|
sleepy.eyes posted:I would guess some pathetic attempt to stop piracy. yes
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
It's really dumb since I can get a pirated pdf in like 10 seconds of google searching
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:I haven't played D&D in ages, having been mostly played World of Darkness, Unknown Armies, and Fate Core recently. I've decided to take a look at D&D 5e and the main question I have is this: Like everyone else said, piracy. That being said, the last time I was poking around in D&D Beyond I noticed that there was PHB content in the spell list, with a spell description that was basically "this is blank but will be available after the beta launches to final". I'd bet they'll do some sort of subscription or digital purchase thing for content, since their plan is to build D&D Beyond as a sort of content storage platform for streaming and playing D&D.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Oh, also, roll your attacks and damage at the same time. Eg) Let's say you're attacking with a longsword. Pick up the 1d20 for the attack roll and the 1d8 for the damage, and roll both dice at the same time. If you miss, just disregard the damage dice. See this looks good on paper until you're throwing four attacks per round with advantage and possibly different weapons and need to figure out which attacks crit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
sleepy.eyes posted:I would guess some pathetic attempt to stop piracy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:It's polite to still pay for the books that you never open because you pirated the pdfs already. View the cost of D&D books as paying tribute to your FLGS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:It's polite to still pay for the books that you never open because you pirated the pdfs already. Yeah, I just want to get PDFs with my paper copies so that I can search instead of relying on the PHB's laughable index.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:Why in the gently caress can I not buy a digital copy of this game in 2017? NeurosisHead posted:Like everyone else said, piracy. That being said, the last time I was poking around in D&D Beyond I noticed that there was PHB content in the spell list, with a spell description that was basically "this is blank but will be available after the beta launches to final". I'd bet they'll do some sort of subscription or digital purchase thing for content, since their plan is to build D&D Beyond as a sort of content storage platform for streaming and playing D&D. Toplowtech fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Jul 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Time for me to get way too dramatic about roleplaying games.The DPRK posted:My friends and I are new to roleplaying games and will start our first campaign (The Lost Mine of Phandelver) soon. I've been in a whole lot of games, with many, many strangers. The good news is that, from the games I've played, the ones with new people actually tend to go the smoothest. The really terrible games always seem to come from the people who've been playing for 15 years, get pissy when things like Feat Taxes get mentioned and bring up the idea of Critical Failure tables. There's been some good advice, but, as someone who's been in a lot of games with a lot of bad players, there's one thing I definitely want to reinforce: AlphaDog posted:Before play: Take this, and go even further. Cooperation is huge in games like this, and at least for now, you want to be cooperative as poo poo. Some of the things I'm going to say actually have some give. For example, I'll talk about intra-party conflict: this can be extremely dramaticly exciting if done well, but it can absolutely destroy a game if done poorly, and right now you guys are still trying to remember how initiative works. So, what I'm saying isn't ironclad, but is based on seeing this done very poorly very often. If you're certain you know what you're doing (and people have talked about this stuff beforehand), it can work. If it's sprung on people, it'll be a disaster. Of all the (many) bad games I've played, in all the systems, 90% of the problems come from: The only way I can play my character means I have to stab your character in the neck. Sometimes, the evil character (usually a rogue) goes off on their own, and steals something that belongs to another PC. Sometimes, the Paladin is so good and righteous that he absolutely refuses to sneak up on these three dozen giants and thus loudly announces your presence, leading to the entire team getting killed. Maybe the character believes so strongly in not relying on other people that, in the end, everyone is completely 100% ok with abandoning him to his inevitable death just because they're tired of trying to get involved. If your characters beliefs are completely unshakable and run contrary to what the party is doing, then your character is wrong. Make another one. Instead, take the other characters into consideration. Don't think just that your characters are in a group, think about why the group works. For whatever reason, you guys are a team, and you act like one. This might require some stretching, this might