|
Mecha Gojira posted:Ever sit through a DM rolling all 14 d6 on a Dragon's Breath Weapon?
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:52 |
|
|
Selachian posted:Designers were paranoid about ending up with the mass of interrupts and reactions that could slow down paragon and later 4E games. 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. 32d20 rats. In reality I don't think it was the designers being paranoid of slowing down the game, they just wanted to remove "gamist" effects and descriptions. It's why instead of "minor action" you get "you can do this on the same round as other actions, though you can only gain one bonus action" written on every loving bonus action. You'll see interrupts and reactions at some point, it's just gonna have a fuckin' paragraph describing what it does every time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
bewilderment posted: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. Maybe, there's some things I don't like about 13th Age, but it does seem like a solid system, strangely enough I'm oddly intrigued about running 3.5E using the class tier system to balance it out, which seems to get rid of some of it's worst warts, most likely I'll just run an OSR game, 4E, or one of those 4E imitators like Heroes Against Darkness or Strike!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Rolling a bunch of dice for damage has been a thing forever. Your outrage is standing on a wobbly leg. Make a dex check. Because it's been around makes it good game design? You're missing the forest for the trees here, trying to zing me or whatever. It's part of a compounding problem of poor design. The reason I hate 5e so much is because it is so regressive in game design. Problems that had been solved half a decade ago are all back again on top of all the problems that persist when the game should be moving forward. The problem with multi attacking is that all you are doing is making a screwy and kind of swingy way to keep up with increasing monster HP meanwhile monsters are compensating with just more dice, but this could be solved with a decent formula and we could all move on with our lives. Yeah, big damage expressions have always been a thing, but they're part of the "bogging down" problem. We kind of solved the off action problem with just fewer of them but we still have the multi attack and lots of dice approach. Oh, and by solving the off action problem we've given martials less to do, which exacerbates their already crippling (literally crippling martials compared to spell casters) lack of options and things to do problem. That's what I think rockso means about having to tear down and start from scratch. It's all these compounding issues of poor game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
I feel like if it wasn't called "dungeons and dragons" no one would play 5e
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
alg posted: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 02:20
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Because it's been around makes it good game design? You're missing the forest for the trees here, trying to zing me or whatever. It's part of a compounding problem of poor design. The reason I hate 5e so much is because it is so regressive in game design. Problems that had been solved half a decade ago are all back again on top of all the problems that persist when the game should be moving forward. Pretty much Tyrannosaurus posted:I feel like if it wasn't called "dungeons and dragons" no one would play 5e That is very likely
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
Being able to strategically spend resources in response to triggers or having to change game-state to compensate for new elements is what adds tactics to a game like this though. Like, I agree late 4e had a mess of reactions and interrupts all keying off of each other, but there was a reason why you had that. You have monsters that can do extra damage if the target is slowed; you have a cleric that can grant a save if an ally is afflicted by a condition within X squares, the scenario is exciting and rewards the cleric's development choices. 5e could be tactically interesting but more often than not its monster invulnerable to everything except wizards or swing at this sack of HP until it dies no matter how unpleasant this monster's powers are because it'll kill you if you don't. Having finite resources that answer specific triggers is actually really cool design space, it's only when they start stacking on top of each other that it becomes a timesink.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
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 I think it's because it's not (yet? ever will be?) a "solved" system. Mike Mearls is Matthew McConaughey and we're all Sarah Jessica Parker. Failure to Launch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I think it's because it's not (yet? ever will be?) a "solved" system. Mike Mearls is Matthew McConaughey and we're all Sarah Jessica Parker. Failure to Launch. Yeah with 3.5/Pathfinder(and indeed most other versions of D&D) we already know what's broken with them and can generally accommodate for it to make it enjoyable on some level, while 5e is still something of an enigma...
