|
thespaceinvader posted:Maybe give a flavour-inspired choice between using it for a relatively small benefit to your allies and a relatively large penalty to your enemies, and that choice is between beneficent and malign influences. S.J. posted:Okay, this is only kind of related to 4e, but does anyone still have that pic of 1st/2nd/3rd edition being different piles of poo poo ending with 4e being power rangers or something? I can't find it for the life of me.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Fairly sure our DM doesn't really know what she is doing (at least in terms of certain mechanics) so even though we created characters using some starting templates she brought along, pretty sure we ended up with hosed up characters. I'm 100% sure mine was incorrect, because I already went through and fixed it. My friend's character is a level 1 Dragonborn barbarian with a +7 strength mod... I tried to replicate it and the highest I can manage is +5 (point buy up to 18 then +2 race mod). Can anyone think of a way that number could be accurate? Common sense tells me "no," but maybe these were min-maxed like crazy and there is some potential bonus I'm not seeing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Fumaofthelake posted:Fairly sure our DM doesn't really know what she is doing (at least in terms of certain mechanics) so even though we created characters using some starting templates she brought along, pretty sure we ended up with hosed up characters. I'm 100% sure mine was incorrect, because I already went through and fixed it. If everyone is broken in the same way, I wouldn't worry about it. If some are above or below the rest,then a tweaking might be worthwhile
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Yeah you're not getting +7 on an ability mod at level 1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
That's pretty much what I was thinking on both points. My original character was definitely broken but not to the same extent. I went back and redid my sheet though so I'm definitely "underpowered" compared to him. Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Fumaofthelake posted:Fairly sure our DM doesn't really know what she is doing (at least in terms of certain mechanics) so even though we created characters using some starting templates she brought along, pretty sure we ended up with hosed up characters. I'm 100% sure mine was incorrect, because I already went through and fixed it. Three possible ways the error might have happened: 1)There was a bug regarding ability scores in the online character builder that used to crop up when picking a draconian subraces where they wouldn't properly readjust your stats and give you an extra +2 to an ability score. But even that wouldn't get you past +6. I don't think it even applied to strength. 2) The DM might have ignored the stipulations on what you can drop down. Does the character have more than one score lower than 10 or any score lower than 8? 3) Maybe the DM confused the character's attack bonus with their strength bonus? +7 to hit at level 1 is pretty normal with a +4 mod and a +3 weapon prof. bonus or +5 mod / +2 weapon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
wallawallawingwang posted:I don't think there is a legit way to get a 24 strength at level 1. Our DM is perhaps too focused on telling her story and not focused enough on running the game. She was pulling stuff from different editions wholesale so it's no wonder poo poo was all messed up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Jebus, that's a shame. 4e is probably one of the best editions of D&D for DMs who aren't really into the rules. Everything either works like it says it does, or gets out of your way to let you just roll some dice and do poo poo. Paradoxically, its also the most unforgiving about straying outside of the numeric framework they give you. But so as long as your DM knows to use MM3 math, and the updated page 42 numbers, they can pretty much just makeup whatever the hell they want to on the fly. Wholesale moves hasn't really worked for anything outside of basic/add/odd.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
I think we're getting it sorted out... Pretty sure I guilted my buddy into fixing his sheet and we have some more experienced members joining our group as well. I mostly just want to fix it so our DM can use pre-genned stuff and not have to crunch the numbers to figure out encounters if our party is too whacked out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
wallawallawingwang posted:the updated page 42 numbers Is there an online errata for the old guidelines somewhere?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Wait, where are these? I know Essentials gave us some updated damage numbers, but they oversimplified it a bit by getting rid of the normal/limited damage split and the low/medium/high brackets. 1d4chan has created an errata'd table on their page about Page 42
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
Post your favorite decidedly un-RAW power uses ITT! Yesterday, the Tiefling Warlord was on guard duty, and it was starting to freeze. He wanted to make fire, but the flintstone was in another character's pocket, and he didn't want to wake him up. So the following happened. He picked up a sharp stick. He pricked himself with it for 1 damage. He cursed the stick. Voila, torch. Might not be exactly as intended, but who cares! Bonus points for guessing what insult he cursed the stick with 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Some monster had swallowed someone, and the warlock used Diabolic Grasp to stick a finger down its throat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Is there an online errata for the old guidelines somewhere?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
The warlock and the wizard digging fortifications by using Eldritch Blast to loosen the earth and Thunderwave to move the dirt out of the trench.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Wait, where are these? I know Essentials gave us some updated damage numbers, but they oversimplified it a bit by getting rid of the normal/limited damage split and the low/medium/high brackets. Average damage is 8+level. The "high" damage expression (brutes, mostly) is that +25%. "Low" damage (usually AoE) is that -25%. Limited-use is up to +75%, but exercise caution. There's caveats. Ongoing damage usually subtracts from total damage. Solos shouldn't take 25% off for AoE. Artillery probably needs low melee damage. Elites need 2 attacks or double damage. Lurkers that attack every other round do double. Nastier status effects should be either limited use, or do less/no damage. And so on. If you're feeling lazy, 2d6 or 2d8 + Level gets you close enough for the normal one. (Yes, technically +1 and -1, respectively.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
