|
gradenko_2000 posted:Ah! So if you already hit, and then you use the power to roll again hoping for a crit, but then you can't go back to the first roll if the second misses. e: Also look at the comparable Halfling power. You can choose to have a hit re-rolled ... but the risk is that you might now get crit instead.
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Immediate Actions can only be used once per round, where a round is defined as one loop through the initiative count. I love DMing and I love making maps and connecting storylines and stuff but I do all that stuff for a RL game already, and I've also come to believe that 4E is a terrible system to run in PBP if you don't at least seriously cut down the off-turn actions, so if I did run a game I'd probably do 13th Age or FATE or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
berenzen posted:It used to be even better, because you could trigger it multiple times, rather than 1/(turn or round, I forget which). Needless to say, that got errataed a while back. Unusually, no, it didn't. It's still 1/turn, which means that off-turn and allies' forced movement makes it even better. NIt also lasts til the END of your next turn, which means you can proc it on your next turn too. it is the best power bar none for Sorcs, and one of the best striker powers left in the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Speaking of off-turn actions, I've played a Swordmage a few times in PBP. I love the class and its powers, but I had to post a ton of if->then statements each encounter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:All I can speak of is having one on the other side of the table during mid/high paragon. The Hunter made his presence felt during every battle, and stayed effective. I needed to take his capabilities into account as much as I did any other character. Bladesingers I don't find too bad. Tricky to play but a lot stronger than they look on paper. Now Binders, Vampires, Executioners, and especially Shroud Assassins - there we have problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:All I can speak of is having one on the other side of the table during mid/high paragon. The Hunter made his presence felt during every battle, and stayed effective. I needed to take his capabilities into account as much as I did any other character. It's not so much that's they're BAD - they do reasonable damage, and are hyper-accurate, and can get some interesting optimisation with the right choices. it's that they're just actively worse than being a regular Ranger past a certain point, because the regular Ranger can do more damage and accomplish the same control.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
What would probably work really well for off-turn actions in PBP is if you made them a communal resource and just assume that when one could get triggered, it does. So as a DM you'd post like "the orc's arrow would hit Jim dead on if a magic force field didn't flare up (that's your Shield for this encounter)" and players could do stuff like "I move away from the goblin, eating an opportunity attack but getting into position to blast his buddies" (where the DM would post monster MBA stats) or "I attack the kobold and with the help of Bob's free action Attack Enhancer drop him well below bloodied value." But it'd be a heck of a list to have to keep track of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:There are a couple powers, such as Elven Accuracy, where you get to roll your attack roll again, and then it specifically says that you must use the second roll, even if it's lower. Also consider domination: You can turn a hit against one of your allies into a miss, but you have to risk making it a crit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
GimmickMan posted:Also consider domination: You can turn a hit against one of your allies into a miss, but you have to risk making it a crit. Not to poo poo in your cereal, but this doesn't work, you can't (voluntarily) take actions whilst dominated, which includes free actions like elven accuracy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Well, that's a bunch of friendly fire that should have happened but didn't, then. It looked like a perfectly reasonable call at the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
No actions work, mind. It's probably not too broken, but it does render domination a LOT less effective.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Just wanted to give a shout-out to these somewhere. http://www.voidstarstudios.com/shop/tact-tiles-deluxe-set-pre-order These are basically interlocking gridded tiles and they are about 50 times better than trying to get a Chessex mat to cooperate during play. It makes whatever playspace you are using still have space. We are no longer using our drinks to hold down the mat and having to get all our sheets and dice off the table. They also erase lines more easily. I would recommend them to anyone who plays any of the last three or so editions of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
How difficult would it be to publish an adventure module for 4e at this point?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Moriatti posted:How difficult would it be to publish an adventure module for 4e at this point? Depends on what you mean by publish.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Depends on what you mean by publish. Arrange an adventure I ran for my friends on Roll20, complete with maps stats, etc., on something like DriveThruRPG as a PDF.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Hey guys, I could use some help. I could have sworn some class had a feature or feat or something that allowed them to use WIS for AC instead of DEX/INT. I was thinking it was related to the Cleric but my search (Google, since I haven't had an Insider account for like a year) has turned up nothing. Any ideas? Edit: I've also been trying to use the offline CB to look but no dice there so far either. Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Runepriest