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
drrockso20 posted:Maybe, there's some things I don't like about 13th Age, but it does seem like a solid system, strangely enough I'm oddly intrigued about running 3.5E using the class tier system to balance it out, which seems to get rid of some of it's worst warts, most likely I'll just run an OSR game, 4E, or one of those 4E imitators like Heroes Against Darkness or Strike! Can I recommend checking out The Next Project?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Can I recommend checking out The Next Project? I've read through that thread, haven't had a chance to read the game itself though, cause I can't use my laptop right now and reading a PDF on a phone is just awful, but from what I can glean from reading the thread it looks pretty interesting
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted: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.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
A good GM never has any problems with anything ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
A good DM isn't playing garbage fifth edition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
Splicer posted:If you make hitting the fighter sufficiently pointless, there's no reason not to just go straight for the squishies. The obvious answer is This was the big loss in futzing around with the reaction model and the Fighter's suite of abilities. It's incredible that a Fighter can't have Sentinel nor Marking in the default game and enabling it enables it for everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Gort posted:A good GM never has any problems with anything ever. Dick Burglar posted:A good DM isn't playing garbage fifth edition. No, actually most of 5es major problems can be mitigated with a bit of good GMing and houseruling. TBH it's perfectly playable even without the houserules, though some problems will crop up. It's not something I would probably want to run, but I'm not going to raise a stink about someone else wanting to run it. It's mediocre, not terrible, and is probably better mechanically than, say, any White Wolf game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
I have around 20 different games that meet those criteria in my bookshelf and like 5 of them even already say Dungeons & Dragons on the covers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:No, actually most of 5es major problems can be mitigated with a bit of good GMing and houseruling. TBH it's perfectly playable even without the houserules, though some problems will crop up. It's not something I would probably want to run, but I'm not going to raise a stink about someone else wanting to run it. It's mediocre, not terrible, and is probably better mechanically than, say, any White Wolf game. Nah, 5e's problems are pretty deeply imbedded into the system itself. A good DM and house rules can only get you so far. I mean, unless by good DM you mean has spent hours pouring over the Monster Manual fixing or rebalancing monsters, handing out healing potions like candy to compensate for lack of HP, and being cool every time someone asks "DM may I..." It's not a bit of house ruling to fix 5e; it's either having to fix or ignore vast chunks of it, which leads to further issues. Then you have the problem of what if you have a bad DM. Or a new DM who isn't as familiar with the system. I'm going to agree with earlier sentiments: a good DM wouldn't play 5e and it's a garbage game. Just because there are worse games out there and that 5e is "playable" doesn't change that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Yeah, the non-omniscient DM is what part of the Oberoni Fallacy is about (at least IMO). "It's fine, just do this, this and this" isn't a good place for your game to be in when you can't assume that the DM knows any better. If I buy the 5e Starter Set and start playing, the expectation is that I can finish the game and have a good time without having to root around the internet to fix issues, unless maybe it's Wizards of the Coast with an official press release of what I should be doing instead. People in this thread are just bouncing ideas off each other when they talk about giving the Fighter more abilities - it's a lot to ask people to have to sort through all that cruft when they could be playing a game that just works out of the box instead. And maybe the people playing 5e do know better, but that's also because they've been playing TGs for a while now, and expecting that from players is another of those "you can only learn D&D from an older cousin" practices that's damaging to the hobby.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Nah, 5e's problems are pretty deeply imbedded into the system itself. A good DM and house rules can only get you so far. I mean, unless by good DM you mean has spent hours pouring over the Monster Manual fixing or rebalancing monsters, handing out healing potions like candy to compensate for lack of HP, and being cool every time someone asks "DM may I..." Pretending that you don't need to modify monster/encounter design depending on your party is a mistake in every system that include it. There's a reason why most don't even try to give a numeric encounter construction system. Every system has extensive "DM may I?". That's the purpose of the DM. Narrative systems like FATE barely are nothing but "DM may I?", and it's still a useful and popular system, even with goons. Of those problems, only HP requires a hard mechanical fix. Mecha Gojira posted:It's not a bit of house ruling to fix 5e; it's either having to fix or ignore vast chunks of it, which leads to further issues. Such as? What do you have to ignore that can't be fixed with a one or two sentence house rule? Mecha Gojira posted:I'm going to agree with earlier sentiments: a good DM wouldn't play 5e and it's a garbage game. Just because there are worse games out there and that 