|
kingcobweb posted:Quick advice question: just hit level 10 with a STR-based grappler bard. Other party members are a warlock, a wizard/cleric, and one unknown (his PC died last session). I've locked in one of the spells I want to take with Magical Secrets, and want the other to use my reaction. I'm going to be either the main tank or the off-tank of the party, depending on what new character gets rolled. So here's the trick. Counterspell on a Bard is awesome. You see, Counterspell is explicitly an Ability Check versus Spell Level + 10. And Bards get to add half their Proficiency Bonus to Ability Checks that they aren't Proficient in. So your tenth level bard, presuming a CHA of 20, will have a +7 on that roll, meaning a 50/50 chance to cancel an 8th Level spell! I took a 15th level Bard into the final battle of Hoard of the Dragon Queen against Tiamat and kept the Goddess of Evil Dragons from ever getting a spell off! It's just too good a combination not to take. That said, Shield can be awfully nice if you're front-lining...but you can dip into one level of Sorceror if you really want it. Heck that'll get you the Dragon Scales to let you drop Mage Armor, as well as some nice blasty Cantrips if you ever run out of real spells or just wanna save 'em for bigger fights coming up.
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
El Spamo posted:I usually ignore monster crits if I can. Granted, I haven't played D&D in quite a while, but I remember them being obnoxious. I can't control the players actions, which is fun, but I CAN control my monsters and the world around the players (which is also fun) and having that little bursty edge at the one end of the monster damage ability disrupted that harmony. Interestingly, in The Next Project, PCs roll to attack (and can crit) and when they are attacked, they roll to 'defend'; the result being that Monsters can't crit, because it basically functions the same as a spell that causes a save. It also means PCs can have stuff like advantage or +1dY on their defense roll.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
I used Wild Shape for the first time yesterday! I attacked the Gibbering Mouth as a blind barkskinned brown bear, hit with both (even with the Disadvantage)... Then I took exactly 34 damage off a crit and reverted back to human form. Paladin was blinded for the entirety of that duration. Speaking of paladins, how do you guys deal with fudged rolls? Not the DM making up numbers or whatever, but a player rolling, getting a low result, and rerolling (without asking or inspiration or anything like that). We have a guy (lawful stupid paladin) who's done it multiple times, and so far our "cmon, cut it out" hasn't helped much. Even our DM has outright told him "if you want, just tell me a number, I don't care too much" but still to no particular effect.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Speaking of paladins, how do you guys deal with fudged rolls? Not the DM making up numbers or whatever, but a player rolling, getting a low result, and rerolling (without asking or inspiration or anything like that). We have a guy (lawful stupid paladin) who's done it multiple times, and so far our "cmon, cut it out" hasn't helped much. Even our DM has outright told him "if you want, just tell me a number, I don't care too much" but still to no particular effect. I guess I'd deal with it in the same way I'd deal with anyone who cheats at games - make it clear it's not acceptable and stop playing with them if it continues.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:
http://crobi.github.io/rpg-cards/generator/generate.html
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Gort posted:I guess I'd deal with it in the same way I'd deal with anyone who cheats at games - make it clear it's not acceptable and stop playing with them if it continues. Exactly. "Stop doing it, or leave."
