|
odinson posted:There's an optional initiative system in the DMG that might be to your liking. Actions are declared at the beginning and you add +/- to initiative accordingly. Can't look up the specifics right now. Delaying >1 turn would create a "blitz to the caster" arms race and throw off the entire game too much imo. In 2e, casters could be interrupted by any hit. Blitz to the caster was the name of the game and created a nice metagame revolving around fake casting. So no, it doesn't throw off the game balance and gives even more reason to martials to body block.
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
captain innocuous posted:Just how hosed would game balance be if all spells were concentration, and resolved at the start of your turn x rounds later? Ah, the Rolemaster solution! In that game, it's implemented in reverse, with spells your level or 2 lower casting in three rounds, 4-6 in two rounds, and 7 or lower in 1 round. It works out alright, as Mages become ticking cannons, rather than instant ones, at least for a little while, so that Save or Die spells can be stopped, sometimes. Doesn't much help Fighters, and still falls apart at higher levels, sadly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
At this point one would probably be better off just throwing out the majority of all spells and monsters and building new ones that balance better with the weaker classes
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
drrockso20 posted:At this point one would probably be better off just throwing out the majority of all spells and monsters and building new ones that balance better with the weaker classes Or take back every small thing given to casters (armor, interruptions, etc) from 3e on and removed from martials (bab scaling, grandmaster, etc), starting with movement occurring throughout rounds instead of instantaneously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
drrockso20 posted:Man Flex Mentallo: Man of Muscle Mystery ... (also anyone who hasn't read it yet should track down a copy and read it, in my opinion it's one of the greatest comics ever made ...
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:FWIW I vaguely recall that he considered it a part of the giant meta theme from Invisibles and The Filth. It's kinda notable that I can only think of two comics of his that I've read that I didn't like(and this is even including those Zoids comics he did for Marvel UK back in the 80's); his X-Men run(I feel this was one of the only times he failed to understand the characters he was writing, not to mention it wallowed in a bunch of awful Grimderp that seemed to influence a bunch of other people at Marvel to go that way, which lead to Marvel being mostly unreadable for most of the past 15 years) and Dinosaurs vs Aliens(which has literally nothing going for it, I'm actually amazed he managed to make a comic about Dinosaurs completely boring)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
RE: Initiative talk. I've never played any of the older versions with the xTurn(segment) spell delay was a thing, but was vaguely aware of it. Just browsed through the OSRIC rules. SPEED FACTOR Some DMs find the regular progression of initiative too predictable and prone to abuse. Players can use their knowledge of the initiative order to influence their decisions. For example, a badly wounded fighter might charge a troll because he knows that the cleric goes before the monster and can heal him. Speed factor is an option for initiative that introduces more uncertainty into combat, at the cost of speed of play. Under this variant, the participants in a battle roll initiative each round. Before rolling, each character or monster must choose an action. Initiative Modifiers. Modifiers might apply to a creature's initiative depending on its size and the action it takes. For example, a creature that fights with a light weapon or casts a simple spell is more likely to act before a creature armed with a heavy or slow weapon. If more than one modifier applies such as wielding a two-handed, heavy melee weapon), apply them all to the initiative roll. (Action : Mod) Spells : Subtract spell lvl Hvy wep : -2 light/fines : +2 2h wep : -2 Range/load: -5 Size mods +5 to -8 (Tiny to Gargantuan) More words giving DM's starting points for their "discretion" Then it is decide action and roll initiative (every time you cycle through all characters). Count down from 30 and go in order
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
odinson posted:RE: Initiative talk. That's way too much rolling. It could be interesting to have everybody declare actions first, roll init once for each side (1xNPCs, 1xPCs), and apply their respective init mods to set the init order for each round, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
Thing is, the last thing D&D combat needs is even more delay between actions; calculating initiatives and who hits when on the fly is one of those things that would be fantastic when a computer does it, but a pain in the rear end to do manually, much less plan out as a party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
If the goal is for declared actions/wielded weapons to have more of an influence on initiative, then you could combine that with simplifying initiative down to 10+modifier. If the goal is to make initiative more random, then roll initiative every turn. I think combining the two would add way too much processing time between turns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If the goal is for declared actions/wielded weapons to have more of an influence on initiative, then you could combine that with simplifying initiative down to 10+modifier. That's how we played it back in 2E days: individual initiative, d10+ weapon speed factor (or casting time in the case of spells).
