|
thespaceinvader posted:Because they don't want to be told stuff they don't already know. These surveys aren't remotely designed to collect feedback, they''re designed to backpat the designers and write marketing copy. This has been the case since survey one. How much do we think that the 4e IP would sell for?
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:30 |
|
|
I know we're sad about no warlords but:Player's Handbook page 51, Bard class posted:A stern human warrior bangs his sword rhythmically against his scale mail, setting the tempo for his war chant and exhorting his companions to bravery and heroism. is fluffwise explicitly the warlord I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:I know we're sad about no warlords but: On the other hand, mechanically it plays nothing like a Warlord. Outside of the inspiration dice, there's few enabling abilities and at the end of the day they're just another class of spell casters casting goofy spells. Some of their spells are buffs, but with 5e's action economy and resource system, you're almost always better off spending your full round action performing a spell that either deals damage or has a save or suck effect. I'm okay with Warlords not being in 5e, though. They're too beautiful for this game. Mecha Gojira fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Harrow posted:What I entirely fail to get through my head is why people who want these "gritty adventures with people who are close to real life" also seem to insist that magic, especially arcane magic, must be nearly unlimited in potential scope. Boing's concept of "specialist casters" would fit in just fine for these "gritty adventures," but that's not what they want, and you can bet there'd be rebellion if a hypothetical 5.5e limited the scope of what magic could do. They want mundanes to have gritty adventures that casters can float above like a distant god. This is 3.5E class, and credit to Ryuujin for telling me about it, but this sort of cleaves closer to my idea of what a spellcaster should be capable of if we're going to hew closely to "martials can't ever be supernatural" He's a walking artillery piece, a magically-powered howitzer, but he's also not the party everyman, he's not capable of unlocking doors (at least not without using his limited set of character customization options), and he certainly can't cast Tenser's goddamn Transformation. Pfox posted:How much do we think that the 4e IP would sell for? What I wouldn't give for a 4th Edition OGL.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
So despite what goons recommended I went to a dnd adventure league. It was really fun. Nobody was a weird grog or anything. Maybe it's because the LGS is right across the street from a university, but goons were completely wrong about the experience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
Xeom posted:So despite what goons recommended I went to a dnd adventure league. It was really fun. Nobody was a weird grog or anything. Then those people need to form a real roleplaying group instead of hanging out where the outcasts and rejects belong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 13:13
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:This is 3.5E class, and credit to Ryuujin for telling me about it, but this sort of cleaves closer to my idea of what a spellcaster should be capable of if we're going to hew closely to "martials can't ever be supernatural" That's really nice. I like that a lot. I think, were I to take a stab at rebalancing 5e magic, I'd have Wizard specialize in schools while Sorcerers specialize in elements. It'd kill off the "dragon vs wild magic" thing, but I really like playing with elemental magic that crosses over into areas that are thematically connected to the element but not physically connected. For example, that Fire Mage class you linked features some light magic along with fire magic, which makes sense, because fire is a light in the darkness. The Fire Mage can ignite a symbolic fire, causing rage in a target's mind. That's cool poo poo. A hypothetical Fire Sorcerer in 5e would definitely have spells like Fire Bolt, Burning Hands, Scorching Ray, and Fireball, but they'd probably also have Detect Magic and True Seeing (firelight lets you see better), things like that. It'd be a big job to comb through the spell lists and come up with equally attractive options for a variety of elements, but it might be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Xeom posted:So despite what goons recommended I went to a dnd adventure league. It was really fun. Nobody was a weird grog or anything. Glad you had a good experience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Xeom posted:So despite what goons recommended I went to a dnd adventure league. It was really fun. Nobody was a weird grog or anything. There's usually at least one weirdo who shits things up, so that's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:What I wouldn't give for a 4th Edition OGL. Yeah, that'd be pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
Boing posted:I've been arguing with my D&D group about class balance for a while and they really weren't getting it, so I decided to put my money where my mouth is and start houseruling up Fighter Spells: Those are great rules, especially since they're so tied in to already established mythologies. I have no idea how you'd challenge a party of guys with those abilities, as those heroes are usually on their own, but hey, I've never figured out how a DM can balance D&D vs a group of high level casters either (since it's pretty much impossible without just breaking out antimagic).