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Yeah I had a player using push tricks back during Encounters. You just pull them to the side. Say you know they're cheating and making the game unfun, and let them know that if they keep it up they can find another table.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:(lawful stupid paladin) Am I the only person who's tired of this phrase? It's really puerile and I hate hearing/reading it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Am I the only person who's tired of this phrase? It's really puerile and I hate hearing/reading it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
It's a short, succinct way of describing a worryingly common character personality type. I don't know why you'd be so angry about it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
I mean, it's also vaguely unfair, because it's a method of playing the paladin that the game for a long time encouraged (and many tables mandated). You had to be lovely about being MAXIMUM LAW and MAXIMUM GOOD because otherwise the game told your DM to take away your class.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:It's a short, succinct way of describing a worryingly common character personality type. I don't know why you'd be so angry about it. I only get mad because it reminds me that we haven't completely slain alignments yet 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I used Wild Shape for the first time yesterday! Make them convert to the chaotic neutral god of cheating and loaded dice.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I mean, it's also vaguely unfair, because it's a method of playing the paladin that the game for a long time encouraged (and many tables mandated). You had to be lovely about being MAXIMUM LAW and MAXIMUM GOOD because otherwise the game told your DM to take away your class. But even back then there were ways to do it that didn't dick over your fellow players or make the game unfun to play. It's making a citizen's arrest while we're infiltrating Zhentil Keep because being a Harper is illegal there. It's insisting that your character has to kill mine because I was jaywalking. It's claiming that because you picked a restrictive class that we all have to play exactly they way you say we can play or else you'll attack us, and then whining when we put you down like a rabid dog because your interpretation of a paladin was ruining the game for the rest of us. "But guys, I know I hosed up the adventure and got you all killed, but I was only playing my character!" That's Lawful Stupid. And the fact that the game has evolved such that Paladins aren't encouraged to be game-wrecking assholes anymore may mean that the term doesn't see as much use as it once did is certainly a good thing, but that doesn't mean the term is completely obsolete. Because there will always be lovely players who use their alignment as an excuse to wreck things like the assholes they are, and for them we still need Lawful Stupid. (And the related Chaotic Stupid "Why the gently caress did you stab the king while he was knighting us?" "It's the CHAOTIC thing to do! Wheee!")
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Unfortunately D&D rolled back on the actual issue: 9 point alignments are a really stupid thing to give to nerds. Elfgame morality isn't really good at nuance and nobody wants to sit around having a philosophical debate. So you either wind up with games where there's no moral nuance, making alignment useless. Or you get players rebelling when you move their alignment towards Lawful Evil or dock their XP because "How do you know that my character is evil?" The first time the Evil Lawmaker dilemma came up at one of my tables I told my players, "From now on Lawful means you follow a personal morality. If your order or government is corrupt it's your moral duty to rectify it." And just started asking my players to bring a 3 point Oath to the first session. Because it's a lot easier to tell someone, "You wrote 'Spare the helpless' in your Oath. There'll be a cost if you want to slit the Orc's throat when he's in shackles." than, "Your actions would be considered Lawful Evil in this case, so I'm dicking with your character sheet." And always make sure Session 0 includes the "We are all here to have fun and kill undead together. Make a character that isn't going to derail that" chat.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:And always make sure Session 0 includes the "We are all here to have fun and kill undead together. Make a character that isn't going to derail that" chat. The reflection/counter-point would be "We are all here to have fun and be nasty Zhentarim together. Make a character that isn't a paladin" Making sure you're not depending on accident or coincidence to get everyone in the game together is basically mandatory for a good game.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
