requiring a lock of some sort as a prerequisite) at an enemy as a ranged attack(or for hurling enemies off of things or into painful things at a distance). Maybe some advanced techniques that let people accelerate their grapples(like a move that charges, grapples and headlocks, all in one move, for rushing past enemies, if AOO's don't hit you/trip you up, and disabling casters, that sort of thing). The exact effects would also be a lot down to the "fluff" of the grappling. Is it going to be some relatively believable martial arts stuff? Or is it going to be over-the-top pro-wrestling that includes skill with improvised weapons? "Pass me the vorpal folding chair!" In the latter case you could also have an ability for "selling" taking a dodged hit to feign death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
I mean, default Monk already inflicts stun for 1 ki regardless of archetype. Open Hand already has knock prone & 15ft push to add to that if you really want to. I'm not sure what other status effect(s) you'd want to inflict via grapple.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Yeah I mean doing grapples as a bonus action and then having other stuff to spend actions on while grappled so you can move, grapple, break his ankle to slow him, disengage and finish move to next guy would actually be super awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Point to where in this thread people have made a concerted effort to kick people who are positive about Next out (except maybe for MonsterEnvy who is kind of a special case). I've become convinced that what most die hard 5e fans like about 5e is being able to talk about 5e as an idea, and never as a game. It lets them get really heated about people who say anything bad about the game and gush about how much they love it without ever going into details. Like ENWorld has an almost 30 page thread that's little more then a two minute hate -fest for Obsidian, all because Feargus Urquhart said "I don't think Hasbro is a good place for D&D to be." Including people screaming about how Obsidian is the most hated developer in the entire industry, how Urquhart (who has worked on nearly every single D&D game that has ever been made) is just "some suit with an MBA who knows nothing about D&D," or my personal favorite, trying to claim that Wasteland 2 being Kickstarted is proof that Obsidian is dying. Because he said "D&D doesn't do so well when pushed into a purely corporate area." Something most of those same posters at ENWorld said over and over again two years ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:"I don't think Hasbro is a good place for D&D to be." I have to admit that I can't really think of a better place for D&D to be, not because Hasbro has made the edition to end all editions, but because it seems like pretty much anyone else who'd be interested in getting their hands on it would be hypergrogs insisting that EVERYTHING should be a save-or-die because REALISM and HARDCORE GAMING. Not that the game isn't flawed, but... who'd handle it better? I can't really think of anyone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
Nobody really, but it's apparent that Hasbro and/or WotC doesn't really give much of a poo poo about it either these days so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:I have to admit that I can't really think of a better place for D&D to be, not because Hasbro has made the edition to end all editions, but because it seems like pretty much anyone else who'd be interested in getting their hands on it would be hypergrogs insisting that EVERYTHING should be a save-or-die because REALISM and HARDCORE GAMING. Not that the game isn't flawed, but... who'd handle it better? I can't really think of anyone. Can't imagine grogs giving fighters save-or-dies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Fighters would have all of their class features removed besides "can attack with weapon" so that wizards can finally shine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Yeah I mean doing grapples as a bonus action and then having other stuff to spend actions on while grappled so you can move, grapple, break his ankle to slow him, disengage and finish move to next guy would actually be super awesome. Coopting the concentration mechanics and certain spell effects seems promising (if we're pretending to follow the 5E design philosophy that most of you mock). How about instead of this arcane "establish grapple, they try to escape, in future rounds, try and do more..." stuff, just make an attack roll, consume some resource (so you can't just do it at will), and then hit the guy with Restrained plus a spell effect. Silence, Hold Person, Blindness/Deafness, Ray of Sickness, Sleep, Slow, Confusion, etc. The effects that don't require concentration have their normal durations, the ones that do require concentration can break if the grappler loses his concentration, or if the target moves away (by breaking the grapple). Other than the conditions inflicted by the "spell", the grappler and grappled creatures can both take normal actions on each other and everyone else - if the grappled character doesn't care that you're holding on, then he can ignore you, and just because Buff McLargehuge is choking out his human shield, it doesn't mean he can't keep fighting everyone else. It doesn't even have to be size-based. A halfling could climb on a dragon's head and gouge it in the eyes (blindness) or kick a giant in the crotch (ray of sickness) or hop on an ogre's back and choke it out (sleep) without first physically overpowering it. Throw in a rule that if you grapple a