|
Path of War is pretty well done, overall. But if I ever run PF, all the supernatural maneuvers are getting houseruled to be extraordinary instead. I don't care if that means they're shooting arrows with the power of musclefire.
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:39 |
|
|
Nihilarian posted:Path of War is pretty well done, overall. But if I ever run PF, all the supernatural maneuvers are getting houseruled to be extraordinary instead. I don't care if that means they're shooting arrows with the power of musclefire. I know that 'supernatural' and 'extraordinary' are terms that have rules meaning in 3e. But I don't remember what either of them mean. And I am overwhelmingly happy about that.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:I know that 'supernatural' and 'extraordinary' are terms that have rules meaning in 3e. But I don't remember what either of them mean. And I am overwhelmingly happy about that. The amount of rules that influence then is pretty small from what I remember. Stuff that's (Ex) is supposed to be superhuman/extraordinary but not supernatural, stuff that's (Su) is supernatural, and stuff that's (Sp) is a spell-like ability. Other than antimagic affecting Sp things, I don't think there's any special rules meaning.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:The amount of rules that influence then is pretty small from what I remember. Stuff that's (Ex) is supposed to be superhuman/extraordinary but not supernatural, stuff that's (Su) is supernatural, and stuff that's (Sp) is a spell-like ability. Other than antimagic affecting Sp things, I don't think there's any special rules meaning. I think you are talking about a thing that I have forgotten about 3e. I'm n ot going to read this post, and screw you.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Say you're shooting flaming arrows (SP) means that you're casting a spell that makes arrows burst into flames, or a spell that shoots pre-made fire arrows. (SU) Means that shooting fire-arrows is something inherent to you somehow. It defies the laws of physics but you're inherently magical in some way so it works. (EX) means that you're shooting the arrows so fast they burst into flames. You aren't breaking the laws of physics, you're just that good.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
CDW posted:So we are promptly converting characters to Pathfinder and jumping ship. mastershakeman posted:Are rogues ever good in non-4e d&d? The best way I've ever read to deal with Rogue/Thief-type classes: It is this writer’s opinion that the standard Thief in Labyrinth Lord is a weak class. The percentile-based abilities are low enough at starting levels that the character comes off as inexperienced and incompetent at their chosen occupation. To rectify this situation, monster classes who get certain thief skills will have at the bare minimum a 50% chance of success and increase this percentage chance with levels. If your party has a fair chance at containing monster classes and a thief, I recommend these alternatives: Thief hit die is 1d6. Pick Locks, Find & Remove Traps, Move Silently, and Hide in Shadows start at 50% at 1st level. The percentile increases by 4% at 2nd level and every level after that to a maximum of 99% at 14th level. Other thief skills remain as normal. ProfessorCirno posted:Pathfinder has 3rd party stuff to replace psionics and Tome of Battle that's pretty drat great, which launches it ahead of 5e.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
I think that D&D-WotC pre-mearls was probably a better environment than Paizo. But Paizo now is better than D&D-WotC. (Ignoring the pathfinder MMO) Magic-WotC is amazing, they made one of the main characters in Tarkir transgender and told the people who threw a fit that they didn't want them as fans.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
5e did make some movements along that line, but they're pointless with the focus on the old guard and hard to access design.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Say you're shooting flaming arrows SP also means you can metamagic them, dispell them or counter etc like spells. SU means they are magic and can be resisted and detected as such but otherwise are as is. EX means it pierces spell and magic immunities, can't be dispelled or metamagiced etc. Giving martials powerful EX abilities (like 4th basically did) is a cool and good thing to do imo.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Say you're shooting flaming arrows Ex is actually specifically allowed to break the laws of physics, at least in 3.5, but it's also explicitly not MAGICAL, so poo poo like an anti-magic field has no effect on it. Basically, they wrote "martials are so good reality bends" into the rules, then pretty much entirely failed to use it until a bit of ToB.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
The Real Foogla posted:SP also means you can metamagic them, dispell them or counter etc like spells. SU means they are magic and can be resisted and detected as such but otherwise are as is. EX means it pierces spell and magic immunities, can't be dispelled or metamagiced etc. You can't metamagic Sp without certain special feats that specifically allow it, though. Like "Empower Spell LIke Ability". Since you can't increase the spell slot of a spell you don't have slotted.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
So I just started playing with 5e, and I'm wondering about spellcasters. Our group is a barbarian, paladin, cleric, and a druid. Do all spellcasters innately know their spell lists before preparing now? And why the hell does a cleric have better damage options than the druid at lv 1 magic wise?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:And why the hell does a cleric have better damage options than the druid at lv 1 magic wise? Why wouldn't they?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