There's also the fact that in media a lot of paladin dilemmas will end up causing the paladin to fall if put in a Dungeons & Dragons context. Take for example Final Fantasy 4 (I doubt that people will go crazy over spoilers of a 24 year old game). The main character is Cecil, a Dark Knight of the Kingdom of Baron whose increasing lack of faith in his ruler comes to a grinding point when he becomes an unwitting accessory to ethnic cleansing. Although he turns a new leaf and seeks to warn other nations of Baron's tyranny, that still cannot make up for his earlier crimes, yet over the course of the game his gradual personality shift culminates in him taking a trial on top of a mountain where he faces off against his "dark self" in order to ascend to paladinhood. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqaNUnCwnxY It's a very powerful scene, and his shadow's quote really sums up the games' ideal version of a holy knight. "Justice and retribution are but trifling things. There are victories of greater worth. Someday you will know them." However, later in the game, Cecil's party is faced with a moral dilemma. The evil knight Golbez is holding Rosa, the love of Cecil's life, hostage. He promises to spare her if he delivers the final elemental crystal (plot MacGuffin) to him. Now this is a hard one. The four elemental crystals are what the kingdom of Baron is after, who Golbez is aligned with at this point in the game. And will doubtlessly be used for evil purpose. Regardless of the choice, innocent people will die. The party tries to play along, knowing that without the crystal Golbez will not even let them get close, so they try handing it over to Golbez in hopes that he'll honor his word, and then attack to get the crystal back. Now, in the rules of D&D, Cecil the Paladin will become an ex-Paladin or at least need the Atonement spell. 1.) Give crystal to Golbez. Tyrannical kingdom causes innocents to die. Lose Paladinhood, . 2.) Throw Rosa under the bus. Cecil lets the woman he loves most suffer and then die. Lose Paladinhood. 3.) Try to trick Golbez by handing over the crystal in hopes of getting close, the best of both options. Lose Paladinhood, you're not supposed to lie or cheat. All are lovely, and will inspire countless drama and arguments if done in a typical game, but all 3 options can truly be interpreted by the GM as being fall-worthy. In D&D Next you had some variance in the Sacred Oaths, but the Oath of Devotion is the closest to what Cecil represents, and it still has the 3E restrictions carried over that 4E done away with. The Oath of the Ancients doesn't make much thematic sense, and the Oath of Vengeance goes against everything Cecil stands for. So basically my metrics for Paladinhood as game mechanics are whether or not it can pass the Golbez Test. Because even in a game with objective morality there will come times when no answer is an ultimately good one. In FF4 Cecil kept his paladinhood, even though Rosa was saved and Golbez got the crystal.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Goon Libertad! recently released a third-party supplement for 5e, with rules for letting you play various humanoid monsters as player-characters. Disclaimer: I am credited in the work after doing a read-through of the draft, but "I've actually read it" is also a reason why I'm willing to give a shout-out for this piece of work and not anything else coming out of the DM's Guild.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:So basically my metrics for Paladinhood as game mechanics are Aside from that, at least in FR, the PC would usually be associated with a specific Power, and that would also mediate some of the decisions. Like its not that hard to run. In a game world where the gods are actual things with opinions and politics, theres room to figure out the "best" course and keep the game moving. Sure there might be a need to "atone" if you are stuck with two bad choices, and a game might be run where there is a "punishment" for skipping the atonement (whatever that means in that game), but Falling should be different. The struggle of being a scion of both Law and Good is that they are not easily compatible sometimes. Thats part of that class gimmick. When the PC says "gently caress it" and goes off murdering and stealing, or allows the orphanage to burn down because "it looks too dangerous", or whatever, thats when they get the old psychic cord cut. (Also, a Paladins conduct was never meant to be the Chivalry of a Cavalier. "Being dishonorable" is not "embodying evil" and should not be relevant to the Paladins pursuit of being a scion of Goodness (or whatever their god calls it).)
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Demand your right to a fair trial. The lawful part can work for you.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
I'm considering a paladin for a potential game and reading up on various things. Am I missing something about the paladin's steed never scaling up its HP?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Caphi posted:I'm considering a paladin for a potential game and reading up on various things. Am I missing something about the paladin's steed never scaling up its HP? From the Find Steed spell? It's got the stats of whatever you summoned as your steed plus the details in the spell description about intelligence and stuff. It doesn't say anything about scaling. Ask your DM if the "such as" in "...the steed takes on a form that you choose such as..." can include cooler stuff than "a horse, pony, camel, elk or mastiff" as you level up?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:From the Find Steed spell? It's got the stats of whatever you summoned as your steed plus the details in the spell description about intelligence and stuff. It doesn't say anything about scaling. No, I meant "since it has static animal hit dice, is there any reason that if I ride it into combat like the spell says I can, it won't become a liability that gets cut out from under me immediately."
