|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Bring back the Leadership feat, let's bog down combat with more PC meatbags. Leadership was just one of those things that wasn't quite thought-out well enough. On the surface: TSR-era PCs get followers at "Name level", so let's turn that into a feat that they can take when they hit level 6! We're just porting over old game features into the new edition! Except back in those days NPCs could be summarized in a single line of stats. You get to 3e and a "Cohort" has its own wealth-by-level poo poo, while even a "standard follower" is going to have a whole paragraph-size statblock. Throw in the action economy and it just breaks down under its own weight.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I wanted to do a tiefling barbarian who triggered Thaumaturgy when I raged, but the extra action was deemed unbalanced. Disappointing. Oh what Thaumaturgy has literally no mechanical bennies to it. Maybe some RP/thematic potential but zip otherwise. Poo poo on your GM
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Rigged Death Trap posted:Thaumaturgy has literally no mechanical bennies to it. Maybe some RP/thematic potential but zip otherwise. It could help persuade people, or intimidate them, or distract them. Anyway, that's the kind of thing magic items are for and the barbarian should definitely be given one because it's cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Is there a decent resource of, basically, reviews of spells, or a list of them that aren't attack/save dependent? I want to make one of my older 3.5 characters, who was a Druid, but with levels of Bard to better represent his diplomatic/know it all nature. Bard and Druid don't combo all that well so I was considering just a two level dip into Druid with Circle of the Moon for a couple OK wild shapes every short rest. I suppose I could also just keep healing spells in reserve for anyone that hits 0 hit points. No weapons besides maybe a cane or staff that I can Shillelagh if absolutely needed. Battlefield control and talking are the goals. My grappler is fun but I haven't been able to find much roleplaying fun in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
empathe posted:That's a really good idea. I couldn't tell you, I don't have FG. http://prints.mikeschley.com/ has a ton of maps from the print adventures at really high resolutions. The Death House is available for free, which is why my party took a right-turn from exploring dungeons to mucking about a haunted house--I wanted to experiment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Man the stories of murder hobo psychopathic PC groups are just horrible to me. I played as a player with a group like that for one session before simply excusing myself out of the group because I hate that sort of nonsensical gently caress about poo poo. I haven't DM'd for very long (barring stuff waaaay back in highschool when I had no idea what good (read: the kind I like) dnd even looked like, so it doesn't count) but I vetted my players and made drat sure they understood that sort of stuff wouldn't be allowed at the table unless it was REALLY funny. I know there are people out there who think that's the entirety of what DnD is and DMs who run entire campaigns about that but man, that is so anathema to me. I wouldn't even be able to handle that as a DM in an in-universe way. In character repercussions for their actions wouldn't be enough, I'd just straight reprimand them at the table for breaking the rules I had explicitly laid out before they even made a character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
There's a very easy in-universe way to discourage this kind of behavior: You kill them all
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Moving away from the grid is possible and even good for some games but it reduces the boardgamey nature of combat. Legend of the Wulin - and probably also its predecessor Weapons of the Gods - also uses zones, although they are less abstract. A zone is just any area inside of which anyone can easily reach anyone else, and ranged and long weapons let you hit people in other zones. To scale this down from crazy wuxia action to normal dungeon crawling, you could say have Zone A and C be zwo different rooms, with the little passage that is Zone B acting as the chokepoint. If a zone is very big with different elevation levels or other distinct features, that's a few more zones for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:There's a very easy in-universe way to discourage this kind of behavior: Yeah the one and only time something like that happened to a group I was in, the surviving villagers got word to the local church and we got clobbered a few days later by a bunch of hold person spells and fighters. The DM straight up reset the plot and said let that be a lesson to not murder towns. In our defense we had idiotic characters (I had a berserk rager as my first ever character which was a bad idea, another had a firbolg whose monstrous traits were 'flies into rage at insults' and 'has horrible odor')
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
You have learned a lesson as a DM: need a tired old NPC to run a shop or an inn, and your group are insane? He's a retired adventurer at level 20 just trying to live a quiet life now, and won't take that kinda poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Yeah the one and only time something like that happened to a group I was in, the surviving villagers got word to the local church and we got clobbered a few days later by a bunch of hold person spells and fighters. The DM straight up reset the plot and said let that be a lesson to not murder towns. For my first session ever, I had a plan if the party went crazy or ignored my plot hook. It was "without interference, the evil ritual (that they were supposed to stop) goes off without a hitch and shrouds the land in fell darkness. The party must fight their way out of the area of effect, fighting insane villagers and evil creatures of every stripe while simultaneously making saving throws every hour to keep from going mad." That would have learned 'em.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Ran my first proper session of SKT with my group, and it certainly seems like everyone had fun.(First session was a meet+greet/character building session.) They were pretty murderous with the playful goblins but they know Kella's true intentions and haven't killed her, a good sign of....not murdering every npc which helps me. I'm pretty sure they're just not going to go in the keep at all, which is strange, who doesn't go in the big setpiece part of the town???? Whatever lol, it's all good, I think they're gonna sleep and then the zhents will arrive tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:You have learned a lesson as a DM: need a tired old NPC to run a shop or an inn, and your group are insane? He's a retired adventurer at level 20 just trying to live a quiet life now, and won't take that kinda poo poo. And people wonder why there's so many high level quest givers in the Realms...