I'm playing in a Next one shot over Memorial Day weekend, and I picked up the 5E PHB to roll some characters. I'm just about burned out on 4E, and a few of my buddies are pretty high on Next, so here's hoping I don't hate it. But I'm about halfway through the PHB and . . . What the hell is the deal with all the Dragonlance references? Other than sporadic articles in Dragon Magazine, has WotC ever directly published any Dragonlance stuff? Are they planning to? I know Next is the edition for old farts (and I'm an old fart!) but holy poo poo, those books are more than 30 years old. And I know why they did it, but gently caress them for jumbling up all the spells together alphabetically in one big lump. All I want to do is pick a handful of Cleric spells. gently caress you Mike Mearls for expecting me to pick through all the other magic bullshit to get there.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:So I just started playing with 5e, and I'm wondering about spellcasters. Our group is a barbarian, paladin, cleric, and a druid. Do all spellcasters innately know their spell lists before preparing now? And why the hell does a cleric have better damage options than the druid at lv 1 magic wise? Casters "prepare" spells, which mean they can spend a spell slot on it, and then they also "know" spells, which are spells that they can prepare. Druids and Clerics always know all their spells, then prepare a subset of it. Domain spells don't count against their preparation limit. Sorcerors, Warlocks and Bards can never know all their spells, but all the spells they know are always prepared. They can modify their known spells one spell at a time every time they level up. Wizards know a subset of their full spell list, and prepare an even smaller set. They can eventually know all spells, provided they find scrolls or whatnot for all of them.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
To elaborate more, jumping from 5e to PF is much easier with the new players I have than trying to go over to 4e, and is the reason I'm doing that. My main complaint with WOTC is that I think they had a good, innovative product with 4e that addressed some issues with 3.5, then suddenly they came out with Essentials then 5e to say "Me too! Me too!" and try to capture that market back. The rush they went under to get a product out with the flip flopping of the rules from the playtest (which I did play in and like in early beta) leads to stuff like the horrible spell list mentioned above, which is made even worse when compared to just looking stuff up on that pathfinder SRD site, and no official pdf products. Are there even any products coming out other than adventures? I just can't figure out what WOTC is even doing with D&D at this point. Mostly just posting this to see what other GMs are thinking and doing.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:And why the hell does a cleric have better damage options than the druid at lv 1 magic wise? (Im going way back here ... but) Clerics do battle for the cause of their deity. Druids protect nature. Druids being some elite battle class came about (somehow) during the rise of MMOs as far as I can remember.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Yeah basically our druid was throwing thorn whip and acid sprays all over the place like no damage, barely contributing compared to our martials. Sitting in a corner and feeling useless is not fun for players tbh.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Because that makes sense..? Well actually it came about because druids/clerics were the only decent fighters of 3.x.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Well actually it came about because druids/clerics were the only decent fighters of 3.x.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:Yeah basically our druid was throwing thorn whip and acid sprays all over the place like no damage, barely contributing compared to our martials. Sitting in a corner and feeling useless is not fun for players tbh. Level 1 sucks. Jump to level 2 and let the wild shape dickery begin! Also, Shillelagh is pretty drat effective at low levels. You can make a one-handed club (paired with a non-metal shield) into a 1d8+WIS weapon, which isn't too shabby. Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 17:42 on May 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:nah, there are plenty of decent fighters in 3.x Yeah, it just got mislabeled as 'Cleric.'
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:Yeah basically our druid was throwing thorn whip and acid sprays all over the place like no damage, barely contributing compared to our martials. Sitting in a corner and feeling useless is not fun for players tbh. Shouldn't they be, like, turning into a bear and then easily outshining the martials? That's the impression I got from reading this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:nah, there are plenty of decent fighters in 3.x Not in Core. There's Cleric and Druid. SRD adds PsyWar. It's not until you get into splats, mostly ToB, that you get non-caster/psionic good fightmans.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Nomadic Scholar posted:Yeah basically our druid was throwing thorn whip and acid sprays all over the place like no damage, barely contributing compared to our martials. Sitting in a corner and feeling useless is not fun for players tbh. And that's fine honestly, because when you can catch a bunch of mooks bunched up in an Entangle you basically shut down the fight by yourself. Also, I'm not sure in what universe the cleric is doing a ton more cantrip damage than a druid. Sacred Flame is pretty inaccurate IME.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Esser-Z posted:Not in Core. There's Cleric and Druid. SRD adds PsyWar. It's not until you get into splats, mostly ToB, that you get non-caster/psionic good fightmans. And yeah, there are also a lot of "decent" fighters out of core, too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Are rogues ever good in non-4e d&d? I feel really bad for the Rogue in my current 5e game, his entire turn each time is just "roll once, hope to hit, then roll more 5d6" Meanwhile the Sorcerer is throwing Lightning Bolts like it ain't no thing.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
To be fair, rogues should always dual wield so they have the twice the number of attacks to make that could be used to make a sneak attack. Also give them flanking advantage so they get to roll a total of four times with two attacks. Rogues are still crap, mind.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Sacred flame did some work for some reason and the druid got some eh rolls for damage
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Shouldn't they be, like, turning into a bear and then easily outshining the martials? That's the impression I got from reading this thread. They don't get wildshape at first level. Even with it, they won't start easily outshining the martials until ~5th level.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Also, I'm not sure in what universe the cleric is doing a ton more cantrip damage than a druid. Sacred Flame is pretty inaccurate IME.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