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Caphi posted:No, I meant "since it has static animal hit dice, is there any reason that if I ride it into combat like the spell says I can, it won't become a liability that gets cut out from under me immediately." There's no hp scaling mentioned anywhere that I can find. Unless there's something hidden in the DMG somewhere, it's not getting more survivable as you do. I'm not sure know how much of a liability it'd end up being, but it seems stupid that it doesn't have something like that. That's why I said ask your DM if you can get a better steed as you level up. Or if you can get scaling hp for your steed, like +1HD/level or something. This isn't a sarcastic "lol ask your DM" thing, the game seems kinda dumb about this and you should discuss with your group/DM why you think it's dumb and how you might collectively go about doing it a better way. If you were a player in my group, I'd suggest that we start working from a simple idea like "whenever you roll for new hit points, your steed gets that many extra hit points too". I would also suggest that a magic horse is cool now at level 3 or whatever, but that once you're into the higher levels we'd want to look at a tougher, cooler magic steed like maybe a talking bear or a dinosaur or a griffon or something.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Those are great solutions that make total sense, so no they aren't in the DMG. Here, have a d100 table of random objects players might find in your villain's dressing room. I've never played with a pally who used the steed much in combat but I've heard they go poof quickly once fireballs and other aoes start flying. Just don't count on being mounted the whole fight and you'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Yeah, that all sounds cool and the potential GM here is a cool guy, I just wanted to triple-check that there wasn't something in the book I was missing, because it looked to me like, yeah, it would get knocked out immediately by a fireball or one attack (free prone on the paladin!) and just drain time, actions, advantage, and spell slots. Unrelatedly, I know rangers are already well-known to be generally unfortunate, but it seems insulting that they have to know their spells while paladins get to just prepare theirs.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
I think the only RAW option is to take the Mounted Combat fear or whatever it's called. The one that lets you switch the attack target to the rider and gives your mounts evasion.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
I could sworn AD&D used to have this d100 table of potential mounts a Paladin might have, with the 100 result being a pegasus or griffin or something, but maybe I just hallucinated that. In any case I did find this:quote:The number of hit points per hit die of the steed will never be fewer than 50% of the level of the paladin, i.e., a 4th level paladin means the warhorse he or she gains will have at least 2 hit points per hit die, excluding the additional bonus of +5, while a 16th level paladin’s special steed will have maximum hit points (8) per die, of 5 × 8 = 40 + 5 (additional hit points) = 45 total hit points for 5 + 5 hit dice Which seems to be as sensible a solution as any compared to a horse that only ever has a flat amount of HP.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Which seems to be as sensible a solution as any compared to a horse that only ever has a flat amount of HP. One dumb thing in 2e that was never addressed was horse HP. IIRC a lt warhorse was like 1+1HD, and a "riding horse" was like 3HD.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I could sworn AD&D used to have this d100 table of potential mounts a Paladin might have, with the 100 result being a pegasus or griffin or something, but maybe I just hallucinated that. In any case I did find this: WotC has a history of breaking mounts, fixing them and then breaking them again. 3e had crap mounts for everyone who didn't get one as a class feature (but with the DMG options you could get some pretty solid options on a paladin), then 4e went back to crappy nonscaling mounts for everyone, then introduced special mount options for the Cavalier in Dragon Magazine, noticed a bunch of characters were spending four feats to MC into paladin and power swap into a mount and then decided that it should be exclusive to the cavalier, thus breaking it again for most characters, leaving only a few options like Fey Beast Tamer, White Horn Knight and possibly the Bridle of Conjuration if you engage in some rules lawyering (if the horse conjured by the bridle is actually a conjuration, then it isn't a valid target for most attacks). Given the amount of  we've seen so far I don't see them fixing the scaling issue anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
I dont have any kind of intuitive feel for 5e math, but a house rule thing for divine steeds could go something like: When you gain a level and do your obligatory prayers, make a wis check, if you pass your steed gets HP equal to 1/2 of your PCs HP gain applied to it. Or if you dont like the gamey/dice-rolling thing slip the roll and make it automatic I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:I dont have any kind of intuitive feel for 5e math, but a house rule thing for divine steeds could go something like: I guess a better question is: why steeds? Or put another way: what are steeds supposed to be doing in the game? If they're just cool/badass transportation options, then I think they should probably scale with the overall meta. That is, at low levels it's just a fast horse, at higher levels it can fly or even instantly move you around the world. Its HP isn't really important. If you're talking about its role in combat, I don't think the drat thing should even have HP, because it shouldn't be distinct from the character - it should be, at best, a source of unique maneuvers. Its HP is only relevant if you're letting it be it's own creature with its own actions which you already shouldn't be doing.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
