|
Solid Jake posted:Also bit of a swerve here but am I reading the Wizard right in that it learns 44 goddamn spells by level 20, not even counting cantrips or free spells from scrolls? Yes. 6+(2*19).
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Yes. 6+(2*19). 44 spells per day. 8-10 encounters per day. How many rounds is a fight expected to last again? 4-6 or so, right? Hmmm....
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:44 spells per day. To be fair, they get the same number of spell slots as all the other Real Casters--22 total, which is still a lot--they just have much, much, much more flexibility by having--at minimum--twice as many spells to pick from when preparing for the day. Which kinda raises the question of what in the hell the advantage of spontaneous casting is supposed to be now, since they used to get more spell slots than prepared casters in 3.x but don't anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
As I understand it, the spellcasting paradigm now seems to be: Clerics and Druids always "know" all of their possible spells, then "prepare" a subset, then can spend their spell slots on any of their prepared spells. Wizards do not "know" all their spells right away, but they eventually can, and then "prepare" a subset, and then can spend their spell slots on any of their prepared spells Sorcerors and Bards will only ever "know" a small subset of all their possible spells, but every spell they know is also always "prepared", and then can spend their spell slots on any of their known/prepared spells Sorcerors justify their smaller spell list through their metamagic and Dragon/Wild magic abilities/modifiers, and the Arcane spell list vis-a-vis the divine casters Bards justify their smaller spell list through their non-Arcane-spellcasting abilities such as Inspiration, better combat capability or school-dipping spell selection, and Bard-specific spell list Whether or not this is actually "balanced" I leave up as an exercise to the imagination, but that's certainly what it the idea of it seems to be
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:I started filling a survey out and then I realized that because two people can enter "not satisfied" to any question for completely loving opposite reasons, the whole god drat thing is meaningless. Does it actually get more meaningful as you get deeper into it? The only meaningful part of it is the optional comments box at the end, limited to 500 words. The rest of it is completely useless because it doesn't tell them anything other than "look at this". Not "this is under/over powered" or "this is useless" or "this is stupid and unfun", nothing at all about the hows or whys things need altering, just "Look here, the problem is this bit". It's even worse than the last one, at least that had the "which of these classes is more powerful" part to give some sort of intent to the response.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Had a question on Spells and spell related stats. For the example I'll use my bard with a +3 CHA. Spell Save DC: 13 (8 from class + 2 prof + 3 CHA) Spell Bonus/Modifier: +5 (+3 CHA + 2 prof) Spellcasting ability? Is this the total CHA or the CHA modifier? I'm assuming that if a spell does not mention needing to roll for attack that the target simply makes a throw against the stat mentioned and if it's better than my Spell Save DC of 13 they resist? If I need to roll for the spell I'm assuming I add the Spell Modifier +5 to the 1d20 roll? Is this against the targets AC. If it is AC do they also get a saving throw against it? What is spellcasting ability for?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
If the spell description mentions a spell attack, you as the caster will roll [d20 + Prof + CHA mod], and then it goes off if you can hit or beat the target's AC. If the spell description mentions a saving throw, the target will roll [d20 (+ Prof if possible) + attribute mod of whatever stat is targeted], and then the target successfully saves if the target can hit or beat your [8 + Prof + CHA mod] The "Spellcasting Ability" paragraph in the PHB just sort of describes how you tap into your spells narratively/per the in-game universe, and tells you that you use CHA as your spellcasting mod.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Super 3 posted:I'm assuming that if a spell does not mention needing to roll for attack that the target simply makes a throw against the stat mentioned and if it's better than my Spell Save DC of 13 they resist?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Just looking over the past month there's [...] and a bunch of articles about how being a DM is hard, and you should give your DM gifts for shouldering that burden.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:When my kids were babies, I changed their diapers. My wife thanked me and sometimes gave me praise or a hug. I did the same for her. That is because changing diapers is crap and getting a bit of appreciation makes it easier to bear. With all this DM appreciation poo poo, they just make their game sound about as fun as changing diapers. Well according to the articles, these mythical "players" apparently show up to the games with nothing but the clothes on their backs and expect to be fed and provided with all of their necessary materials. If I were one of those people then yeah I'd probably have to butter up the DM to keep the game going. Though I doubt you'd be buying him Rhinestone D20 Underwear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