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Lifespirit and Wildblood Wardens. EDIT: Also Serene Blade Runepriests
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Ah, I completely forgot about Wardens and I didn't know they added a new Runepriest subclass. Neat! Thanks guys!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Moriatti posted:How difficult would it be to publish an adventure module for 4e at this point? Maps would be fine as long as you have the rights to them anyway. You could get away with referencing monsters and telling what page of the relevant book they're on, but I doubt you could print the actual stats without getting in trouble. Although, I very much doubt Wizards would have the resources to DO anything about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Very good, that should do!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Would it be crazy for a PBP game to require players to write beforehand when they want out of turn actions and such to trigger? Like, "I will use Shield if it will make an attack that does 10 or more damage miss." This might make defenders decently worse, but would streamline things a lot I think and lead to less waiting for people to post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
No, it wouldn't. In fact, that's really quite intuitive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
I honestly think that 4e is the absolute worst system you could use in a PbP game. The strength of the system is tactical battles and those take a long time in person even when you're all in person(or using maptools or the like). Putting them into PbP makes them even slower and makes immediates and other off-turn abilities/effects even more of a problem to deal with. 4e's a great game, but I'd never want to do it in PbP style. gradenko_2000 posted:No, it wouldn't. In fact, that's really quite intuitive. Makes marks harder to handle. It's intuitive, but it's still irritating. As an example, with that suggested shield rule, I'd block an 11 damage MBA and let the 5 damage daze through. If I were doing a PbP game with rules like that I think I'd just avoid immediates as much as possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Moriatti posted:How difficult would it be to publish an adventure module for 4e at this point? I'm not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice, but if I were going to publish 4E compatible material, I'd definitely look long and hard into the possibility of using the GSL to do so, since a good deal of the legal heavy lifting is already done for you. However, you may find that the license isn't appropriate for your needs, in which case you might want to consult with someone who is qualified to give legal advice and is familiar with IP law, etc. so you can figure out how to go about doing things the right way. thespaceinvader posted:Maps would be fine as long as you have the rights to them anyway. You could get away with referencing monsters and telling what page of the relevant book they're on, but I doubt you could print the actual stats without getting in trouble. Although, I very much doubt Wizards would have the resources to DO anything about it. And while the D&D branch of Wizards definitely doesn't have any real resources to speak of these days – evidenced by the lack of any corresponding license for 5E, among other things – I'm pretty sure its legal department is alive and well, if the whole Hex kerfuffle is any indication. The biggest hurdle to using the GSL – like I mentioned previously – is how outdated the SRD is. You might be able to get away with using references that should be in the SRD but aren't for lack of anyone updating the document – like, say, any references whatsoever to monsters that use correct math – as long as it's done in a manner appropriate to the rest of the license. I should note, though, that the SRD only applies to core rulebooks, so anything that only appears in a splat or adventure is probably out of the question. Obviously, if you're going to do something that violates the GSL, don't accept it in the first place – there are provisions built in where any licensee who breaks any of the license's agreements is held liable for Wizards' legal fees.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Khizan posted:Makes marks harder to handle. It's intuitive, but it's still irritating. As an example, with that suggested shield rule, I'd block an 11 damage MBA and let the 5 damage daze through. If I were doing a PbP game with rules like that I think I'd just avoid immediates as much as possible. The same thing happens in regular tabletop play though? If it's a hit that makes you think "oh I should use my defense on it" and then later in the round/fight you also get hit with something that makes you think "welp, should have waited to use my defense on this one instead", it happens. People rarely save them outside of not using them up when a minion hits them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 08:26
|
|
|
So, if I'm understanding the GSL correctly, it should be fine, since I plan on using my own monsters anyways by and large.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Yep, that's perfectly ok as long as your monsters don't share the exact same name as a monster in the SRD and aren't facsimiles of anything that's not in the SRD. I'd also stay away from anything that Wizards considers proprietary characters and hasn't included in the SRD, such as Kuo-Toa, Slaads, and Yuan-Ti. Looking over the monster sections of the d20 SRD for the OGL for notable omissions should give you a better idea of which creatures are product identity for Wizards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Someone was asking about Gamma World in system recommendation megathread, so I thought I'd move that conversation over here since the the Gamma World thread's in the archives.Woozy posted:Just wanted to say I followed up on this and I think I'd just rather do an actual Gamma Worlds game! Any advice for someone running this for the first time? I'm pretty familiar with other tabletop games. Everything you need to get started playing is in the