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Epic adventurers need epic threats. Taking down a dungeon full of orcs or a criminal den is low level work. By the time you're level 15 you're facing down dragons and giants constantly, and other humans who are equally as epic as you are. Criminal masterminds who own entire cities' watchmen and politicians, and are never seen in person so you don't even know where to find them. Wizards who own entire pocket planes and control the physics of their own dimensions. Cool stuff like that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Boing posted:By the time you're level 15... You just mention to a passing king that when you were hunting gods in the northern marshlands last week, you found it tiresome to have to keep scraping orcs off the soles of your boots. That comment gets filtered downward* until the captain of the guard in Marshtown receives an order, looks at his underfunded, undermanned department, and sends his secretary to the tavern to ask some adventurers if they think they're bad enough dudes to take down the orc chieftain and save the kingdom. *So far down. Further than that. Further. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:There is a new D&D survey out right now. One of the questions is as follows: Mearls' absolute hate for the warlord is now starting to actually amuse me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Well, it's also missing the whole Psionic power source, which is amusing because it did cram in those other two butt-fart classes from PHB3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Hey at least he acknowledged the existence of the Anime Weeaboo Bullshit Splatbook for 3.5E
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Pfox posted:How much do we think that the 4e IP would sell for? Sadly, avoiding the competition rereleasing your discontinued product to a grateful market is one of the few lessons D&D division HAVE learned from the 3.5-4e transition...
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:You can totally play a gritty game that maintained that feel through at least a dozen levels. (Speaking about 2e.) First of all I played Dungeons and Dragons from 1986 to about 1998 until I knew the system and its massive problems inside-out. I'm very familiar with what you can do with each system. You can absolutely play AD&D and 2e as "gritty non-magical" but you're going to have to throw out a bunch of poo poo from all the books - most of the spell lists from the Player's Handbook, most of the magic items from the DMG, and some of the monster manual...increasing in amount as you level up. Why wouldn't you just use the correct system, rather than taking a slice of a different one and calling it a day? I mean, Fantasy Vietnam or throwing out parts of the D&D rulebook made sense in the 1980s when there was no Internet and you literally couldn't find other RPGs. But it's 2015 now. Get the right system for the job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
AD&D 2e The Complete Fighter's Handbook posted:So far, we’ve mostly talked about the warrior character and his role in normal AD&D campaigns. It's funny because the book then recommends that you should consider setting such campaigns in "strictly non-magical worlds" because otherwise the Fighters are still going to have problems tackling high-level threats if they don't have magic but the Evil Wizard does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
The "fun" of an old-school gritty campaign is the "fun" of sitting around a table planning your Nth ambush on some monsters. That's the "scheming" that Fringe is talking about - because the math so heavily favors the monsters you do anything you can to flip it around and that frequently boils down to "ambush them!" while robotically checking every floor, door, wall, ceiling while dissecting every monster corpse and smashing every piece of furniture to splinters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
So everyone fill out the survey and write in warlords. I want to see how it's addressed next month.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
I forgot to add Warlord in when filling in that box and remembered right after submitting, and was annoyed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:So everyone fill out the survey and write in warlords. I want to see how it's addressed next month. Probably by eliding the issue entirely. I hope everyone voted for Martial Adept as well, I'd be so pleased if that could make it into the top 3 or so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The "fun" of an old-school gritty campaign is the "fun" of sitting around a table planning your Nth ambush on some monsters. That's the "scheming" that Fringe is talking about - because the math so heavily favors the monsters you do anything you can to flip it around and that frequently boils down to "ambush them!" while robotically checking every floor, door, wall, ceiling while dissecting every monster corpse and smashing every piece of furniture to splinters. I think that's primarily how I play, actually. The dm throws such nasty stuff at us that our main concern for the rogue and wizard is scouting so that we can go into fights ready. As we also get forced into time crunches it usually keeps the wizard and priest(s) from taking enemy specific spells after long rests. Combine this with low availability of magic, especially potions, and it's pretty much fantasy Vietnam.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Have these surveys actually borne fruit at any point in time? If so, I wonder if we'd actually see a return of the "Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic" if the Martial Adepts option gathered enough votes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