creature bigger than you are, you're restrained instead of the target, and you automatically move if it does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:I have to admit that I can't really think of a better place for D&D to be, not because Hasbro has made the edition to end all editions, but because it seems like pretty much anyone else who'd be interested in getting their hands on it would be hypergrogs insisting that EVERYTHING should be a save-or-die because REALISM and HARDCORE GAMING. Not that the game isn't flawed, but... who'd handle it better? I can't really think of anyone. Kai Tave posted:Nobody really, but it's apparent that Hasbro and/or WotC doesn't really give much of a poo poo about it either these days so. It was basically that; he felt D&D was suffering under Hasbro/WotC not giving a poo poo about it at all and not really trying to find out what it'd be good at in terms of marketing. As I understand, Obsidian (and, before that, Bioware) had a really hard time working with WotC and Hasbro while developing the Neverwinter Nights series and it's subsequent expansions. This of course was translated into "HE HAS SPOKEN ILL OF 5e; DESTROY HIM!" by ENWorld.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Fighters would have all of their class features removed besides "can attack with weapon" so that wizards can finally shine. That's not too far from what happened in 5e when you compare playtest Fighter with what was published.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
They should be managed by a 1d1000 business-decision table
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Coopting the concentration mechanics and certain spell effects seems promising (if we're pretending to follow the 5E design philosophy that most of you mock). How about instead of this arcane "establish grapple, they try to escape, in future rounds, try and do more..." stuff, just make an attack roll, consume some resource (so you can't just do it at will), and then hit the guy with Restrained plus a spell effect. Silence, Hold Person, Blindness/Deafness, Ray of Sickness, Sleep, Slow, Confusion, etc. So everyone would have a set of limited-use spell effects on their attacks? Hmm...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Are you saying martial characters would have spells? No, we can't have that. They already deal too much damage when they hit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
You're right, that's weeaboo garbage. Better stick to the classic D&D model where all the good combatants win fights by calling out the names of their special powers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Good Ideas I like a lot of this stuff, though without having the mechanic for engaging and maintaining a grapple, what would be "breaking" a grapple once someone's locked into one of the effects that require concentration? Still the same? Also you'd probably want some minor limitations on what they can do while grappling. The grappler should have at least one arm(or leg, or other appendage) occupied by the grapple, so he might be able to have one guy in a headlock while fighting another guy with a sword or something, but he can't just have a TELEKINETIC HEADLOCK while whamming someone with a great big claymore or firing a bow. And you'd probably want some sort of contested roll if either of them tried to do something involving movement, like charging at an enemy, because the other "partner" in the grapple might try to stand their ground or simply be loving heavy to haul around. Basic idea, though? I like it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Maybe limit it to one hand free and light weapons? Could even do it all off saving throws. Your grapple DC being 8+prof+str/dex vs their str/dex/fort depending on the move.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:Also you'd probably want some minor limitations on what they can do while grappling. The grappler should have at least one arm(or leg, or other appendage) occupied by the grapple, so he might be able to have one guy in a headlock while fighting another guy with a sword or something, but he can't just have a TELEKINETIC HEADLOCK while whamming someone with a great big claymore or firing a bow. And you'd probably want some sort of contested roll if either of them tried to do something involving movement, like charging at an enemy, because the other "partner" in the grapple might try to stand their ground or simply be loving heavy to haul around. These are already accounted for in the grapple rules though; you can't grab without a free hand, and you can only move half your speed since it's assumed the guy your grappling is resisting you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:These are already accounted for in the grapple rules though; you can't grab without a free hand, and you can only move half your speed since it's assumed the guy your grappling is resisting you. Right, but Karma's idea seemed to suggest largely tossing the existing grapple rules and assume they didn't exist in favour of his idea, which I was largely cool with, for instance. "Other than the conditions inflicted by the "spell", the grappler and grappled creatures can both take normal actions on each other and everyone else" That seemed to imply no limitations to me, but I may have just misunderstood him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