require softening the edges of your character, and this might require some creativity, but at least for your first campaign, that rogue can steal from everyone except from the other PCs. My character represents my real, very personally held beliefs or issues, and don't you dare question him because I will take it personally. Roleplaying can be a very healthy way to deal with Strong Feelings, but... I mean, do we really want to handle stuff that's best discussed with your therapist? Is your character angry at being lied to by a party member because it gave Nick the Necromancer an advantage in the last fight, or are you angry because your friend lied to you? Is your character frustrated because another PC called out that their shyness prevents them from being promoted in their mercenary group, or are you upset because your friend just totally dismissed your real life social anxiety? Does your character's background have some striking resemblance to yours, in some incredibly tragic way? Generally, characters are extensions of the players. And that's good and fine! But if your character believes in something really, really strongly, make sure that you won't get so tied up in it that the playing table will become a wrestling ring. It's just a game, yo: pretend to be an elf and poo poo. Save the big stuff for the other kind of group. Let me tell you why your character isn't actually [alignment]. Ok, so, Morality in dungeons and dragons is really, really weird, and way, way too many words have been spilled about it. Some players (usually those who've been playing for 15 years) have really strong opinions on what Lawful Good means, and will give you a firm chewing out because clearly what your character is doing is lawful neutral at best. Instead, when it comes to if a character is acting like a REAL paladin would, or is as concerned about nature as a REAL druid would be, just kinda... it's an elf game, man. Like, maybe this druid follows a god that's totally ok with cities. I mean, cities have animals, right? Like rats and pigeons. Aren't they deserving of respect? At least for your first few sessions, when it comes to class and alignment, everyone is playing their class correctly. Including you. Especially you. My character actually doesn't want to be here at all. For some reason, this character is involved in the adventure, but really, really doesn't want to be. A nobleman who is having to dirty his hands because his father ordered him to. A terrified guardsman who just wants to go home. Someone with their own, personal agenda who constantly wants to abandon the quest and do something entirely irrelevant. Someone who just doesn't like getting involved in other people's issues. While characters like this can be workable, they can also be extremely disruptive. If the beginning of every session, or the beginning of every major plan, starts and ends with "Convince Josh that this entire thing isn't a waste of time and stupid and that we should do anything at all", you will all be miserable. If your character doesn't want to get involved with the main plot, then your character is wrong. Make another one. Instead, every character should not only have a reason to be part of the group, but should have a reason to do the main plot. It might be a stretch, it might be contrived, it might require you to alter your character a bit. But 99% of the time, the best character is the one who everyone can work with to some extent. You can be an idiot, a fool, or a weakling, just don't be disinterested. And on a good note, of the small fraction of games that turned out really, really well, the strong majority featured new players, or were almost entirely new players. As long as you focus on the ideas of "Am I cooperative?", "Am I reasonably chill?" and "Am I not taking the game that seriously?", you will almost certainly have a really, really good time. And if the game turns into some overly dramatic backstab fest involving really touchy subjects, huge moral arguments and literal tears, might I suggest Monsterhearts? That'll probably be right up your alley. Edit: Also, reread Be Obvious from above. 99% of the game starts with "Why don't we do this?" You might feel awkward or nervous suggesting a plan of action. REJECT THAT NONSENSE, your idea is probably golden and if it's not it's probably inspiring someone else's golden idea. You're an adventurer, you do poo poo. And to do poo poo, you have to suggest things. The more people are suggesting things, the more heroic you can be, because this idiot over here managed to convince you all that the best way to sneak into the Dragon's Lair was to convince the dragon that you were hosts in a dating show and needed to do a series of interviews to set him up with his perfect dragon date. For the record, that plan worked. Gharbad the Weak fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jul 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
A shorthand version of a lot of what's up there that I tell my players is "There are characters who are not cooperative or who would not join this party. This story is not about them. This story is about 4 or 5 people who did cooperate enough for a story to exist in the first place. Make someone for that story."