How many new products have been released since they started doing these surveys? How long has 5e been out? What's that? Did you mumble free PDF for a third party adventure? Edit: My bad, looks like Elemental Evil was supposed to be a big cross promotional deal, so it looks like that was in house as opposed to Hoard of the Dragon Queen. Mecha Gojira fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Have these surveys actually borne fruit at any point in time? If so, I wonder if we'd actually see a return of the "Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic" if the Martial Adepts option gathered enough votes. I legitimately doubt anyone in the D&D team even looks at them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The "fun" of an old-school gritty campaign is the "fun" of sitting around a table planning your Nth ambush on some monsters. That's the "scheming" that Fringe is talking about - because the math so heavily favors the monsters you do anything you can to flip it around and that frequently boils down to "ambush them!" while robotically checking every floor, door, wall, ceiling while dissecting every monster corpse and smashing every piece of furniture to splinters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
I had a level 3 Barbarian get eaten by a CR 6 Roper in an official published adventure because he didn't check to see if there was a lever behind the kobolds he had just decapitated. A fighter was also eaten by a Roper that day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Have these surveys actually borne fruit at any point in time? If so, I wonder if we'd actually see a return of the "Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic" if the Martial Adepts option gathered enough votes. If they even look at them, they just tell us the data matches what they thought and that they're doing everything right already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:I no longer believe that every one of you has played in these mythical Games Of Absolute Terribleness. When I was a teenager playing AD&D, a lot of DMs ran their games exactly like this: Oh, you looked in the barrel? Save vs petrification, there was a cockatrice in there. Oh, you tried to cross the rope bridge? Make a dexterity check or die. Oh, you opened the chest after checking the front and top and hinges for traps? A blade shoots out of the bottom and hits you, save vs poison or die. It's not some kind of mystery where they got the idea that that's how the game is played, either. The "mythical" game you're talking about is built right into the AD&D rulebooks and held up as an example of exactly how to run the game. The AD&D DMG is full of "roll the dice and abide by the result" and "you are the impartial arbiter of the rules" and similar stuff. Then the first room of the example dungeon has 3 encounters in itg. 2 of them are pretty great, but then there's encounter B. Encounter B is moldy sacks of grain. You can break them open easily to see what's inside. If you break them all open, there's a 25% chance that the last one contains Yellow Mold and everyone within 10' saves vs poison or dies. The example of play contains the glorious tale of the PC was eaten by ghouls after being paralysed on the first (surprise round) hit after they just solved a puzzle. Paralysed before they could respond and then killed not as a consequence of failure, but because they'd figured out how the mystery room worked. Is it really a stretch for you to believe that a hell of a lot of people tried to run the game as per the examples in the book? I mean, you know not to do it, I know not to do it, but are you telling me that you never once came across someone doing it like that? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
From the D&D Basic set:quote:Crab spiders are 5' long giant spiders. They are meat-eaters and attack their victims by clinging to walls or ceilings and dropping onto them. They have chameleon-like powers and can change their color to blend into their surroundings, surprising on a roll of 1-4 (on 1d6). After the first attack, a crab spider can be seen and attacked normally. Any victim bitten by a crab spider must save vs. Poison or die in 1d4 turns. However, the poison is weak, and the victim may add + 2 to the saving throw roll. This is a level 1 Wandering Monster quote:On the north side of the tapestry is a wooden table and 3 wooden chairs. A few moldy cards lie on the tabletop. Against the west wall is a wooden chest. Any attempt to disturb the chest will bring an immediate attack by the crab spider. The chest contains 99 sp (silver pieces). Room 2 in the example dungeon actually has those Crab Spiders as the occupying monster