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Leadership was just one of those things that wasn't quite thought-out well enough. It was also a delightful case of "let's take something unique to non-casters and give it to EVERYONE!" See also: Ranger animal companion somehow becoming a druid thing, and making them better at it then Rangers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
I'm going to be DMing a game for 3 first-timers and 1 experienced player who's going to help act as a player guide. We're meeting to roll characters and introduce and I'd like to run them through a simple encounter on a simple map to show how combat flows. I'd like to cover perception checking (maybe stealth), initiative, combat, and maybe a simple puzzle based on something on a body so they can do a little investigation. Am I missing any other key mechanics?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
empathe posted:I'm going to be DMing a game for 3 first-timers and 1 experienced player who's going to help act as a player guide. Hard to do in a single session where you're already teaching rules and doing character creation, but the big one is resource management and appropriate resting in DnD5e. Also maybe the fact that DnD5e combat is super-lethal at low levels and you don't lose anything important by either starting straight at level 3, or starting everyone with the amount of HP they'd have at level 3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:Hard to do in a single session where you're already teaching rules and doing character creation, but the big one is resource management and appropriate resting in DnD5e. Yeah, I'm thinking it'll be just a training exercise with their new characters that won't count. Play to learn the rules. So literally no real "story" or RP, just an exploration of the rules. Resting/healing is a good callout! It'll also help me adjust the beginning of the campaign if they aren't doing well with combat and using all their tools.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
empathe posted:I'm going to be DMing a game for 3 first-timers and 1 experienced player who's going to help act as a player guide. Reactions, specifically Attacks of Opportunity. Be prepared to explain bonus actions a couple times. If you ask a beginner, "do you have a bonus action you'd like to take," they will always answer, "yes, I'd like to attack again."
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
lifg posted:Reactions, specifically Attacks of Opportunity. I wonder if it would have worked better to give the actions names like "red", "blue", "green" instead of attack, bonus, free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Or.... Maybe something like Action, Move Action, Minor Action, Free Action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
I recently had the exact same situation (right down to party comp--three first-timers and a pro). I had my teaching encounter be a goblin hostage situation. They could scout out the exterior, come up with a plan, then kick the doors in and Siege the Day. Complicating factors were 1. One of the hostages was bleeding out in a corner, teaching them about Death saving throws and giving them an immediate goal (stabilize) 2. The goblins were stacked up on the front and back doors, teaching them about reactions and attacks of opportunity (I foreshadowed this by having an NPC tell them how they'd tried to rush the place and gotten ambushed) 3. Stealth/Surprise rounds + Advantage/Disadvantage (this took place during a driving rainstorm which meant they had Advantage on sneak checks, and could literally get the drop on the goblins by coming in through the ceiling 4. and some light roleplaying (figuring out how best to attack, scouting the perimeter, maybe even negotiating with the goblins) Protecting the hostages and stabilizing the dying one gave the encounter a dynamic feel to it. Our encounter ended with the last surviving goblin grabbing a kid and holding her hostage. This was supposed to teach them about grappling, shoving, and cover--but instead of doing anything smart, the party tried to attack him and almost killed her. I took pity on them and had one of the other hostages (the girls' adoptive older brother) try to tackle the gobbo. Except he blew his roll and the goblin slashed the poo poo out of him. Whoops. That at least gave the rest of the party time to bash his head in. The encounter ended with the discovery that one of the kids was missing, likely hauled off by other goblins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
That sounds like a great intro to D&D, I'm going to shamelessly rip it off if "we haven't played any RPGS and want to try exactly this version of D&D can you DM?" ever comes up for me. Except with kobolds because kobolds are great. Suprise rounds in 5th ed though?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
lifg posted:Reactions, specifically Attacks of Opportunity. To complicate matters this is exactly how you take a swing with your offhand when dual wielding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
d&d would've been far better if dual wielding never existed or if the offhand attack was just a flat damage addition to your main one
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:That sounds like a great intro to D&D, I'm going to shamelessly rip it off if "we haven't played any RPGS and want to try exactly this version of D&D can you DM?" ever comes up for me. Except with kobolds because kobolds are great. I didn't do it by the book, I just had all the gobbos be surprised (because that's the normal reaction when Hulk Hogan the Half-Elf Monk does a flying elbow drop through the ceiling to start combat) and gave the party a free round. Didn't want them to get killed in the first battle or need bailing out, and I was throwing a lot of gobbos at them. They ended up doing super well and murked 2/4 of the gobbos almost immediately, with a third heavily wounded. That's when their two kobold buddies came charging up the stairs from the basement where they had been rooting around. The next stage was finding out what happened to the kid and figuring out why goblins and kobolds were working together.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:d&d would've been far better if dual wielding never existed or if the offhand attack was just a flat damage addition to your main one That be pretty nice. Something like... Offhand options: - a weapon, +4 damage - a shield, +2 AC - a spell focus, can cast and counter spells - free, ADV on physical skill checks
