|
Admiral Joeslop posted:
Helen Keller amnesiacs? hmm maybe in all seriousness though I really want to play a memento style archaeologist who keeps making amazing finds that everyone else already knows about
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
I always thought a game where you start with only the absolute most basic parts of your character set in stone (EG: "I am a human") at level 1, levelled up quickly and chose stuff like one power/feat/feature per level would be a good way to go. Too many games these days have you make shitloads of irrevocable character decisions right out of the gate, when you're least familiar with the mechanics.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:
Yeah, but it would exhaust the poor DM.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Yeah, but it would exhaust the poor DM. Obvious solution there is to just give each player another player's sheet.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Mr. Tambo posted:Obvious solution there is to just give each player another player's sheet.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:
this is a potentially interesting idea for a tabletop game held back by framing it as just a dnd campaign
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Brother Entropy posted:this is a potentially interesting idea for a tabletop game held back by framing it as just a dnd campaign That has always been the case throughout D&D's history. People always laud its versatility without ever realizing they really want to play another game and not D&D. Hell, there were a ton of pbp games here during 4e that were mecha anime or sci-fi or something that people kept running in D&D.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:I always thought a game where you start with only the absolute most basic parts of your character set in stone (EG: "I am a human") at level 1, levelled up quickly and chose stuff like one power/feat/feature per level would be a good way to go. Too many games these days have you make shitloads of irrevocable character decisions right out of the gate, when you're least familiar with the mechanics. Shadow of the Demon Lord does this, although you're also super fragile. You start as a level 0 member of your ancestry (that game's term for 'race' which I think works a lot better) and then at level 1 you pick warrior, rogue or magician, possibly based on what you did at level 0. The GM is encouraged to do things like sprinkle scrolls throughout the starter adventure to see who's into magic, and so forth.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:Shadow of the Demon Lord does this, although you're also super fragile. You start as a level 0 member of your ancestry (that game's term for 'race' which I think works a lot better) and then at level 1 you pick warrior, rogue or magician, possibly based on what you did at level 0. The GM is encouraged to do things like sprinkle scrolls throughout the starter adventure to see who's into magic, and so forth. Sounds interesting. Is the game itself any good? Edit: Why did they call the world "Urth"
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Gort posted:Sounds interesting. Is the game itself any good? I think it's alright, but it's basically DnD-ish rules by way of Warhammer Fantasy setting elements and occasional gruesomeness. While the book plays up the grimdark you can run a pretty standard DnD-fantasy game out of it just by not using the Corruption or Insanity rules. The main draw of the system is the 'class-building' where as mentioned, you start as a level 0 nobody, then a level 1 warrior/rogue/magician but then when you hit level 3, you pick an 'expert path' out of 12 and you're not restricted, so you can be a warrior-wizard or a magician-gunslinger. Then at level 7 you pick an 'expert path' out of 64, though 32 of them are just magic schools and variants like Aeromancer. So you can be a Rogue-Druid-Aeromancer if you feel like. The class benefits are also staggered, so when you hit level 6 you get your final warrior benefit or whatever, instead of just being your expert path through and through. Even your ancestry matters - when you hit level 4 you get the choice of picking another spell from a school you know, or getting an ancestry benefit.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:I think it's alright, but it's basically DnD-ish rules by way of Warhammer Fantasy setting elements and occasional gruesomeness. While the book plays up the grimdark you can run a pretty standard DnD-fantasy game out of it just by not using the Corruption or Insanity rules. That sounds nice from a character-building-freedom kind of way, but it does sound like a bit of a balance nightmare. I'll certainly give it a look, looks like there's an SRD for it here if anyone else is interested.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
Not to clog the 5e thread with Demonchat but I've been running a campaign in Shadow of the Demon Lord and it's gone great. Combat (with the zones rules from the Forbidden Rules supplement) is nice and fast, the class system is fun to gently caress around with (but not too complicated) and as a GM, I find it pretty easy to just make up monsters and spells on the fly.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
BinaryDoubts posted:Not to clog the 5e thread with Demonchat but I've been running a campaign in Shadow of the Demon Lord and it's gone great. Combat (with the zones rules from the Forbidden Rules supplement) is nice and fast, the class system is fun to gently caress around with (but not too complicated) and as a GM, I find it pretty easy to just make up monsters and spells on the fly. "If you didn’t want to see blood and faeces flying out of writhing, living intestines, you came to the wrong place." Hmm. I... don't want to see that?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