PHB3 and Psionic Power are up on dndclassics.com this week, plus the next batch of 4e-era Dragon/Dungeon issues. The fact that they're putting these issues up online at such a rapid clip makes me expect them to kill the availability of the magazines on D&D Insider once they've finished uploading them for individual sale, if they don't just outright kill Insider altogether. Either way, if you've got Insider, you ought to download each issue if you haven't already.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Nice, thank you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
I seem to hear a lot from people (including the OP of this thread) about how the introduction adventures of 4e (i.e. Keep on the Shadowfell, etc.) were very bad. I played Keep on the Shadowfell many years ago in high school but I can't really remember too much about it. Can anyone shed some light on why the published adventures were so bad? Just curious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
Generally most of the various modules are badly balanced (to the point that you can get surprise-TPK'd), or if not that, they're on-rails things where you're just going from encounter to encounter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
WotC hadn't been in the business of module making for awhile when Keep was made; they were SUPER rusty and it shows. It was also made by Mearls, who never really understood a lot of 4e (as could be seen by what happened when he took the reigns and created Essentials). It tends to really ignore a lot of 4e's strengths and forgets constantly that it's not AD&D, while not really being well written at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
BattleCake posted:I seem to hear a lot from people (including the OP of this thread) about how the introduction adventures of 4e (i.e. Keep on the Shadowfell, etc.) were very bad. I played Keep on the Shadowfell many years ago in high school but I can't really remember too much about it. Can anyone shed some light on why the published adventures were so bad? Just curious. It started decently up to the Irontooth fight. Then once you entered the keep there were 17 combat encounters in a row (I counted) with almost no plot advancement and a not terribly interesting environment. Combat in 4e should be a climax - throwaway combats are a grind. If you think of 4e combat as big budget action scenes, John Rogers says how to do it right and Mearls did everything wrong. Just bad writing, made worse by a quick fight not being a thing in 4e.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
It's also, as my group proved, pretty easy to accidentally skip all but one or two of those 17 encounters and arrive at the final combat underlevelled and unrested.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
The Irontooth encounter was also bullshit, being a level 6 encounter for a level 1 party. Pretty much all the published 4e adventures I tried were crap, with a ton of fighting and very little plot advancement to back it up. 4e combat is fun, a 4e combat virtually identical to the one you just had a moment ago against the same baddies in the same terrain is not. Sometimes I wonder if the published modules are the source of most of the flak 4e got - they are dreadful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
The later ones are pretty good. The slaying stone, Reavers of the Harkenwold
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
The Belgian posted:The later ones are pretty good. The slaying stone, Reavers of the Harkenwold I wouldn't call The Slaying Stone good. Just not terrible. Which makes it stand out by contrast.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
So if you're wondering when Zeitgeist's solid 4e mechanics take a dive, it looks like Adventure 5 is the breaking point. The overall adventure is intricate and interesting, but it's clear the first parts at least are 3e/PF conversions with a shaky encounter structure that doesn't lend itself to 4e very well. It also brings in secondary characters who are quite a lot simpler than actual PCs - boring, imo - and involves them in too much combat for my tastes. Im hoping it improves next adventure. I'm having to do extra work to make it function.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Let's talk about ability scores! As mentioned in the link, I try not to put less than a 10 in CON/WIS/DEX. Like, I look at the defense pairings: FORT: Either you need STR for your class features, or you don't need it at all. So you probably have 18 or 8 STR and like 12-15 CON. AFAIK there's only one CON-primary class, right? REF: Either you need INT for your class features, or you don't need it at all. So you probably have 18 INT and 10-12 DEX, or 8 INT and 18 DEX WILL: Whichever one of WIS or CHA you need for your class features gets the high number; if you need WIS, you can dump CHA, but if you need CHA, you probably want 10-12 WIS Is this pretty much how everyone else does it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
You can build a CON-primary Warlock, too. Or if you're my weird player, Paladin, or really anything, but nevermind that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
There are plenty of CON-secondary classes, though, most notably the Valourous Bard. Realistically, ability scores are almost always 'what is your primary stat? Put an 18 there. What is your secondary stat? Put the next highest score there. Then think about feat access (especially for your multiclass and epic crit feat), put the third highest score there. Then DEX then CON in that order if you don't have them already. Put an 8 somewhere, probably INT, CHA or STR depending on class'. Ability score setups are usually fairly well dictated by your choice of class and build. You can also build a very solid CON-primary half-elf Knight, better if the DM doesn't immediately nix White Lotus Master Riposte working with aura defence targets (which he should, that was a very obvious erratum that didn't get done through laziness).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