Should I take the fact that the last several pages are entirely discussions of other editions/other games and how to convert to those instead of this as an indication that we shouldn't start a 5E game? Was hoping to find discussions of ongoing play of 5E, useful tools, rule interpretations and such. Not promising.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
si posted:Should I take the fact that the last several pages are entirely discussions of other editions/other games and how to convert to those instead of this as an indication that we shouldn't start a 5E game? Was hoping to find discussions of ongoing play of 5E, useful tools, rule interpretations and such. Not promising. Depends. How do you feel about 3.5?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
5E is a perfectly playable system. If you want to play it, you can do so. You may have to make some judgment calls on some of the awkward wording of some rules (polearm reach, for instance) but it can work out. The problem is, it's not a very good system. The classes are terribly balanced against one another and some of them are just straight up not fun and not good. Also the combat, with its low-HP-high-damage, can (accidentally) be very lethal, especially at low levels. Play it if you want, but don't be surprised if you find you don't like it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
si posted:Should I take the fact that the last several pages are entirely discussions of other editions/other games and how to convert to those instead of this as an indication that we shouldn't start a 5E game? Was hoping to find discussions of ongoing play of 5E, useful tools, rule interpretations and such. Not promising. Standard "Should I play 5e checklist" here: Does your group own any other editions of D&D and enjoy them at all? Does your group care all that much about what game they are playing or do they tend to prioritize the social value of play over the medium? If your answers are "No" and "Our group is awesome and can make a bad or boring system work" then you should totally get 5e.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
If your group won't play anything else it's more than fine. You can have fun with it. I don't think the premade adventures are that good but I prob had the best time playing an TTRPG in an impossible style battle as a Fighter/Cleric. There's not a lot of tools. Rule Interpretations have a 'ask your DM' problem. I think you can house-rule it to hell pretty easily but I've only been doing that since I got a stubborn group. 5E: Not the worst game ever, but not an infinite amount to talk about.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Standard "Should I play 5e checklist" here: This is our first stab at D&D in general - we have all played it before, but somewhere around the 20 years ago mark. Recently we have played games like Apocalypse World, various Fate system games, etc. So we're definitely on the second aspect there. Dick Burglar posted:5E is a perfectly playable system. If you want to play it, you can do so. You may have to make some judgment calls on some of the awkward wording of some rules (polearm reach, for instance) but it can work out. The problem is, it's not a very good system. The classes are terribly balanced against one another and some of them are just straight up not fun and not good. Also the combat, with its low-HP-high-damage, can (accidentally) be very lethal, especially at low levels. We're all friends and the balance part too important. If you've played things like Apoc World, classes are inherently not balance-able, and it creates a lot of inter-character awesome. Could you elaborate on the not fun/not good classes? That would be good to know. I was kind of reading through here and saw general criticism of pretty much every class, which would make me think standard game everyone thinks their class is underpowered, etc. The lethal thing, I say awesome - if our first merry band of adventurers goes out and is slaughtered by the first thing we encounter, this will be great hilarity when we create the second band and march into the same doom.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
si posted:Should I take the fact that the last several pages are entirely discussions of other editions/other games and how to convert to those instead of this as an indication that we shouldn't start a 5E game? Was hoping to find discussions of ongoing play of 5E, useful tools, rule interpretations and such. Not promising. It's not ~~terrible~~ and you can avoid most of the issues with houserules and TRPG experience and general group sociability, but there are other systems out there that you don't need to houserule and/or you don't need to be a long-time player to enjoy and/or are simpler and easier to learn and play and/or don't cost as much money. si posted:Could you elaborate on the not fun/not good classes? That would be good to know. I was kind of reading through here and saw general criticism of pretty much every class, which would make me think standard game everyone thinks their class is underpowered, etc. Nothing short of an extensive overhaul will redeem the Rogue and the Fighter.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
si posted:This is our first stab at D&D in general - we have all played it before, but somewhere around the 20 years ago mark. Recently we have played games like Apocalypse World, various Fate system games, etc. So we're definitely on the second aspect there. Sounds like you're fine, though if you've enjoy apoc world and FATE you're likely to find this game a little restrictive and backwards. If you can find a way to play it for free first, I'd recommend that. Honestly despite the constant lack of actual 5e conversation in here, I don't think anyone hates the game, it's too basic and plain to hate. You'll have a good time, it might just be the same good time you had with other systems that didn't take the big buy in. Hell if you're specifically looking for a "Hooray we're playing D&D and everyone keeps dying to dumb mechanics and weird traps but it only takes three minutes to make a character" even that has a better edition or two you could get for peanuts. theironjef fucked around with this message at 20:47 on May 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:39 |
|
|
Do you enjoy saying "I attack" every turn and rolling dice to see if some numbers go down?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2015 20:57
|
|
