|
Honestly, you'd need enough damage to basically guarantee "this enemy of my level will be dead in two turns", and then the opportunity cost of killing that creature can instead be put towards killing other enemies. Like, if A B C and D are fighting W X Y and Z and A says "Z will die in 2 turns from ongoing fire damage", then B, C, and D can focus down W, X and Y in those turns. The opportunity cost compared to just attacking the afflicted guy has to be good enough to justify it. If a first level Afflictor (for lack of a better term) can guarantee that an enemy of the same level will die on the turn after next, with MM3 math, they need to be doing 10.67 damage a turn. 11. That means Ongoing 10 wouldn't even be enough. So, here's my idea. The class starts with decent attacks (1[W]+Mod hitting NADs), and has three DOT statuses, that each deal 5 ongoing of a different damage type, that also each apply a debuff to the creature's offensive capabilities. For example: Katie Perry Level 1 Afflictor At-Will Power One Enemy, Ranged 10 Standard Action, +PRIMARY vs Fortitude Hit: 1d[W]+Cha, and you can apply your Fire Dot to the target. Effect: You can apply your Cold Dot to target, or any creature adjacent to target. Boo! Level 1 Afflictor At-Will Power One Enemy, Ranged 10 Minor Action, +PRIMARY vs Will Hit: You can apply your Fear Dot to the target. Get Sick Level 1 Afflictor Encounter Power One Enemy, Ranged 5 Standard Action, +PRIMARY vs Fortitude Hit: 2d[W], and target takes -SECONDARY to saving throws against your DOTs until start of your next turn. Effect: PRIMARY damage, and you can apply any one off your DoTs to the target. DKP 50 Minus Level 1 Afflictor Daily Power One Enemy, Ranged 10 Standard Action, +PRIMARY vs Will Hit: 3d[W]+PRIMARY, and target takes -10 to saving throws against your DOTs until end of encounter. Effect: You can apply up to three DoTs to the target. Need More Dots Level 1 Afflictor Power You possess 3 DOTs, chosen bla bla bla, you may only have each DOT afflicting one enemy at a time, each of the DOTs is Save Ends. Example DOTs bla bla bla, others can be chosen. Fire DOT: Ongoing 5 Fire, -SECONDARY + 1/2 Lvl to damage rolls. Cold DOT: Ongoing 5 Cold, Slowed Fear DOT: Ongoing 5 Psychic, -2 to attack rolls. This way, the Afflictor has two options: Focus down and utterly annihilate one creature's chances to do things, or spread the effects around and play Controller. It'd need tweaking to figure out exact numbers, of course, but that's the idea. girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Mar 27, 2017 |
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
Bouncing back to say once again that Battlemind makes for some hilariously rad hybrids - Battlemind/Fighter in particular. It doesn't FULLY click until paragon (where you can take a PP that lets you use Charisma for, like, everything, since you're split on your stats) but once it does click, you are now a living wrecking ball mixed with a pinball machine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Speed battlemind + samurai is just about my favorite thing ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
Instead of doing something productive, I hammered out a rough prototype for what a good DoT class might look like. No points for guessing what classes I based its effects on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
Torchlighter posted:EDIT: Apart from Dead, the only conditions that really help end a fight are vulnerability or lowering defences. Otherwise, they don't actually kill anything or speed up combat in any way. Would Ongoing be better if you could essentially 'consume' it on hit to give the creature vulnerability to that attack? This occupies essentially the exact same design space as the vulnerability mechanic, but with added complexity and fiddliness. Just stick to vulnerable. dont even fink about it posted:Speed battlemind + samurai is just about my favorite thing ever. Can brutal barrage trigger the extra crit damage bonus from samurai's level 10 feature? I don't think it relies on rolling damage dice, so I'd assume it would. I think samurai is best left to avengers and rangers, though, and even with them you're probably still better off grabbing sohei for the guaranteed extra minor attack per encounter over crit-fishing, but YMMV on that one. If you're just referring to getting to zoom your way across the battlefield before anybody even rolls initiative, yeah, battlemind beats them out in that aspect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:This occupies essentially the exact same design space as the vulnerability mechanic, but with added complexity and fiddliness. Just stick to vulnerable. Zooming across the battlefield to attack monsters who are trying to be back-rank support is great, with the caveat that you can make your leader's job a lot harder, but you are a defender so you're likely more self-sufficient than a striker doing the same anyway. By mid-paragon it is pretty nuts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Does anyone have any thoughts on the Companion character rules from DMG 2? I'll probably be running a 4E game for 3 players soon, and I've been considering letting the players get a companion character as an ally, first because my players are some Naruto motherfuckers who constantly try to get every friendly character to join them on their grand adventures, and also because I want to encourage the players to play whatever they want rather than have to worry too much about covering all the roles. This is obviously something I'll talk to my players about first because I don't want to force a DM PC on them, but I figured I'd make sure the rules are alright before bringing it up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
The war of the burning skies adventure path loves giving the PCs people with full stat blocks to follow them around. As this is ridiculous I replaced them all with NPCs using the companion rules. The companion rules are overall good, but I think they work better for some classes (leaders) than other classes (defenders). Controllers and strikers work fine, though strikers need CA to get their striker feature and this is a bit questionable in play for ranged strikers. You also want to pick straight forward at wills and I'd suggest just using average damage for them to cut down on the resolution time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