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:A shorthand version of a lot of what's up there that I tell my players is "There are characters who are not cooperative or who would not join this party. This story is not about them. This story is about 4 or 5 people who did cooperate enough for a story to exist in the first place. Make someone for that story." Yeah, that sums it up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
What do you guys do as a DM when your table isn't interested in your game any more? Like, when the lawful good vengeance paladin decides he wants to start a protection racket and burns down an orphanage full of kids with them in it for not paying to "help him avenge evil", and the chaotic good life cleric murders the constable in his sleep because he didn't do enough to protect folks it's because they're bored as players. They helped design the sort of heroic fantasy setting and story seeds I'm working with, but I feel like it's more my job to just write the story they want to tell than it is to be the alignment police and make them stay the course with the heroic folk they started out wanting to play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:What do you guys do as a DM when your table isn't interested in your game any more? Like, when the lawful good vengeance paladin decides he wants to start a protection racket and burns down an orphanage full of kids with them in it for not paying to "help him avenge evil", and the chaotic good life cleric murders the constable in his sleep because he didn't do enough to protect folks it's because they're bored as players. They helped design the sort of heroic fantasy setting and story seeds I'm working with, but I feel like it's more my job to just write the story they want to tell than it is to be the alignment police and make them stay the course with the heroic folk they started out wanting to play. Call it a game. Bring events to as satisfying a conclusion as you can, then play something else. No game lasts forever, and it's better to bow out and either run something new or let someone else take over than have the group slowly disintegrate from lack of interest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:What do you guys do as a DM when your table isn't interested in your game any more? Like, when the lawful good vengeance paladin decides he wants to start a protection racket and burns down an orphanage full of kids with them in it for not paying to "help him avenge evil", and the chaotic good life cleric murders the constable in his sleep because he didn't do enough to protect folks it's because they're bored as players. They helped design the sort of heroic fantasy setting and story seeds I'm working with, but I feel like it's more my job to just write the story they want to tell than it is to be the alignment police and make them stay the course with the heroic folk they started out wanting to play. Talk to them about why they're playing like that. Are they just bored? Do they want to play a different kind of game instead? Or do they want to shift the direction of this game? Either way, it sounds like this game is over as a heroic fantasy epic. That's fine - if nobody's having fun it's ok to stop or to change things up. I would let them know that the original theme of "heroic fantasy with good and noble heroes" doesn't seem like it's working, ask them what they do want out of a game, and find out if they'd prefer to be playing a new game with a different theme. Whatever happens next, get them involved in the creation of the setting and story so that a) they have direct input into what the game will be like and b) you don't have to do everything by yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
I'm way excited for everyone to shoegaze and mumble under their breaths while I try to have a grown up conversation with them about what they want. Bless their hearts, they're fun to play games with. But they're the most conflict averse bunch of nerds I have ever known. Like, the quintessential archetype of people who play D&D because they feel so unremarkable in their real lives.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Sounds kind of like they have too much free time on their hands - maybe it would be a good move to destroy the town they are in with an undead invasion, lead by the necromacer lord from a nearby haunted castle, who is ultimately doing the bidding of a council of liches in the east who are looking at destroying the kingdom in revenge for their exile while they were still human. Or have them arrested/recruited by the king only to force them to complete a quest to rescue a princess from a dragon. Or have the town infested with a slaadi infestation, have the barkeep and the sheriff's deputy violently die before the players eyes and make it keep happening until they find the child who holds the black slaadi mind control gem - the only child that survived the orphanage fire. Have a mysterious teifling who, under the guise of telling them where a powerful magic item is, sits down with the players at an inn and has them all planeshifted to Tartarus. With no obvious way to return, they have to defeat the demon lord who is blocking all planar shifting out of his kingdom. Instead of them going out to find adventure, have adventure come to them? Unless they're all level 20 and done with adventuring and the main quest/storyline?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Goffer posted:Sounds kind of like they have too much free time on their hands - maybe it would be a good move to destroy the town they are in with an undead invasion, lead by the necromacer lord from a nearby haunted castle, who is ultimately doing the bidding of a council of liches in the east who are looking at destroying the kingdom in revenge for their exile while they were still human. No they're like level 6. Those are all great story ideas that I like a lot though!