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
I just think rolling for your spot in the initiative each turn takes too long. You might as well pull cards out of a hat. Delaying rounds for casting spells is a clunky and maybe too harsh a penalty, but it keeps the game moving. Plus, it has the added benefit of less caster supremacy. You NEED the meatshields to block for the spellcasters, and the spellcaster NEED to do things like cast invisibility before they even try big spells. I don't think it's too out there to require 18 seconds before the meteors fall. But I haven't tried it in a game, and it does add another layer of complexity to the game. As it is though, the spell list is stupid, how 95% of the spells say "Casting Time: 1 action" Why even have that there if there isn't the possibility of Casting Time: 2 actions" That should probably be hidden in a block of natural language as well, in different places in the spell description. "The caster takes a few brief moments, and as she releases the spell, the duration of one swing of an axe has passed, or several for a mighty Warrior." captain innocuous fucked around with this message at 05:54 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
I think REIGN did something like the lowest initiative declared first but the actions resolved in reverse order. Kind of like a FILO system (first in, last out). This gave high initiative people the greatest ability to adapt their actions to the flow of the battle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
The other end of the spectrum would be for spells to simply be on the same relative tier as weapon attacks: you can choose between single-target damage or AOE, trying to guess at a creature's vulnerability and changing your element to match, forgoing (some or all) damage to inflict a non-completely-debilitating status effect, and so on. (and mind you, some martials don't even get to choose that kind of flexibility) There's a certain mechanical simplicity of the OSR era where it was just roll to hit, deal 1d6 damage on a hit. That's actually something you could modify quite a bit: step down the damage die to 1d4 if you want to cleave/AOE, you get a +2 or +4 AC if you spend your turn defending, the "Warlock" can cast a curse that reduces enemy AC or increases damage rolls, the Cleric can cast Guidance or a Cure Light Wounds with every successful hit ... and so on and so forth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
If you really want a game where actions have to be declared in advance, I highly suggest you check out Burning Wheel. All combat actions are 'scripted' in bursts of three, and it ends up playing out like complicated rock-paper-scissors. It's a pretty cool game on the whole, like a storygame run through a 90s crunch filter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
10+DEXmod +/- action seems like a good compromise. Feat: Alert would be more beneficial in those circumstances. I wouldn't play the "speed factor" rules without everyone being on board and knowledgeable about the ruleset. I've only played IRL . I can see it being much easier in a pbp game, if thats what everyone is okay with. The optional rules start on DMG pg. 270 btw. Beyond the several initiative options; there are also marking, disarming, climbing larger creatures, and tumbling rules. I think flanking is somewhere in there, but not sure off the top of my head. Will double check tomorrow. *e*(mistype) odinson fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
odinson posted:and tumbling rules. I liked that 4e rolled a bunch of skills into Acrobatics, but IMHO tumble was the most useful of them, and that got replaced by Shifting so Acrobatics didn't actually do that thing  But I can only imagine the 5e tumbling rules are poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Tumble stuff: A creature can try to tumble through a hostile creature's space, ducking and weaving past the opponent. As an action or a bonus action, the tumbler makes a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by the hostile creature's Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. If the tumbler wins the contest, it can move through the hostile creature's space once this turn. I played with my friend several months ago who had just gotten out of the dentist office and was still on  He was attempting all sorts of tumbling and scaling larger creatures (Acro). Either the DMG wasn't out at the time or we (including the DM) didn't know the exact rules. Along with some molotov cocktail shenanigans, it was hilarious if not efficient.*e* In retrospect, The DM made the correct calls for skill checks and whatnot. It was just funny at the time because you could tell he had never encountered a rambunctious halfling monk trying poo poo out and throwing down. odinson fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:I liked that 4e rolled a bunch of skills into Acrobatics, but IMHO tumble was the most useful of them, and that got replaced by Shifting so Acrobatics didn't actually do that thing They removed Tumble's ability to avoid Opportunity Attacks because they didn't like that you could skip out on an entire game mechanic with it, or at least not without the specific trade-off/opportunity cost of using a Shift instead of a Move. odinson posted:I think flanking is somewhere in there, but not sure off the top of my head. Will double check tomorrow. *e*(mistype) Flanking is "you