starter set, but there's a character sheet generator (redirected link) and blank character sheet (redirected link; .zip available) available that you might find useful. There's a set of booster cards to expand your Alpha/Omega options from just the base set, if you find that you or your players want more variety or deck construction options. The Famine in Far-go expansion has additional Origins, monsters, an adventure, and a few cards used in an optional subsystem for group or individual allegiance. The Legion of Gold expansion has more monsters, a few more Origins, another adventure, and rules for a feat system. There are also some vehicle rules (redirected link; direct download available) and a guide for incorporating real-world locations (redirected as well; direct download still available) posted on Wizards' website. You don't need all of these extras to start out, but they're helpful if you need more options as a GM or your players find the system to be just on the simple side of things for their tastes or want more character options. As I said before, you can probably even use 4E monster statblocks as long as you use a discerning eye when picking them out. If you're looking to get started soon, there's even a short holiday-themed adventure (also redirected with direct download still up and maps available; requires some statblocks from Famine in Fargo & Monster Manual 2), which might (I want to really stress the 'might') work as a one-shot if you have about five players who don't mind diving headfirst into 8th+ level characters. To speed up character creation, I'd also recommend printing out the cards you'll be using and some half-page Origin summaries that other people have created if you're playing in person. Otherwise, make sure you've got some sort of system for handling the deck stuff for online play. Auralsaurus Flex fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Auralsaurus Flex posted:Good poo poo! Thanks very much! Players seem good with the idea and I'm pretty stoked to get them out of a fantasy setting for once--not sure if anyone else has this problem where your group just clearly functions better in a sci-fi game but no one realizes it because we all grew up in Greyhawk so I think I'll pick up what I need this weekend. 
Woozy fucked around with this message at 12:51 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
So I'm looking at doing a blaster controller which as far as I know is both possible and effective. It's a L3 game. How would I go about this? Pyromancer Mage, Invoker, straight wizard? Like I kind of want to be able to rain pain and suffering on several targets from the back row.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Ah, I completely forgot about Wardens and I didn't know they added a new Runepriest subclass. Neat! Thanks guys! Serene Blade Runepriests are super fun, too. They generate quite a bit of temp HP if you're in the fray. I use a greatspear, so I don't get hit as much as a hammer or sword one, but it's a very nice feature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Unknown Quantity posted:So I'm looking at doing a blaster controller which as far as I know is both possible and effective. It's a L3 game. How would I go about this? Pyromancer Mage, Invoker, straight wizard? Like I kind of want to be able to rain pain and suffering on several targets from the back row. Blaster controller is kind of a contradiction in terms. Blasters do area damage and are generally an iffy idea at best because doing a little damage to a lot of things leaves a lot of things slightly damaged but no less effective. Controllers do status effects to lots of things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
I'd look at Sorcerer for area damage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:I'd look at Sorcerer for area damage. Warlocks are okay at this as well. They're neither great controllers nor great blasters but with the right power selection they can def do both at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Sorcerer (or its e-class, Elementalist) do the ranged blaster mage thing well. But as said, aoe damage isn't generally as valuable as focused fire unless you're doing something like a Rebreather (don't).
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Invoker is a loving amazing class for controlblasting, such as it is. I really like the design of the class, it's just powerful no matter what you want to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
So how would I go about said control-blasting Invoker then? Like I've got Human since I figure I can leave con at 16 for now, and Superior Implement Proficiency (Accurate Staff) and Battlewise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Basically that, yeah. Invokers get beasty encounter powers, pick the ones you like, go nuts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
The two Invokers I've built are: -Stun/dominate/daze spam. You take powers that cause you to potentially daze yourself, as I recall. This requires you to have Superior Will to make it work right and then you're off to the races. This would be the charop build. -Thunder-radiant spam. Do more damage, push people all the time, benefit from radiant being absurdly over-supported in the game later on. The action denial build can do a lot of radiant too IIRC. There's nothing too complex about learning Invoker, unlike say wizard, who in my opinion has a lot more trap options. At later levels the Invoker gets exponentially more terrifying because of item pickups you can make. -Because they're wisdom-based, Invokers can capitalize on initiative optimization, and with certain power/background choices you can make an Invoker that will never not go first. This is more valuable for controllers than it is for other classes (though it's good for everyone), because the opening turn is where monsters are going to be in tighter groups and not yet in melee range. -You can eventually accumulate items to give you a +9 to saves against your backlash powers so there's no downside.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 23:00
|
|