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:I'm way excited for everyone to shoegaze and mumble under their breaths while I try to have a grown up conversation with them about what they want. Bless their hearts, they're fun to play games with. But they're the most conflict averse bunch of nerds I have ever known. Like, the quintessential archetype of people who play D&D because they feel so unremarkable in their real lives. Woah this is condescending. First of all, try to frame things positively when discussing changing direction. Make it something to be excited about. Second if people are afraid to talk, try discussing it over email or a Facebook group post to put in the distance of text and make it so they're less on the spot to respond.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:I'm way excited for everyone to shoegaze and mumble under their breaths while I try to have a grown up conversation with them about what they want. Bless their hearts, they're fun to play games with. But they're the most conflict averse bunch of nerds I have ever known. Like, the quintessential archetype of people who play D&D because they feel so unremarkable in their real lives. If that's the general level of communication you have with your players about what they want from the game, then you've definitely found the problem. That's not to say it's necessarily your (or their) fault though. I've DMed for a group of very socially awkward people before, and communicating was an issue. If you try what Mango Sentinel said and shift to email, you might find that it's a lot easier to get a conversation going. If that doesn't work, you can try starting the game in a fairly generic way, then adapting it to how they're playing as you go along. This will mean not planning more than a session in advance for a little while, so make bite-sized adventures with small details that you can use as hooks/callbacks for expanding the world and story once you have a handle on what they want. By this, I mean include generic mysteeeeeeerious things that you will tie together later down the line. A glowing gem. A letter in a language nobody recognises. Weird runes that look like a cypher. A strong smell of cinnamon in an recently-emptied store room. Their swords all have the same weird hilts. They all have similar, but subtly different, tattoos on their left ankles. Someone stole all the beer from the inn, the wine and spirits were untouched. A prisoner who doesn't remember how they got there. Then observe the players. What are they interested in? What are they speculating about? What are they excited about? How are they interacting with NPCS? What are they talking about as their goals? Then include that stuff and tie it back to your generic items/persons/locations of myyyyyyyyystery so it looks like you planned it all along. e: I made that sound like a lot of work. It isn't. Just make your descriptions rich in detail, remember which details the players pick up on, and build future plots and stories off those. Don't seize on the first detail they seem interested in and immediately write a 20 session adventure based on it, just remember to include that detail in future adventures - if they stay interested, listen to their speculation about what's going on, then build a several-session adventure where that detail gets expanded into a sub-plot and then resolved. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
I haven't seen this posted yet but.... uh. Well. 23 minutes of Mearls talking about, among other things, the initiative stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfSo4wVkwUw
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Pcs just got out of the Amber Temple in CoS. Four of the six players accepted a few dark powers, with 3 of them turning evil in the process. After the session was over, they kinda felt like this game jumped the shark. Anyone else have to deal with their players doing this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:I haven't seen this posted yet but.... uh. Well. 23 minutes of Mearls talking about, among other things, the initiative stuff. fake edit: I wrote that out and realized maybe that's a petty thing to say because isn't that how most RPGs are written?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:fake edit: I wrote that out and realized maybe that's a petty thing to say because isn't that how most RPGs are written? Most RPGs don't have anywhere D&D's resources or history of experience to work from. I think it's a fair criticism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
ReapersTouch posted:...they kinda felt like this game jumped the shark. Anyone else have to deal with their players doing this? Once players have lost interest, it's usually a good time to end the campaign. Start a new one with a different theme or in a different setting or with a different DM. Or maybe a short break from this particular game would be good. Ask if people want to do one (or several) short adventures in a different setting or system. Ask if someone else wants to DM a different adventure and come back to this one later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
I find most people don't come back to campaigns they've taken a break from. It's like dad and mom on a break. That's ok though. They deserve better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