get Advantage on the melee attack roll if you and an ally are on opposite sides of the enemy" Which they had to turn into a variant rule because you know, no grid required and all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:They removed Tumble's ability to avoid Opportunity Attacks because they didn't like that you could skip out on an entire game mechanic with it, or at least not without the specific trade-off/opportunity cost of using a Shift instead of a Move. Not just talking about "Shift: The Move Action™" but shifting in general in 4e. Rangers got all kinds of powers that were like "shift before and or after stabbing a fool TWICE, because gently caress that guy, am I right?" Like "avoiding OAs" was still a thing in 4e, it just wasn't done by acrobatics. Which basically made it the "don't fall off a narrow surface/avoid fall damage"-skill -- which is hilarious because 4e is a very 2D game, IME. Point is Acrobatics doesn't do much in 4e or 5e and in 3.5 it was split into multiple nickel-and-dime skills.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:... Point is Acrobatics doesn't do much in 4e or 5e and in 3.5 it was split into multiple nickel-and-dime skills. I like how on different saves and checks you can pick between Athletics and Acro. That should be a more across the board type thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Feat talk. Pg. 484 (Don't know how put specific posts as a link, and not quoting the whole thing) I'm calling it a night right now but, don't want his analysis to fade away without confirmations, input, dissenting opinions, or counter-options. One thing to consider is expected level range of your game. Somethingsomething about in 3.0/3.5 toughness being a elf wizard/frog familiar one-shot only feat where there are trap/situational options and mastery of the system. (Will rephrase and link this better later, just a cliffnote for now) If you start with the standard array or a 27 pt. buy, you will not max your main stat until 8 normal/6 ftr. That fact is more important to some than others. I personally go with human (v) most of the time for vanilla games. I like the options right out of the gate. House rules are extremely common and can mix things up for balance and world flavor. ASI/Feats All: 4 8 12 16 19 Fighter: Bonus at 6 14 Rogue: Bonus at 10 There has been some official errata that changes things in your print/pdf versions of the official rules as far . http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/PH_Errata_1.1.pdf http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/SA_Compendium_1.01.pdf They range from some decisions that everyone already assumed, to rulings that you're sure they didn't honestly play test or run the numbers on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
My DM has homebrewed some monster races and I tried to convince her that some of them are way overpowered but she vigorously defended this thing:quote:Cambion Two skill proficiencies (she says it's not imbalanced because some other races get 3) At-will charm with a one day duration and a DC that's the equivalent of having 22 charisma (she says it's not imbalanced because it has downsides - if a creature succeeds on the save you can't charm that creature again that day!) Flight at level 1 (not imbalanced because if you get shot you fall down and take additional damage, in fact that is a net negative apparently) Innate AC bonus from charisma, on a race that gets +2 charisma and is highly incentivised to be a Warlock or Bard (what???) A seventh level spell that you can cast from level 1 (but only on yourself!) I want to prove to her that this is pretty nuts by playing a super optimised cambion warlock but I don't know if that would even be any fun
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Yyyyyep, that's all bullshit. 23AC bards would be my first objection. But you could probably prove it's broken with a monk. goatface fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
That's pretty much bullshit alright. If you're looking for game balance, anyway. If you just want a straight up power fantasy with a kickass demon guy/gal then go for it, lord knows I've done that in my younger years. But yeah let's not pretend it's balanced. A limitation to a bonus is not a drawback, it just means that they have a bonus that is slightly less good than what it otherwise might've been. Flight is not a net negative - you can still bypass any pit, wall, uneven ground, river, or other obstacle with effortless ease. If the damage is a concern (Paladins with the Resilient feat would beg to differ) then just don't use it in combat. Although Monks would laugh at that "drawback" since they can ignore most falling damage. I'm not aware of any race that gets three skill proficiencies. Even if it were, balance is determined by the total package and not elements in isolation. Having a race that can fly exists (aarakocra). Having races that casts spells exist (tiefling, drow). Having races with skill profiencies exist. But a race that has flight, and spells, and proficiencies, and a special mind-slave power, and also up to a +5 bonus to AC? Yeah no, get out of here. You can make up any race you like, but you don't get to pretend that it's balanced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Just play the race and inform her you charm every single important npc you meet and make her roll. It'll be really obnoxious if there's