5e is "playable" doesn't change that. Or, you know, you have to compromise with other people in your group on what system you're going to run. And for it's many flaws, 5e creates characters and plays fairly quickly, doesn't have colossal lovely subsystems, doesn't require extensive system mastery to make a competent character, and doesn't have any blatant gameshattering mechanical abuses. On those criteria, it's better than about half the games on my shelf. TBH I'd probably rather play 5e than DungeonWorld, though 13th Age beat it out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:And maybe the people playing 5e do know better, but that's also because they've been playing TGs for a while now, and expecting that from players is another of those "you can only learn D&D from an older cousin" practices that's damaging to the hobby. I'd rather people get into the hobby on a mediocre game than not get into it at all, tbh. What systems can you name that work well out of the box for new GMs and players, that are not mechanically complex at game start, and do not require intensive RP (like FATE)? e: also, in my experience, new player/GMs don't notice all the design/mechanical flaws we pick apart here, in any game. fool of sound fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jul 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I'd rather people get into the hobby on a mediocre game than not get into it at all, tbh. What systems can you name that work well out of the box for new GMs and players, that are not mechanically complex at game start, and do not require intensive RP (like FATE)? Maybe the new hero quest? I've just been scanning the rule book but it doesn't appear to be too complicated. Maybe it's too fate like, though?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
There's a major difference between, "Make sure the math matches MM3 on a Business Card," and "CR is useless, just fyi." And either way that's not something a new DM might know or worry about, leading to crap encounters. That's what I mean by pouring over the Monster Manual. There's also a difference between "DM May I" in a game built around it, and "DM may I" as a way to compensate for the fact that half the classes have way more narrative control and DON'T have to ask "DM May I." Also, Vancian Casting IS a tedious, confusing, and lovely resource management system that was brought back for no other reason except that it "feels" like D&D. But, hey, let's pretend these aren't problems so we can call 5e a mediocre game instead of a terrible one. I mean, what the poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
So, this weekend I'm getting drafted into a campaign of 5e and I haven't really played anything since 2e back in the 90s. It's gonna be an "Assault the Keep"-type scenario so I don't anticipate a lot of rests. Any suggestions on what to check out and/or avoid so I can get myself some mechanical breathing room and focus on the plot/characters without worrying too about pasting myself in combat?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:So, this weekend I'm getting drafted into a campaign of 5e and I haven't really played anything since 2e back in the 90s. It's gonna be an "Assault the Keep"-type scenario so I don't anticipate a lot of rests. Any suggestions on what to check out and/or avoid so I can get myself some mechanical breathing room and focus on the plot/characters without worrying too about pasting myself in combat? Play a spell caster, cast from the back line. Seriously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
You sure as poo poo are going to run into the problem of player survivability about 5 minutes into Lost Mine of Phandelver when the party gets ambushed by 4 goblins, not to mention the 5 other fights in the goblin cave, including a 27 HP Bugbear that can flatten a 10 HP character in a single hit. Or how the game barely warns you about the "action economy" when it comes to constructing encounters. Sure, people might not refer to it in those terms, but I've more than a few threads in other forums where new DMs are scratching their heads about the players dismantling their "Ogre Boss" easily.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:So, this weekend I'm getting drafted into a campaign of 5e and I haven't really played anything since 2e back in the 90s. It's gonna be an "Assault the Keep"-type scenario so I don't anticipate a lot of rests. Any suggestions on what to check out and/or avoid so I can get myself some mechanical breathing room and focus on the plot/characters without worrying too about pasting myself in combat? If you want to go melee fighter, run a barbarian or paladin. Otherwise play whatever. Mecha Gojira posted:There's a major difference between, "Make sure the math matches MM3 on a Business Card," and "CR is useless, just fyi." And either way that's not something a new DM might know or worry about, leading to crap encounters. That's what I mean by pouring over the Monster Manual. I legitimately have never played a game where CR or the equivalent wasn't pretty utterly useless, except maybe Strike!. 13th Age's is marginally useful too, I guess. Can you give me a game with a good encounter building system so I can check it out? Mecha Gojira posted:There's also a difference between "DM May I" in a game built around it, and "DM may I" as a way to compensate for the fact that half the classes have way more narrative control and DON'T have to ask "DM May I." I'm not sure exactly what you mean here. Are you saying that the combination of DM-interpreted skills and distinctly defined spell is a problem? Mecha Gojira posted:Also, Vancian Casting IS a tedious, confusing, and lovely resource management system that was brought back for no other reason except that it "feels" like D&D. 13th Age manages it 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Apparently, we already have a fighter and a Barb (which I think are the only 2 confirmed classes at this point), so I was strongly considering caster. Is there anywhere that provides a good breakdown/comparison of casters as played (I've read the PHB descriptions, but you know they always play out a bit different in practice)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I legitimately have never played a game where CR or the equivalent wasn't pretty utterly useless, except maybe Strike!. 