I always thought the best way to do an NPC follower would be to make them into a powerful encounter power. Assume for game purposes that in any given fight they're helping out by fighting some guys offscreen or doing ranged attacks (to no mechanical effect) but that they can "shine" for a round when the PCs want them to. Then they come out and do a bunch of attacks, then they go back to being in the background again. That way you get the mechanical bonus side of having a follower, without having to track all the rest of the stuff that comes with an NPC. If you like, you could even have a danger roll where the NPC has a chance to get wounded or killed each time their power is used, so players could have a dilemma like "We need this nobleman we're escorting to help out in this fight, but can we risk him?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
That's sort of how I played-out NPC followers. I made them like "assists" in Marvel vs Capcom where they jump in, do A Thing, then jump out. And much like choosing between Guile and Spiderman and Jill Valentine is an interesting decision because of the different uses for their assists, the value in having multiple different NPC companions lies in what their A Thing is when you decide to call upon them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
Something occurred to me prepping the next Gardmore Abbey session: there's no reason for the party to ever meet the orc chieftain. Every other enemy/encounter that features a card has at least a sidequest pointing you there, but not the chief (unless you count the ettin who possibly wants his speaking stones, but he only blocks the way to the chief in the first place). Since you can eventually drive the orcs away, this creates a bit of an issue; it's easily worked around but it requires more effort than "just run the module." Bit curious for an adventure that's otherwise so well designed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 10:52
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Something occurred to me prepping the next Gardmore Abbey session: My DM turned that NPC into a rival from my PC's backstory. I see how that could be a generic NPC without a story hook.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
If you think about tag-along NPCs more like Artifacts (maybe with hit points and defenses), I think you're off to a good start. For simpler NPCs, yeah, just turn them into an Encounter or Daily power, with maybe some static bonuses like +2 to History checks or what-have-you. For more complicated ones, minimize dice rolls and limit their complexity. Here's one I put together that I'm kind of proud of. This is at the high-end of NPC complexity for me, but it's mid-Epic so anything goes. I've taken her name off because she appears in the Zeitgeist adventure path, and I don't want to inadvertently spoil anything. (I put together the stat block myself, though, so no spoilers there! And this is actually toned down from how she was in the published adventure.) quote:((NAME WITHHELD)) Level 24 Ally Initiative +12
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
I'm guessing that Charm plays a big part in the encounters?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
PMush Perfect posted:I'm guessing that Charm plays a big part in the encounters?  Figuring out the best strategic use for this NPC will be a key part of the tactical puzzle in a few encounters.One thing about Epic Tier is that basically everything is fair game to fling at the PCs, including stuff that'd be just downright bad design at Heroic Tier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Something occurred to me prepping the next Gardmore Abbey session: there's no reason for the party to ever meet the orc chieftain. Every other enemy/encounter that features a card has at least a sidequest pointing you there, but not the chief (unless you count the ettin who possibly wants his speaking stones, but he only blocks the way to the chief in the first place). Since you can eventually drive the orcs away, this creates a bit of an issue; it's easily worked around but it requires more effort than "just run the module." Bit curious for an adventure that's otherwise so well designed. They have to meet the chieftain and get their cards as part of the Deck of Many Things quest to unlock the Secret Collector encounter. So yeah no sidequest, just the main quest. Say the party skips all the orc encounters–the gates, the campsite, and the keep, and still does all the Padraig quests, including Defending the Watchtower. All the last one does by itself is two things: make it so orc encounters never get replaced by reinforcements and let them skip encounter 2 (campsite), which they'll have needed to complete once to allow them to get to the watchtower to defend it in the first place. It just makes the village full of orcs and junk that attacked the watchtower run, not the orc encounters if they haven't been done yet. Killing the chieftain by itself also temporarily stops reinforcements until the power struggle dies down. The party has to do both to make the orcs never get reinforcements again. It's weird, but even if they Defend the Watchtower then kill the chieftain, there are still six bored hungry orcs who never get their relieved from guard duty at the gate. The module kind of expects the chieftain to be alive during Defending the Watchtower, since failing it causes the part to be captured and ransomed by the chieftain–if not Bakram, who it specifically names, then his successor. The orcs won't attack the watchtower to trigger the Defend quest unless there is a chieftain, after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Is there any significant difference in content between the Deluxe and regular editions of the PHB 1 and the DMG 1? As far as I can tell, it's just the covers that are different, since it doesn't seem to include any errata.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
slydingdoor posted:It just makes the village full of orcs and junk that attacked the watchtower run, not the orc encounters if they haven't been done yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