I'd probably do it like this: - At level 3 when you choose the tradition, you can initiate a grapple for free any time you land an unarmed strike as part of your flurry of blows. You add your proficiency (again, if proficient) on all grapple checks. You may also pick two cool effects you can choose from any time you land an unarmed strike on a grappled target as part of your flurry of blows. - At level 6, you upgrade one of the effects and eliminate the need to keep a free hand while grappling, you can pretty much katamari damacy the gently caress around. You add your proficiency bonus to melee damage against grappled opponents. - At level 11, you upgrade the other effect and eliminate the speed reduction while grappled. You can pin grappled opponents for free when landing a flurry of blows hit against a grappled opponent, without being restrained yourself. - At level 17, you upgrade one effect to its final form and can initiate grapples for free when you land any melee damage with an unarmed strike or monk weapon. 30.5 Days fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I'd probably do it like this: I think the problem with this setup is that, again, it kind of makes your grapples always the same thing. You've got two things you can do, really, besides punching someone. I'd just open it up so a given grappler could eventually collect them all, but instead limit them by how many could be maintained at once. And picking to only upgrade one of your abilities at a time gives you a great big wasteland between levels 6 and 11 where you're probably going to largely be spamming your upgraded ability, making you even more of a one-trick pony.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Leave the grappling rules where they are. Then make an exception for monks and fighters. They can grapple someone with a normal attack roll as a bonus action because they are highly trained and specialised melee combatants. Grappled opponents are automatically immobilised. (for anyone, same rules as now for escaping) Fighters and monks, on the other hand, can do the following (while still wielding a single handed weapon and making the rest of their attacks as usual): When the opponent is initially Grappled, the grappler chooses to immobilise them as normal, or take them down (knock them prone, and they are no longer grappled). Once per round, the grappling fighter or monk may use a regular attack in order to apply one of the following: Takedown: (as above) Improved position: Target remains grappled, makes a Str save (DC rules go here) or gets Disadvantage on saves while grappled. Joint lock: Target remains grappled, makes a Con save (DC rules go here) or gets Disadvantage on attack rolls until the end of the fight. Choke: Target remains grappled and makes a Con save (DC rules go here) or is rendered unconscious. Yes, this does mean that a fighter with 3 attacks could hit a dude with his sword, grapple his opponent, improve his position, and choke the opponent out in the same round if he succeeds each check. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:I think the problem with this setup is that, again, it kind of makes your grapples always the same thing. You've got two things you can do, really, besides punching someone. I'd just open it up so a given grappler could eventually collect them all, but instead limit them by how many could be maintained at once. I could see adding a third but the problem is that any more than 3 and this guy has a weird number of martial combat options compared to everything else in the game. Open Hand monks get 3 combat options before 17, Shadow monks arguably get one option every every upgrade (silence is the only level 3 option worth a drat, "okay guys hold on, I'm gonna cast darkvision on everyone and then 5 rounds I'll cast darkness!"). Fighter gets two combat options at level 3, etc. etc. etc. So I guess I'd be nervous about having this totally incongruous buffet. For the upgrade path, it definitely sucks. It'd probably be better to have 3 levels of the initial options given at 3, 6, and 11, and then have the 17 options be an entirely new set that adds a new option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Oh, or the level 17 lets you apply your powers to all your grappled enemies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I could see adding a third but the problem is that any more than 3 and this guy has a weird number of martial combat options compared to everything else in the game. Open Hand monks get 3 combat options before 17, Shadow monks arguably get one option every every upgrade (silence is the only level 3 option worth a drat, "okay guys hold on, I'm gonna cast darkvision on everyone and then 5 rounds I'll cast darkness!"). Fighter gets two combat options at level 3, etc. etc. etc. A variation would be 5 steps, more evenly distributed with 2 abilities picked up at 3 and then every two levels either upgrading a pre-existing one or picking up another ability until level 13.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I could see adding a third but the problem is that any more than 3 and this guy has a weird number of martial combat options compared to everything else in the game. I think the thing is, though, that's a flaw in the other archetypes, one that should be fixed, not repeated. I also feel, personally, that archetypes should give more at low levels than they do at high levels, front-load them with options and fun things, because, frankly, way more people are going to play games in the level 1 to 10 range, than in the 11 to 20 range.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
The hazard of loading the front end of a class with good stuff is multiclass shenanigans, is my guess for why so many good things are 5/6/7 or more levels deep in the classes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:47
|
|