13th Age's is marginally useful too, I guess. Can you give me a game with a good encounter building system so I can check it out? 4E with the MM3 math fixes. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I legitimately have never played a game where CR or the equivalent wasn't pretty utterly useless, except maybe Strike!. 13th Age's is marginally useful too, I guess. Can you give me a game with a good encounter building system so I can check it out? 4e. You have to do a little adjusting based on group optimization, but it's a solid system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I legitimately have never played a game where CR or the equivalent wasn't pretty utterly useless, except maybe Strike!. 13th Age's is marginally useful too, I guess. Can you give me a game with a good encounter building system so I can check it out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:If you want to go melee fighter, run a barbarian or paladin. Otherwise play whatever. The issue is again some have it and some don't. A rogue has to ask if he can hide; a bard or wizard just casts Invisibility. Now for balanced encounter building, I'll give you that I've never seen a perfect system. 4e unfortunately broke down at higher levels, though the foundation of X hits at y damage to take down equivalent level enemy, give or take for AoE's and status effects, was solid. Would have been great if they tried to improve on it for this system instead of throwing it out all together. Also, I thought 13th Age used an AEDU system for powers. I've never played it admittedly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Kibner posted:4E with the MM3 math fixes. Dirk the Average posted:4e. You have to do a little adjusting based on group optimization, but it's a solid system. Splicer posted:D&D 4th Edition. Works fine out of the box apart from some math issues about 15 levels in, works amazing if you use MM3 math and some actually one-line house rules. Welp.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Also, I thought 13th Age used an AEDU system for powers. I've never played it admittedly. It uses something of a hybrid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Also, I thought 13th Age used an AEDU system for powers. I've never played it admittedly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
In 5e, you can Know a spell, and you can Prepare a spell. A Prepared spell is a spell that you can spend a spell slot on to cast. A Known spell is a spell that you can Prepare. Clerics and Druids always Know all possible spells of the appropriate level, so they just have to pick and choose a sub-set to Prepare. Wizards will Know more spells than they can Prepare, but they do not Know all spells right off the bat - they need to find/learn the spells and add them to their spellbook. Bards, Sorcerers and Warlocks only Know a small sub-set of possible spells, but all their Known spells are also always Prepared for them. The Druid's gimmick is that they can shapeshift (but not at level 1, which kinda sucks) The Bard's gimmick is that their spell selection is varied/versatile between Arcane/Divine, they have Bardic Inspiration to mess around with die rolls, they're never completely bad at any skill, and they can eventually poach spells from other classes. The Sorcerer's gimmick is that they can manipulate the specifics of their casted spells, such as casting it twice, drastically increasing the range, preventing friendly fire, etc., and they can use the lolrandom Wild Magic table. The Warlock's gimmick is that their "default" spell attack is powerful enough to be on-par with the damage put out by fighty classes, and they have very few spell slots in exchange for those slots regenerating with Short Rests.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:So, this weekend I'm getting drafted into a campaign of 5e and I haven't really played anything since 2e back in the 90s. It's gonna be an "Assault the Keep"-type scenario so I don't anticipate a lot of rests. Any suggestions on what to check out and/or avoid so I can get myself some mechanical breathing room and focus on the plot/characters without worrying too about pasting myself in combat? e: or a druid. Please note that if you play a fighty cleric everyone will die unless someone else plays a healy cleric. Being a druid makes this not your problem. e2: especially since shapeshifting also doubles as one of the most powerful healing effects in the game. Splicer fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jul 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Welp. It helps that they don't approach enemies as PCs. If you are cool with spending some money to check it out, you can sub for a month to the online tool which, I think, has the MM3 fixes built in: http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/tools.aspx
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:52 |
|
|
Splicer posted:e2: especially since shapeshifting also doubles as one of the most powerful healing effects in the game. I haven't played a druid from 1-3. 4th level was ok, I was survivable and did ok damage. At 5th and 6th level I was really, really good at kicking asses and staying alive. You don't get the "nah, gently caress this encounter" stuff that a wizard does, but when shapeshifted you do get to be an extremely tough, extremely dangerous melee guy. Plus you get to turn into a goddamn bear.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 16:32
|
|