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:I didn't do it by the book, I just had all the gobbos be surprised (because that's the normal reaction when Hulk Hogan the Half-Elf Monk does a flying elbow drop through the ceiling to start combat) and gave the party a free round. Didn't want them to get killed in the first battle or need bailing out, and I was throwing a lot of gobbos at them. In a teaching/learning session, I'd probably think about having one gobbo not surprised to show that it's not always 100% effective. Then again, you did show that doing something cool and unexpected makes for awesome gaming, which is probably more important than understanding the surprise rules. lifg posted:That be pretty nice. Something like... Yeah, that's good. Would tie in well with simplified weapon damage too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
I play surprise by ear, if the party does something that would catch someone off guard then that's a special round.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:d&d would've been far better if dual wielding never existed or if the offhand attack was just a flat damage addition to your main one lifg posted:That be pretty nice. Something like... Splicer fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I, too, enjoy D&D 4th edition. Is that really how twin strike worked? I didn't realize that dual wielding is weird because it isnt something that ever really happened afaik. At most you'd have a parrying dagger in the off hand, but not be attacking with it except super rarely. I believe the drizzt books came out prior to 2e letting you dual wield equal sized weapons if you are a ranger, but I don't know the origin of dual wielding with smaller weapons in the offhand. I assume one of the original players wanted to do it because it seemed cool, just like clerics with blunt weapons mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Is that really how twin strike worked? I didn't realize that It sure isn't!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
D&D's mistake was assuming that more weapons = more attacks. Like, this whole thing began in AD&D where you could wield a dagger or a hand-axe in the off-hand, and it'd give you an extra attack, but both those attacks would have a penalty to their attack rolls, which could be partially mitigated by high Dex, etc. etc. 3e largely inherited that model: second weapon = second attack, but you have to take feats to mitigate the penalties and specialize in that style of fighting. 5e at least simplifies the model: second weapon = second attack, but you have to use your Bonus Action to access the second attack rather than go jump down a rabbit hole of numerical penalties and bonuses. Except the original idea makes no sense because in AD&D's minute-long combat rounds, a single attack roll doesn't represent a single swing of your weapon, but rather an entire fight sequence worth of traded blows, with the attack roll representing whether or not the blows made an appreciable difference in the enemy's capability to fight. In that context, adding a second weapon shouldn't let you make a second attack roll because the attack rolls don't represent swings of a weapon on a 1-to-1 basis. Even if we were to grant that more swings maybe meant you had a better chance to land a blow that hurt your target, a bonus to the attack roll takes care of that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Is that really how twin strike worked? I didn't realize that http://www.bookoffiverings.com/ Not that Musashi wasn't a massive exception, but he is a famous one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Is that really how twin strike worked? I didn't realize that
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Twin strike is a special ranger power which requires two weapons (or one ranged weapon) that lets you hit a dude twice. Standard dual weilding (like a rogue holding two daggers or what have you) just gets a +2 damage bonus. Holding two weapons doesn't do anything by itself in 4e; you can take the TWF feat to get a +1 damage bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Yeah, 4E abandoned the idea that two weapons = two attacks, except for specialized two-weapon builds (e.g. ranger, tempest fighter, whirling barbarian). 5E, of course, brought it back because tradition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Holding two weapons doesn't do anything by itself in 4e; you can take the TWF feat to get a +1 damage bonus. To expand on this, any class can hold two weapons in combat (as long as one has the offhand property), but can only swing one at once. They must decide before attacking which weapon the strike will come from, at otherwise no penalty. This isn't to say the 5e's use of the bonus action is bad, it's just boring.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
I dunno, it seems pretty neat for the rogue. If they miss their sneak attack they can give up their cunning action to have a second chance at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
I agree it is in fact quite practical, especially for a rogue, but it's lost a lot of flash which I feel is key to the style.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Holding two weapons doesn't do anything by itself in 4e; you can take the TWF feat to get a +1 damage bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2017 17:31
|
|