I've always found the sentiment that GMing is some taxing and onerous burden that someone has to nobly shoulder in order for elfgaming to happen to be a toxic one. I mean sure, it takes effort, but so does being a player in any given game if you aren't just sleepwalking through it. If being a GM in a given game is unnecessarily troublesome then that's maybe a sign that the game itself doesn't give the GM very many good tools to use just like how if character generation and combat rules are a huge pain in the rear end then it makes what the players do troublesome as well. But if someone views the act of GMing as inherently something that's to be endured then that person shouldn't be GMing, full stop. It's something you should be doing because you want to do it and you find it enjoyable and that's it. If the idea is "well I don't want to GM but nobody else will so I guess I have to or we won't get to play D&D, sigh" then what you have there is the makings of a dysfunctional game group.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I've always found the sentiment that GMing is some taxing and onerous burden that someone has to nobly shoulder in order for elfgaming to happen to be a toxic one. I mean sure, it takes effort, but so does being a player in any given game if you aren't just sleepwalking through it. If being a GM in a given game is unnecessarily troublesome then that's maybe a sign that the game itself doesn't give the GM very many good tools to use just like how if character generation and combat rules are a huge pain in the rear end then it makes what the players do troublesome as well. agreed but substitute the word "GM" for "moderator of a gaming forum" for comedy laughs
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:When my kids were babies, I changed their diapers. My wife thanked me and sometimes gave me praise or a hug. I did the same for her. That is because changing diapers is crap and getting a bit of appreciation makes it easier to bear. With all this DM appreciation poo poo, they just make their game sound about as fun as changing diapers. It is easier to post DM Appreciation articles than it is to make a fun game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
DIY gift ideas, go buy stuff!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I've always found the sentiment that GMing is some taxing and onerous burden that someone has to nobly shoulder in order for elfgaming to happen to be a toxic one. I mean sure, it takes effort, but so does being a player in any given game if you aren't just sleepwalking through it. If being a GM in a given game is unnecessarily troublesome then that's maybe a sign that the game itself doesn't give the GM very many good tools to use just like how if character generation and combat rules are a huge pain in the rear end then it makes what the players do troublesome as well. Toxic sentiments for toxic people, by and large. Remember that in the lead up to 5e Mearls was quoting ENWorld and RPGSite in their crusade against poo poo like "player entitlement." It gives constant handies to DMs because it's intended audience is made of pathetic authoritarians desperately squabbling for any amount of power they can get over their fellow players. The D&D DMs it's aimed at are people who don't want to DM for the sake of running the game, they're doing it explicitly so they can control something over their friends.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:DIY gift ideas, go buy stuff! Just got in on a group at work and I bought the GM a gift card to the game store as a 'Thank you' for organizing etc. Gave it to him before the game and he was pretty surprised, guess that's not the norm.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:The D&D DMs it's aimed at are people who don't want to DM for the sake of running the game, they're doing it explicitly so they can control something over their friends. I can understand in something like pbp having the dm be like "okay these are things I don't want in the game," but whenever there's been a rule dispute or a question or whatever at a live table it's always been a matter of consensus in my experience. I guess what's puzzling me is how anyone tolerates the "authoritarian DM" for longer than 1 session. Super 3 posted:Just got in on a group at work and I bought the GM a gift card to the game store as a 'Thank you' for organizing etc. Gave it to him before the game and he was pretty surprised, guess that's not the norm. I mean if he's making an event out of it with food & stuff then yea, I can see throwing something his way or chipping in for the grub. Doing it just for being the DM would be a little strange to me though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
I dunno, man. It's not a burden to be nobly shouldered, but I think the GM (especially in D&D) has more work to do than all the players combined. Most (but not all, thankfully) of my GMing experience has featured players not even coming with updated character sheets when they level, not doing their item wishlists or backstories, and in general not doing anything outside of the game session. This is different from "player entitlement" ("how dare they presume that their character will grow and develop along any lines at all, let alone the ones they envisioned when they created the character?"), in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:As I understand it, the spellcasting paradigm now seems to be: Essentially the sorcerer/bard limitation doesn't matter because there is an obvious hierarchy of good to trash-tier spells. Bards even more so because they have all those spells and are skill kings and can put in a good melee presence and have features besides.