every a time passage where you can go nope, I need 20 rolls now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Just play the race and inform her you charm every single important npc you meet and make her roll. It'll be really obnoxious if there's every a time passage where you can go nope, I need 20 rolls now. Oh wow, you're right. For some reason I assumed that you could have only one charmed victim at a time. But no, you can just use it constantly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Tell her the charm ability is LA+6 in 3e, and 5e is a lower powered system. There are a lot of races and templates in 3e, there's bound to be one that has that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Also, according to Fiendish Charm, a suicidal command just gets a second saving throw. On a fail, the target would commit suicide.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Rereading it as written, it's actually a dominate effect, not a charm (charm effects just grant you advantage on social checks)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Speaking of powerful homebrew races, though not that powerful, in my Wednesday game where the DM switched to Eberron using houseruled races and allowed me to try out the Awakened Mystic a new person joined because the game they normally play on Wednesday had no one else show up. Since we have a githzerai, with a weak version of the Psychic Defense that is only half wis mod to AC when not wearing armor, Awakened Mystic; a half-dragon troll that has a weaker regeneration that has a per short rest limit on how much it can heal, Champion Fighter; a dwarf fighter/barbarian/druid probably (again); and a kobold bard, no idea if lore or valor; they wanted to play a Bugbear Barbarian, though they switched to Champion Fighter after seeing the features the DM gave them. I think they plan on grabbing Barbarian after 5 levels of Fighter. The DM gave the Bugbear +2 Str +1 Con, the Brute and Surprise Attack racial features. This means that it deals an extra die of damage when it hits with a melee weapon attack, so a greataxe would be 2d12 in their hands, or 4d12 on a crit. Also if it surprises a creature and hits them on the first round of combat it gets +2d6 damage. Both are kind of powerful features compared to the current batch of races. Though not nearly as powerful as that Cambion above.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Not that powerful, really ,since you only benefit if you're in a sucky class.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
I just realized that from 5th level on, Uncanny Dodge lets the Rogue halve an attack's damage against them. Cost is your reaction for that turn. No "X times per short rest" or anything. Just halvin' damage all day once per round. That would have been pretty loving useful for the goddamn class whose job it is to stand up front and take hits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
I'm amazed there is no feat or class feature that grants more reactions per round. It seems like such a fundamental hole in the game and would help martial classes out a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Boing posted:I'm amazed there is no feat or class feature that grants more reactions per round. It seems like such a fundamental hole in the game and would help martial classes out a lot. Designers were paranoid about ending up with the mass of interrupts and reactions that could slow down paragon and later 4E games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Selachian posted:Designers were paranoid about ending up with the mass of interrupts and reactions that could slow down paragon and later 4E games. And then they went ahead and brought back multi-attacks and made a hugely important mechanic revolve around doubling the number of 20 rolls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted:And then they went ahead and brought back multi-attacks and made a hugely important mechanic revolve around doubling the number of 20 rolls. Ever sit through a DM rolling all 14 d6 on a Dragon's Breath Weapon? I have. It was the very last game of 5e I ever played.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Edit: ^^^^ yea dont know why someone wouldn't used the avg damage they provide for that. Solid Jake posted:And then they went ahead and brought back multi-attacks and made a hugely important mechanic revolve around doubling the number of 20 rolls. Rolling 2d20 at the same time or making multiple basic attacks aren't too time consuming compared to the number of interrupts and reactions in 4e. Once they started being AoE or inflicting conditions the game slowed to a crawl.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
There's something about 5e that keeps dragging me back to this thread even though I know it's a garbage system that can't be fixed without throwing out almost all of it and starting from scratch, it's rather maddening
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
drrockso20 posted:There's something about 5e that keeps dragging me back to this thread even though I know it's a garbage system that can't be fixed without throwing out almost all of it and starting from scratch, it's rather maddening Just play 13th Age or something, it's not perfect but 90% of problems people have with 5e are either resolved by it, or by the fan-made classes in the vault.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:43
|
|