So this is a weird question, but the concept of crossbreeds came up recently. Now apparently upper planar outsiders and lower planar ones can breed and make creatures call Forlorns, who are trapped between good and evil and don't belong anywhere. And there's all the obvious half-breeds. So someone in my nerdy group asked if there was ever anything about what would happen if a demon and devil made a kid? Would it be basically a Forlorn? Woukd it be a neutral evil fiend that is neither demon nor devil?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:One dumb thing in 2e that was never addressed was horse HP. Heavy warhorse was 3+3, medium 2+2, light 2, and riding 3. It was dumb. I think the riding horse was higher HD because of the way HD interacted with the rules for overland travel and tiring yourself / your mount out, but I might be thinking of a supplement or something for 1e or possibly a completely different game. FRINGE posted:When you gain a level and do your obligatory prayers, make a wis check, if you pass your steed gets HP equal to 1/2 of your PCs HP gain applied to it. I probably wouldn't include the chance of your horse not getting tougher, but if you wanted to include a check anyway you could also go for the horse getting all/half your extra hp. Mendrian posted:I guess a better question is: why steeds? Or put another way: what are steeds supposed to be doing in the game? I think this is the best way to handle the whole thing (and ranger pets, and followers), but if you're a relative newcomer to D&D you should bear in mind that some people will be furiously opposed to thw idea of a creature existing without its own stat block and hit point pool. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 08:46 on May 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:So someone in my nerdy group asked if there was ever anything about what would happen if a demon and devil made a kid? Would it be basically a Forlorn? Woukd it be a neutral evil fiend that is neither demon nor devil? Its alignment would be chaotic lawful
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:If you're talking about its role in combat, I don't think the drat thing should even have HP, because it shouldn't be distinct from the character - it should be, at best, a source of unique maneuvers. Its HP is only relevant if you're letting it be it's own creature with its own actions which you already shouldn't be doing.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:So someone in my nerdy group asked if there was ever anything about what would happen if a demon and devil made a kid? Would it be basically a Forlorn? Woukd it be a neutral evil fiend that is neither demon nor devil?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:So this is a weird question, but the concept of crossbreeds came up recently. It would be whatthefuckever you want it to be. Decide for yourselves. Be creative.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:I dont know how it is now, but (trained) steeds with a trained rider got their own attacks. They were a huge benefit. (In 2e terms I think they got 1d8/1d8 per round.) Well yes, that's probably how it was. I'm saying 'distinct pet with it's own action pool and HP' is broken and dumb the same reason that minion spellcasters are dumb. It leads to unbalancable bullshit that breaks the action economy for the sake of verisimilitude. If I were designing a mount, it would do the following: a.) It increases the rider's movement options by X. Basic horses just have high movement speeds, other mounts have more fantastical movement abilities. This enhances the rider's move action. b.) It grants at least one bonus-action maneuver. A basic horse would probably let you spend your bonus action (and your regular action) to charge (move+attack) with Advantage, for instance. A trained warhorse might get that, plus an additional option, maybe a bonus action to kick/pin enemies. c.) Separating a rider from a mount should be an attack against the rider, treated as an attack with Disadvantage. If it hits, it deals normal damage and the character is knocked from the mount, falling prone. Or something like that, I'm just brainstorming here. "How do I kill the mount?" isn't a question I'd even need to think about at the table since it wouldn't really happen all that much. If the shoe was on the other foot I'd come up with some way for the PCs to do it, of course. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 22:51 on May 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
Mounts and animal companions are a lot easier if you think of them as equipment or class abilities. What does having a wolf equipped do? Same as having a sword or shield, some manner of passive benefit + some extra power options. What happens to a horse when its rider is fireballed? Same thing as what happens to their spellbook or armour.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 17:44
|
|