So I was taking a look at the 4e essentials stuff and I got a little confused, is something like the Knight basically just a specific build for the fighter? It seems like the usage of the aura rather than a mark makes the Fighter player rather differently, so is supposed to be used as a standalone class or can one mix/match some of the fighter features from PHB, martial power, etc. with the Knight features? I'm guessing that regardless of choice, one is free to pick and choose powers as one levels from the other books, is that right? Also finally, if I wanted to play a Fighter focused on defending allies, does anyone have any suggestions for the fighter's mark thing vs the defender aura? Thanks for any help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Essentially for your character you want one of two arrays. 18 Primary Stat 14 Secondary Stat (Rider) 11 Tertiary Stat (the thing you want in order to qualify for something, generally) 10 10 8 or 16 Primary Stat 16 Secondary Stat 13 Tertiary Stat 11 10 8 With the last four on here maybe involving some 12s and not a 13, mileage may vary depending on what you want to qualify for. The first array is for a class/build that really benefits strongly from hitting as much as possible and has a largely unimportant/in some cases nearly non-existent rider. The second array is attractive if you have +2 racial modifiers to your two 16s, and not so much if you don't. It's generally for classes/builds where your secondary stat matters a lot (very often leaders), you are trying to get two very good NADs (most defenders, really), or you want to leave room to get a decent feat like plate mail proficiency before epic but you have other priorities. I am strongly against doing it any differently. Building around Con is an enticing option for certain hybrids and other builds but you really feel it in skills unless your DM barrages your group with Endurance checks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
BattleCake posted:So I was taking a look at the 4e essentials stuff and I got a little confused, is something like the Knight basically just a specific build for the fighter? It seems like the usage of the aura rather than a mark makes the Fighter player rather differently, so is supposed to be used as a standalone class or can one mix/match some of the fighter features from PHB, martial power, etc. with the Knight features? I'm guessing that regardless of choice, one is free to pick and choose powers as one levels from the other books, is that right? A Knight is a standalone class that gets exactly what HotFL gives them. They are a fighter subclass, so can pick from Fighter utility powers, feats, and paragon paths as appropriate, but don't have many of the core features (marks, combat challenge, combat superiority) that many Fighter feats lean on. A Knight won't pick any normal Fighter At-Will, Encounter or Daily attacks, without some feats or racial features to enable it. Now - They are pretty good (if boring) defenders, and actually better vs. hordes of enemies, but they are incredibly vulnerable to forced movement. And did I mention boring? In basically all cases, I'd suggest a standard (aka Weaponmaster) Fighter. If you really must be a Knight, take a dwarf to patch up that huge Achilles heel. Fighters are the top defenders in the game, so you're set.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
If you need to do something like qualify for Polearm Momentum you could do 16,14,14,13,10,8, but otherwise those arrays are the only real choices. This is why DTAS makes sense. If choosing your ability scores doesn't involve any interesting decisions, why bother including them in the game?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
The game also isn't well-balanced around making every ability score equally important to the function or every-day life of your character, it's just "put big number in attack score, second number in build choice." And of your build choices, quite frequently one choice is the actual effective one and the other two or three are "the same thing, but not as good" or "downright bad." It's totally divorced from saying anything about who your character is and almost totally divorced from how you function in combat. This leads down strange paths, like figuring that other than Strength, Wisdom is the Fighter god-stat almost regardless of what you are trying to do.
Name Change fucked around with this message at 08:59 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:It's super confusing. I guess I should assume that the essentials classes are their own thing because essentials is sort of meant to be a simplified, stand alone version of 4e, is that correct? Also, can a standard Fighter built from the PHB rules utilize any knight powers, etc. from the essentials books?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
BattleCake posted:I guess I should assume that the essentials classes are their own thing because essentials is sort of meant to be a simplified, stand alone version of 4e, is that correct? Also, can a standard Fighter built from the PHB rules utilize any knight powers, etc. from the essentials books? If a power has a level, then it's avaliable to the other versions of the class at that level. If it doesn't have a level then it's unavailable except in rare occasions when there might be a feat. Some of the classes are more tightly integrated with their base versions than others. Hexblade gets warlock utilities and dalies. Mage basically gets everything. Slayer gets utilities? I think?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
BattleCake posted:I guess I should assume that the essentials classes are their own thing because essentials is sort of meant to be a simplified, stand alone version of 4e, is that correct? Also, can a standard Fighter built from the PHB rules utilize any knight powers, etc. from the essentials books? I believe there's a feat (Martial Cross-Training?) that lets Knights poach Fighter powers and vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:It's super confusing. Counterpoint: go Eladrin and just teleport both yourself and your enemies nonstop. Just loving teleportation every single round, probably more then once a round, zapping everything around you through portals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Guys. GUYS. I need as many basketball-related character traits as possible for a Lv.5 Goliath Dragonmagic Sorcerer. Items, powers, feats, you name it: the campaign is planned to go up to level 10. The player in question already has Boots of Bounding, tons of Athletics, Thunder Leap, a Magic Orb +1 and an unholy fixation of slam-dunking with Acid Orb. I plan on increasing the basketball mayhem as much as possible, without ever outright having it be basketball. I need this for reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 15:47
|
|