So I ended up asking a bunch of people whether or not they were interested in playing in my campaign, because in my experience roughly half of them flake out before their character sheets are done. But I managed a very high success rate, and now have 7 characters ready for the first session. I know challenge rating is based on four-member parties, so does anyone have advice that is better than the official rules about how to balance difficulty for larger parties? I'm sure I'll figure it out as I go along, but I'd rather the first few sessions not be braindead easy or TPKs.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:"If you didn’t want to see blood and faeces flying out of writhing, living intestines, you came to the wrong place." That sort of thing is the province of the 'Forbidden' spell school which is pretty clearly marked in the book with a big icon that means "this is really meant for evil NPCs, not heroes". Although there is an illustration in the book of one guy's flesh melting off his skeleton while his buddy both vomits and presumably shits blood.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:So I ended up asking a bunch of people whether or not they were interested in playing in my campaign, because in my experience roughly half of them flake out before their character sheets are done. But I managed a very high success rate, and now have 7 characters ready for the first session. I know challenge rating is based on four-member parties, so does anyone have advice that is better than the official rules about how to balance difficulty for larger parties? I'm sure I'll figure it out as I go along, but I'd rather the first few sessions not be braindead easy or TPKs. increase enemy groups by about half again, do not focus fire under any circumstances. CR is at best a loose guideline anyway, so it's not like it can work much worse than it normally does.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:So I ended up asking a bunch of people whether or not they were interested in playing in my campaign, because in my experience roughly half of them flake out before their character sheets are done. But I managed a very high success rate, and now have 7 characters ready for the first session. I know challenge rating is based on four-member parties, so does anyone have advice that is better than the official rules about how to balance difficulty for larger parties? I'm sure I'll figure it out as I go along, but I'd rather the first few sessions not be braindead easy or TPKs. Generally speaking you want to increase the number of enemy threats rather than the severity of them, and try not to focus-fire too much. If a four-person party can handle four skeletons (for example), your party should face seven (or a couple more, as larger parties tend to have more synergy and greater access to area spells) rather than a skeletal giant that will one-shot one of your characters and leave the rest unscathed. efb
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
"Don't focus fire" is a good guideline in general, but it becomes super important when you're upsizing encounters for a bigger party. Upping the number of monsters to scale to the number of PCs is a good way to do it, but you need to remember that upping the number of PCs doesn't necessarily help any individual PC. Also, threats to an individual PC are probably better thought of as being multiplactive rather than additive (I mean, as a guideline, not as in that's how the game wath works). The threat gap between 2 and 3 kobolds is bigger than that between 1 and 2. A PC that can handle 3-4 baddies at once might unexpectedly melt if faced with 5-6 because it's suddenly much more difficult than you'd expect it to be. e: Wow, I'm unclear this morning. Think of it like this. Assume you're solo fighting multiple dudes* and are gonna kill one opponent per round. Your opponents average 3 damage per round, which isn't much. You fight 1 dude who does average 3 damage per round. Round one you take 3 damage, round 2 it's over and you've taken 3 damage. You fight 2 dudes who do average 3 damage per round. Round one you take 6 damage, round 2 you take 3 damage, round 3 it's over and you've taken 9 damage. You fight 3 dudes who do average 3 damage per round. Round one you take 9 damage, round 2 you take 6 damage, round 3 you take 3 damage, round 4 it's over and you've taken 18 damage. You fight 4 dudes etc, 12, 9, 6, 3. 30 damage. 5 dudes, 15, 12, 9, 6, 3. 45 damage. A PC who can absorb 18 damage in a tough fight is probably gonna be screwed if they start taking 45 instead. *Or the whole party will kill one opponent per round etc, but all the bad guys have dogpiled one PC. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:55 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Gort posted:Generally speaking you want to increase the number of enemy threats rather than the severity of them, and try not to focus-fire too much. If a four-person party can handle four skeletons (for example), your party should face seven (or a couple more, as larger parties tend to have more synergy and greater access to area spells) rather than a skeletal giant that will one-shot one of your characters and leave the rest unscathed. i would advise exactly the opposite. go somewhere between 125-150% of what you'd normally run. in this example, five or six skeletons, not seven or eight or nine. more enemies gets deadlier fast in 5e, even moreso than in previous editions because of the scaling changes.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:
there's too many systems overlaid, it'd grind everything to a halt. It also makes it a pain for spellcasters who don't have the book, since they can't write it down or organise cheatsheets.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
I think of it as number of PC attacks vs monster attacks in a round. Total PC attacks plus two in a round can end up being pretty challenging so long as you got the monster stats and spells dialed in properly.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
Gort posted:Generally speaking you want to increase the number of enemy threats rather than the severity of them, and try not to focus-fire too much. If a four-person party can handle four skeletons (for example), your party should face seven (or a couple more, as larger parties tend to have more synergy and greater access to area spells) rather than a skeletal giant that will one-shot one of your characters and leave the rest unscathed. Replacing three skeletons with two 1.5 skeletons is a bit more straightforward.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
My paladin just hit 6 and I'm considering taking warlock 1 instead of pal 6. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:My paladin just hit 6 and I'm considering taking warlock 1 instead of pal 6. Thoughts? But you get the awesome aura at Pal 6. +2 to saves for you and your allies.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:But you get the awesome aura at Pal 6. +2 to saves for you and your allies. it's partially narrative, in game we just essentially discovered a new archfey and island and poo poo so it makes sense now for my guy to be like "hey let's make a deal" Plus I am a paladin of Bane, if my allies can't make their saves they don't deserve to survive. edit: the other part is because I wanna smite all day and all night Elendil004 fucked around with this message at 01:54 on May 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:it's partially narrative, in game we just essentially discovered a new archfey and island and poo poo so it makes sense now for my guy to be like "hey let's make a deal" There was some discussion earlier in the thread about warlock/paladin stuff synergising. I can't remember the details, though, sorry. But it sounds like you already know you're gonna do it because it'll make a fun story. So do it. e: Is there anything in the rulebook or errata or twitter about what happens if you have extra attacks from more than one source? Like Extra Attack from Fighter or Paladin and then Thirsting Blade as an eldritch invocation? Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. You can attack with your pact weapon twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. I guess the straight reading is "they don't stack", but it wouldn't be the first time the obvious reading has been contradicted later. MonsterEnvy posted:But you get the awesome aura at Pal 6. +2 to saves for you and your allies. + cha mod. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:16 on May 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:There was some discussion earlier in the thread about warlock/paladin stuff synergising. I can't remember the details, though, sorry. From what I remember/think the main benefit is spell slots that return on short rests for more smiting.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:e: Is there anything in the rulebook or errata or twitter about what happens if you have extra attacks from more than one source? Like Extra Attack from Fighter or Paladin and then Thirsting Blade as an eldritch invocation? PHB posted:If you gain the Extra Attack class feature from more than one class, the features don't add together. You can't make more than two attacks with this feature unless it says you do (as the fighter's version of Extra Attack does). Similarly, the warlock's eldritch invocation Thirsting Blade doesn't give you additional attacks if you also have Extra Attack.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Our rogue just left our campaign. How bad would it be to dip into a level of rogue as a way of the open palm monk for thieves tools, expertise in thieves tools, expertise in stealth, sneak attack, and proficiency on one of the rogue's skills (probably insight since my int is garbage). I'm a level 5 monk right now for reference.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:From what I remember/think the main benefit is spell slots that return on short rests for more smiting. Yes! That was the big one! There might have been another interaction with Smite too? Something to do with reach or range? MMAgCh posted:Covered in the PHB, p. 164. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Ran my first session of Rise of the Runelords in 5e. It went well! The first encounters with the goblins were pretty easy, and they managed to save a bunch of townspeople. They seem to be intent on being friendly to the townspeople, so that should make the emotional punches later on in the plot all the better. I had a bit of a grognard moment when someone wanted to play a dragonborn. There aren't any dragonborn in Pathfinder for starters, but she was so insistent that they were as iconic as elves or dwarves in a fantasy world. I never really liked dragonborn, and they feel very shoehorned into Forgotten Realms. Pretty much the only world they make sense to me in is Dragonlance. I showed her that they were really only mainstream in 4e, and were written into the system wholesale after that. She ended up playing an Orc and I think she's happy with it. It was just a funny moment to me, because I had always thought of 5e as a updated ruleset, but it really changes the lore as well. SerCypher fucked around with this message at 03:45 on May 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
That seems pretty weird. Dragonlance is probably the world where it seems the least likely for Dragonborn to be there, unless you are playing 4e and using the variant that is actually a Draconian. They definitely fit in Forgotten Realms, since that is both a kitchen sink setting, and they were specifically added in in the update to 4e. And 5e is basically set in Forgotten Realms and they are available in that. That said they have been around for a long time. 4e Dragonborn are a bit different from 3.x. in that in 4e they are a race rather than a template. And if you are just looking at dragonmen, there have been all kinds for decades, half-dragons of course but others as well. That said is Rise of the Runelords in Forgotten Realms? Or is it in the Pathfinder setting? Because who knows what races technically exist in that setting.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
RC Cola posted:Our rogue just left our campaign. How bad would it be to dip into a level of rogue as a way of the open palm monk for thieves tools, expertise in thieves tools, expertise in stealth, sneak attack, and proficiency on one of the rogue's skills (probably insight since my int is garbage). The thing with trying to get Sneak Attack is that it narrows down your already-narrow list of weapons a monk can use. Otherwise  yeah, more skill profs never seems to hurt anything.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
Ryuujin posted:That said is Rise of the Runelords in Forgotten Realms? Or is it in the Pathfinder setting? Because who knows what races technically exist in that setting. it's set in Golarion, which is also a kitchen sink setting
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
Given that Pathfinder is a clone of D&D I'd be shocked if there wasn't a dragon-dude race somewhere in there.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Given that Pathfinder is a clone of D&D I'd be shocked if there wasn't a dragon-dude race somewhere in there. you've forgotten pathfinder's core founding principle: gently caress 4e dragonborn weren't introduced in 4e, but that's where everyone knows them from, so there are no pathfinder dragonborn other than the half-dragon template
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
there's even a whole book of monstrous PC races and it doesn't have dragon people
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
You don't understand. Dragonborn are too powergamey. *Plays CoDZilla exclusively*
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:I had a bit of a grognard moment when someone wanted to play a dragonborn. There aren't any dragonborn in Pathfinder for starters, but she was so insistent that they were as iconic as elves or dwarves in a fantasy world. Lmao your player wanted to have fun and you harassed them over wanting the "wrong fun" and forced them to do something else because it hurt your sensibilities.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
I may never understand the mindset of wanting to DM a setting someone else wrote and also strictly adhering to the lore. Like, who gives a gently caress?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:29
|
|