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Toxic sentiments for toxic people, by and large. Remember that in the lead up to 5e Mearls was quoting ENWorld and RPGSite in their crusade against poo poo like "player entitlement." It gives constant handies to DMs because it's intended audience is made of pathetic authoritarians desperately squabbling for any amount of power they can get over their fellow players. The D&D DMs it's aimed at are people who don't want to DM for the sake of running the game, they're doing it explicitly so they can control something over their friends. Their communication style to the players is just patronizing this edition. "Well we're pretty sure the Ranger is okay but if you want we'll print some special rules just for you. Just make sure to ask your DM first if it's okay. And don't run with that d4, you'll put your eye out!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Their communication style to the players is just patronizing this edition. "Well we're pretty sure the Ranger is okay but if you want we'll print some special rules just for you. Just make sure to ask your DM first if it's okay. And don't run with that d4, you'll put your eye out!" B-b-b-b-but, 4e talked down to me and was the baby edition...!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:B-b-b-b-but, 4e talked down to me and was the baby edition...! Don't worry dear, we'll take away all of mean old 4e's toys and put him in the corner with the Warlord and Swordmage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Is there anyone else even there any more? Has it been winnowed down to just Mike on his own? Would explain the lack of consistent updates, and the shoddy editing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:B-b-b-b-but, 4e talked down to me and was the baby edition...! Innocent DMs: B-b-b-but! Stinky, entitled players: He-he-he! Corner Gygax: The Grand Douchey of Karameikos!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Innocent DMs: B-b-b-but! This is pretty fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Innocent DMs: B-b-b-but! Holy poo poo I can see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
homullus posted:I dunno, man. It's not a burden to be nobly shouldered, but I think the GM (especially in D&D) has more work to do than all the players combined. Most (but not all, thankfully) of my GMing experience has featured players not even coming with updated character sheets when they level, not doing their item wishlists or backstories, and in general not doing anything outside of the game session. The problem you're describing isn't "GMing takes more work" though. Players who don't update their character sheets? Players who, essentially, aren't holding up their end on the whole collaborative and cooperative experience thing? None of that has anything to do with how hard it is to GM, and the idea that the GM has to do "more work than all the players combined" is, frankly, bullshit. If it's the case that you, as a GM, are having to do more work than all the other players combined then you have a dysfunctional gaming group and you should really consider finding a more pleasant social activity to engage in with them or finding a better group to game with. I mean, this isn't really an attack against your integrity or anything, I believe you when you tell me that you've had to do more work because your players are some combination of lazy or disinterested (or, more charitably, are interested in RPGs in a way that doesn't align with your own investment as a participant in the process), but what that means is that you're getting a raw deal from your game group, not that being a GM is inherently some insufferable obligation to be endured.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 10:30
|
|
|
The thing that gets me is that "GMing is hard work" is mostly hard because, as a GM, you have to fight the systems in a lot of editions of D&D to get it to do what you want. It's a lot easier to DM 13th Age because you aren't having to fight it every step of the way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:The thing that gets me is that "GMing is hard work" is mostly hard because, as a GM, you have to fight the systems in a lot of editions of D&D to get it to do what you want. It's a lot easier to DM 13th Age because you aren't having to fight it every step of the way. Some of the "hard work" GMs put up with is absolutely down to fighting the system. To beat a particular dead horse, Next's Challenge Rating system basically means that assembling a fight that delivers X experience is equivalent to tossing darts at a board. Will you achieve the perfect blend of challenge and tension or accidentally wipe the party? Who knows! It's fun to have your session derailed because you weren't planning to kill half the PCs and suddenly you have to madly scramble or fudge things, or maybe you put your foot down about it...you wear the Viking Hat after all...and now your players are pissed because that fight (which you totally thought would work out just fine) was some bullshit. Repeated trial and error can, of course, ameliorate this. Plenty of 3.X/Pathfinder GMs have a solid handle on how to finesse those games to produce something that isn't completely whacked out in one direction or another, but a lot of that experience was acquired by making the decision, one way or another, to put up with something insufferable and finicky and opaque until it finally became second nature to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Toxic sentiments for toxic people, by and large. Remember that in the lead up to 5e Mearls was quoting ENWorld and RPGSite in their crusade against poo poo like "player entitlement." It gives constant handies to DMs because it's intended audience is made of pathetic authoritarians desperately squabbling for any amount of power they can get over their fellow players. The D&D DMs it's aimed at are people who don't want to DM for the sake of running the game, they're doing it explicitly so they can control something over their friends.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