For anyone interested in the mechanics of 4e combat and who might be looking for ideas on stuff they can add, I can recommend a video game called Atlas Reactor (SA thread here: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3788846). Being a computer game there is obviously stuff that wouldn't translate to the table too well, but there is about 20 classes that all play differently but are really well balanced and contribute in their own ways. It might be more interesting to people hacking their own system together, as it's pretty bare bones compared to a full 4e class power set - but I enjoy it and can feel the similarities / influence from 4e type combat pretty heavily.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Wraiths are just plain lovely enemies. Is it insubstantial right now or has it taken radiant damage, wait was the radiant damage this or last round, does this attack deal force/radiant well then he's just gone now and we have to break out the rules for being hidden, who had the bright idea to build an encounter out of nothing but wraiths in the first place This level of complexity should be reserved for solos. e: although right now in post-game talk I'm hearing how at least one player really liked that fight so I dunno, maybe they're just a pain in the rear end to run. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Rules question: there are powers like cleric's level 6 utility Stream of Life, which deal damage to the cleric and "cannot be reduced in any way." I assume this includes resistance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
I'd assume the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Rules question: there are powers like cleric's level 6 utility Stream of Life, which deal damage to the cleric and "cannot be reduced in any way." I assume this includes resistance? Yes, Resistance is a game element that reduces damage. e: RC 224 if you really need a reference for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Wraiths are just plain lovely enemies. Is it insubstantial right now or has it taken radiant damage, wait was the radiant damage this or last round, does this attack deal force/radiant well then he's just gone now and we have to break out the rules for being hidden, who had the bright idea to build an encounter out of nothing but wraiths in the first place But then I remembered that I never ran an encounter with more than one of those things at a time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
I did also ditch all the special wraith mechanics about halfway through the fight because it was just dragging on e: and up until then we'd forgotten about them more than half the time anyway. I also had them retreat towards the end but my players are determined to see things through to the last hit point. Shortly before that, they had stumbled right into one of Gardmore Abbey's biggest boss fights. A level 6 party against nothing but level 10 enemies. It was very touch-and-go and there was no moment where at least one character wasn't stunned, dying or otherwise incapacitated, but they pulled through in the end. It's only getting easier from here, at least in theory. After the session one player said "looked like you had your hands full avoiding a TPK there" and I replied "what do you mean avoiding a TPK, that's your job." e2: a thing that came up: say someone has a power that goes along the lines of "hit: 2d8+CHA modifier damage, and until the end of your next turn, any creature that ends its turn adjacent to the target takes 1d6 damage." I say you roll that 1d6 once when you use the power and use the result every time a creature fulfills the condition. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Apr 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:e2: a thing that came up: say someone has a power that goes along the lines of "hit: 2d8+CHA modifier damage, and until the end of your next turn, any creature that ends its turn adjacent to the target takes 1d6 damage." I say you roll that 1d6 once when you use the power and use the result every time a creature fulfills the condition. (By extension, if you crit, the d6 gets maximized as well.) My players expressed surprise. Did I miss a rule? It doesn't really matter when/how you roll the d6, but crits only apply to the target(s) of the attack, you shouldn't be maximizing it. It's also technically a damage roll, so any modifiers to damage rolls the player has apply.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Yep, we just recently worked out all those secondary damage rolls and modifiers (Sorcerers come out surprisingly complex in that, I think between all her powers we hit all the combinations of ability mod/implement enhancement bonus/sorcerer bonus there are). I think it does matter how you roll - say, over the next round, two creatures fulfill the condition. My take is, you roll the d6 for the first one (either when the power is used or when that creature triggers the damage roll, sure), but not a separate time for the second one and any further. Good catch on crits though - of course that's how it works, I had a brain fart there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
Can anyone cite the "feat tax" benefits I'm supposed to give out to players again?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Azran posted:Can anyone cite the "feat tax" benefits I'm supposed to give out to players again? "The second fix is an unofficial, but very common house rule: Feat Taxes. After a while, Wizards realized that monster defenses climb faster than PC attack bonuses, and so they released the so-called "expertise" feats that give +1 to attack per tier. This fixes the attack bonus problem (mostly), but raises another: everyone who wants to be a competitive character will take these feats, making them essentially a wasted slot. The common fix is to give out an Expertise feat at level 5 or earlier. Other feats that are sometimes given out for free to avoid taxes (depending upon group and playstyle): Improved Defenses, Weapon/Implement Focus, and Melee Training (especially for Defenders like Battleminds and Swordmages who otherwise lack a useful Melee Basic Attack)."