quote:Poison gas: Save vs. Poison or die These are suggestions for Room Traps for "stocking the dungeon" And finally Room 7 also contains Green Slime: quote:Green slime looks like green, oozing slime. This creature can be harmed by fire or cold but cannot be hurt by any other attacks. It dissolves wood and metal (in 6 rounds), but cannot dissolve stone. Green slime often clings to walls and ceilings and will drop down on surprised characters. Once in contact with flesh, it will stick and turn the flesh into green slime. It cannot be scraped off , but must be burnt off (or treated with a cure disease spell; see the D&D EXPERT rules). When green slime drops on a victim (or is stepped on), the victim can usually burn it while it is dissolving armor and clothing. If it is not burned off, the victim will turn completely into green slime 1-4 (1d4) rounds after the first 6-round (one minute) period. Burning does 1/2 damage to the green slime and 1/2 damage to the victim.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:When I was a teenager playing AD&D, a lot of DMs ran their games exactly like this: Oh, you looked in the barrel? Save vs petrification, there was a cockatrice in there. Oh, you tried to cross the rope bridge? Make a dexterity check or die. Oh, you opened the chest after checking the front and top and hinges for traps? A blade shoots out of the bottom and hits you, save vs poison or die.  I would rather have been born rich or with the power of flight or something. (The only game I ran into that was that bad was the Pathfinder game I mentioned a while ago that I never went back to. Lots of traps, DM monologues, surprise monsters, etc... Considering it was one "not-DnD" game out of many years it really does seem weird to me that this is a common thing.) In any case, Megaman's Jockstrap was implying that I was saying "lovely games" are fun, and I was not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Maybe I did lead an existence charmed, in only one way: good DnD games. I don't doubt it. I managed to avoid nearly all the cat-piss-thread type horror without even trying. I did play plenty of games like what Megaman's Jockstrap mentioned though. My point was really that when you try to play AD&D by the rules, and try to follow the advice and examples given, you end up with exactly that sort of bullshit game. I remember the first time I ran that starter dungeon, and although the party didn't open the deadly sacks and didn't go the way you go to get eaten by ghouls, the spider in the first room one-shotted the wizard. Like, the very first thing that happened after "you enter the dungeon and see..." was the wizard looking at the pile of bones and then as the book tells you to do I dropped the spider on him and he died on the first hit. I'd played enough D&D by that point to say "...but you throw the thing off you before it bites, everyone roll initiative", but you get what I mean, right? The example dungeon as it is written is likely to one-shot the first character to investigate the first feature described, then kill everyone near the second feature described, then god help you if you are one of the remaining adventurers and solve the puzzle in the next room because you are likely to be eaten by ghouls. It's not shocking that lots of people ran their games like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Quick rules question. The DM's at my FLGS make us roll on ability checks at disadvantage if we are not proficient. This mostly occurs on knowledge checks, but not on perception or stealth checks. Is this not incorrect?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:I no longer believe that every one of you has played in these mythical Games Of Absolute Terribleness. Where were you during the playtest? WotC actually sent out a Games Day packet that had character sheets with skills on them and a level 1 adventure that dropped skills entirely in favor of ability checks and multiple boss monsters that could only be harmed by magic. Players in my venue nearly had a fist-fight over it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:I no longer believe that every one of you has played in these mythical Games Of Absolute Terribleness. Oh, I have. Only I was the DM.  I picked up a lot of stupid habits by running 3e for 8 years. Did you know that an octopus gets 8 attacks a round and any of them can be an improved grab? And then I spent ten minutes trying to find the drowning rules.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:From the D&D Basic set: A level 1 monster with a save-or-die? What the hell. Why.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
odinson posted:Quick rules question. It's absolutely incorrect. If you're not proficient, it just means you don't get to add your proficiency bonus. That's why it's called a proficiency bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:30 |
|
|
odinson posted:Quick rules question. That is incorrect as all hell. Proficiency applies to skill checks and saving throws, not all ability checks, and it just means you add your proficiency bonus. Harrow posted:A level 1 monster with a save-or-die? What the hell. Why. Don't worry, it's a weak save-or-die
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:05
|
|