It's all a conspiracy from Big DM.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Do you believe this stuff or is it just kind of auto-posting at this point? One of 5e's creators is a crypto-fascist who's forums are filled with people loudly proclaiming that players who go into a tavern and order an elven wine without being told first that the elves make wine are too entitled and are trying to steal the DM's job by creating world details.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:If it's the case that you, as a GM, are having to do more work than all the other players combined then you have a dysfunctional gaming group and you should really consider finding a more pleasant social activity to engage in with them or finding a better group to game with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:One of 5e's creators is a crypto-fascist who's forums are filled with people loudly proclaiming that players who go into a tavern and order an elven wine without being told first that the elves make wine are too entitled and are trying to steal the DM's job by creating world details. I hope that every single one of them gets their railroad adventure sidetracked by smarter players
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:One of 5e's creators is a crypto-fascist who's forums are filled with people loudly proclaiming that players who go into a tavern and order an elven wine without being told first that the elves make wine are too entitled and are trying to steal the DM's job by creating world details.  He's terrible, but let's keep perspective, here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I dunno man. Calling Tarnowski one of 5e's "creators" is about on the same level as ranting about how swine are destroying gaming. There's nothing indicating that either him or Zak had any actual lasting influence on the system anyway, since it rips off so much crap from 3e and both of those gently caress-nuts have a nerd boner for 2e and earlier. I'm betting that the most Pundowski ever did for Next was chase Cook off the team. FRINGE posted:Do you believe this stuff or is it just kind of auto-posting at this point? At this point I think he's doing the latter, since virtually every post I see from him now is just OH MAN THE HOBBY IS HORRIBLE HERE LEMME TELL YOU WHY. Like, Cirno. Dude. We get it. You can stop now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:One of 5e's creators is a crypto-fascist who's forums are filled with people loudly proclaiming that players who go into a tavern and order an elven wine without being told first that the elves make wine are too entitled and are trying to steal the DM's job by creating world details. Isn't this then the DM's fault for not providing those details of his world before hand? Or is it the DM's fault for not just having the barkeep tell the players that drink doesn't exist? Sounds like those people can't improvise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Innocent DMs: B-b-b-but! Needs the Lady of Pain standing in the corner shedding a single tear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
It's not anybody's fault. The DM does not have an absolute lockdown on the details of the world, and insistence on having so is part of the problem of "being a DM is just so much work".
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
Splicer posted:4E provides more support for combat, but doesn't provide less support for non-combat. On top of that, a non-spellcaster in 4E can gain quite a few additional non-combat abilities by taking non-combat utility powers, though they probably wouldn't actually do that because they're a shared resource pool for combat-related utility powers. This is one of the reasons why we were super excited when 5E looked like it might address this with Combat/Social/Exploration siloing, but then they went and hosed that up beyond all belief I am not at all saying that because 4E combat is more complex it means you have less options for roleplay. It's more that I don't want to play with a grid and to me combat is something that happens in between stories. I feel like 4E was fixing a problem that I didn't have which was that spellcasters were more interesting, so they gave everyone loads of abilities to make up for it and it became a slog for me. I 100% feel that 5th is the easiest to just dump the grid with. I guess 4th felt more like we talked about and did combat and things happened as a result of it. The best analogy I can think of is this. You work in tech support. One manager focuses on you serving the customer and making sure things are fixed, sales happen but the people in that manager's team don't talk much about them, they're just part of the job, although a few people concentrate on them for bonus. The other manager has a sales board and loves to talk about sales techniques and the amount you get in bonus for each one. In both situations the job is identical but you FEEL like you're a salesperson in the latter. 4E felt like the latter, only sales is combat (duh). I'd love the system in a computer game because I love complex character creation and loads of options, but in tabletop it's just not how my friends play. And in regards to the player's handbook thing people commented on - I own it. My friends do not. They create their characters with me, because they're less invested in D&D than I am. This was again harder in 4th because all the options made it take ages. Taear fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 17:13
|
|
matches.