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
 I feel so dumb, forgot to check the OP. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
I always like when people come up with thematically fitting character concepts that are well supported by the mechanics, even if the mechanics were intended for something different. Or in short, I like a good refluffing. One of my players made a Revenant Swarm Druid. The idea is that she died when her grove did. However, the great circle of life doesn't just stop there; bodies are returned to the earth, souls to the gods. In this case, the Raven Queen took an interest. What you get when that happens is a pale young woman who is very much in touch with nature and engulfs foes with the worms, maggots and flies that feed off her own decaying body. The goth version of MGS3's The Pain, if you will. Only, because we're us, with more "fruit flies like X" and "buzz off" jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
I'm still looking for a game where I can appropriately translate the booger-powered anti-Wizard class from Tales of Maj'Eyal into the game's mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I always like when people come up with thematically fitting character concepts that are well supported by the mechanics, even if the mechanics were intended for something different. Or in short, I like a good refluffing. I had kind of a similar idea for a dryad. She sees the death of her tree in a vision, and she winds up dedicating herself to the Raven Queen and the domain of fate. She travels the world, essentially seeking the thing that is responsible for her eventual death so she can face her end head on. Unfortunately, the DM who usually runs 4e stuff hates the Raven Queen and specifically ripped her out of the pantheon for his custom setting (as well as a multitude of races) so I instead wound up playing basically a seal-shifter Fighter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
Was importing Kelemvor from the Forgotten Realms pantheon not an option? I feel like he's a more interesting take on a death deity than the raven queen, who's basically half badly-ripped-off Gaiman's Death of the Endless and half edgelord. IIRC she's also a Mary Sue from a designer's campaign setting that was OMG SO BADASS that she challenged the old death deity to a duel AND WON so she got his domains. Pass. Edit: nope she just shanked him and stole his poo poo, after becoming his consort because of course she would  Yeah I don't blame any DMs for jettisoning this garbage heap, but the proper thing to do would be to replace her with a different, less bad death deity. Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Actually at the time I was really unfamiliar with D&D so I was kinda just winging it and relying on my writing. He might have made an exception if I plied him to get the other death god. He ended up letting someone play an eladrin (who are not formally in the custom setting) and framed it as a planes hopping experiment gone awry. But that's not a bad idea. If he runs a game in that setting again, I may go that route
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Was importing Kelemvor from the Forgotten Realms pantheon not an option? I feel like he's a more interesting take on a death deity than the raven queen, who's basically half badly-ripped-off Gaiman's Death of the Endless and half edgelord. This reminds me about how I like the flavor text of some of the Epic paths. One of them is about restarting the literal structure wheel of reincarnation the Raven Queen never fixed so she can play "I'm totally neutral, not Evil!" Death overlord to her preferences. With the flavor text only end goal being fixing it, and then booting her through it 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Skypie posted:I actually have someone who is rolling a shaman in a game I'm about to run so I have been digging into them myself trying to get a handle on them. This is me if anyone is interested.  Skypie posted:He ended up letting someone play an eladrin (who are not formally in the custom setting) and framed it as a planes hopping experiment gone awry. BTW the guy who played this character is one of the worst gamers I've ever played with (in a different game) and me and Skypie wage an eternal crusade against him. I might talk about him, either here, or since it wouldn't be a massive derail there, gaming_shit_that_didnt_happen.txt
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:This is me if anyone is interested. I am actually looking forward to this party. Stalker shaman, paladin, tactical warlord, archer ranger, and a psion. The paladin, taclord, and psion were in a Shadowrun 4e game I ran a couple years ago and made me want to die because their characters combo'd so well together for absurd amounts of damage. I can't wait to see how this goes! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Skypie posted:I am actually looking forward to this party. Stalker shaman, paladin, tactical warlord, archer ranger, and a psion. The paladin, taclord, and psion were in a Shadowrun 4e game I ran a couple years ago and made me want to die because their characters combo'd so well together for absurd amounts of damage. I can't wait to see how this goes! If that's a problem, can't you just throw a few more waves of enemies at them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
Warlord reminds me of a minor mechanics question that came up last time: Bravura Warlord can let allies gamble when they spend an action point: if they hit with the AP attack, they can make an MBA as a free action. Barbarian has a feature: when he drops an enemy to 0 HP, he can charge. The situation: Barbarian spends an AP, takes the Warlord's gamble, hits and drops the enemy to 0 HP. No other enemy is in melee range. He charges a different enemy and asks if he can make the Warlord's granted MBA after the charge. I rule no, the Warlord's granted MBA is lost, because if you can insert one other action between trigger and free action MBA you could insert as many as you want and in theory take the granted MBA one round later or two or in another fight altogether. Accurate? More to the point: fair? We get things wrong with these new characters all the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 20:09
|
|