I think my favorite part is how he says he wanted to bring '70s' design to the modern only 'easier' and he did that by bringing in the AD&D method of varying initiative that makes you roll a die and add a number each turn by.... having a system that makes you roll a die and add a number each turn, only it's different die based on your action. Game design!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Harvey Mantaco posted:I find most people don't come back to campaigns they've taken a break from. We used to do a shitload of long-term D&D and every so often we'd take a session off D&D to do a one-shot in a different system, or a few sessions while someone else DMed a different adventure module as a one-off, or to play boardgames instead, or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
While trying to infect an enemy army with plague, I likely ended up infecting the town we were defending (and then surrendered) as well as the party. oops best case no one is infected, no chance this works in my favor
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:While trying to infect an enemy army with plague, I likely ended up infecting the town we were defending (and then surrendered) as well as the party. oops burn it all down and salt the earth. Only way to be sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:I haven't seen this posted yet but.... uh. Well. 23 minutes of Mearls talking about, among other things, the initiative stuff. I don't get why he has it out for bonus actions as a concept. The single worst thing about them is that he had to call them "bonus actions," which 1) implies to some new people that they are free second actions and 2) implies a hierarchy of actions that then leads to confusion when someone figures that since a bonus action must be shorter, it's surely allowed to be performed in the space saved for a regular action. You could just as easily call them "red and blue actions" and while it'd be equally as baffling what that actually means or why it works that way, it'd at least fix the listed problems. I think the biggest issue is to have an honest moment of self-criticism and ask if there's really any reason a player shouldn't be able to do two bonus actions instead of an action and bonus action if they really want to. If there's an actual compelling reason, fine. But otherwise, let them do that, and rename them major and minor actions or regular and quick actions or whatever. He's making this so much more difficult than it needs to be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I don't get why he has it out for bonus actions as a concept. The single worst thing about them is that he had to call them "bonus actions," which 1) implies to some new people that they are free second actions and 2) implies a hierarchy of actions that then leads to confusion when someone figures that since a bonus action must be shorter, it's surely allowed to be performed in the space saved for a regular action. If you want to really simplify the system there is some degree of merit to nixing bonus actions, but his stated solution is funnily similar to a 4E Rogue power. At the same time the entire problem he talks about seems to stem from how they didn't even try to understand 3E/4E action economy during 5E development and as a result bonus actions can be either really powerful or an actual hindrance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
Are there any bonus actions that let you do something you can't do with an Action in the system (otherwise why would you ever want to do two bonus actions)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Mr. Tambo posted:Are there any bonus actions that let you do something you can't do with an Action in the system (otherwise why would you ever want to do two bonus actions)? Eldritch Knight's weapon-summoning (You can bind two at a time) and various spells like Misty Step and Hex off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
Well, spells are already a thing you can't do twice in one turn, so none of those would matter (I don't think there are any bonus action cantrips). Unless/until there are bonus actions that would be problematic to double up on I can't see a problem with sacrificing a regular action for bonus action, other than it probably not being a very good use of a turn. gently caress I miss standard/move/minor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I don't get why he has it out for bonus actions as a concept. The single worst thing about them is that he had to call them "bonus actions," which 1) implies to some new people that they are free second actions and 2) implies a hierarchy of actions that then leads to confusion when someone figures that since a bonus action must be shorter, it's surely allowed to be performed in the space saved for a regular action. I kind of get that he wants to move away from the "standard" and "minor" terminology because that'd be a holdover from 4e, but if he also could have just relied on "standard" and "swift" as 3e terms. The choice of the word "bonus", combined with the idiosyncrasies of this particular edition's writing makes the entire issue, as you said, a lot more difficult than it should be, especially when "movement" is no longer an action unto itself anymore, which could have freed up some more space in the technical definition arena. You'd think that it'd be easy enough to define a class of action that was "does not cost an action, but can only be done once per turn", and yet here we are. Heck, even Pathfinder Unchained's revised action economy is arguably clearer and more intuitive than this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Naw, I think that legit Mearls just wants their to be Action and movement, because having a 3rd thing slows down the game too much (  )
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 08:50
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Naw, I think that legit Mearls just wants their to be Action and movement, because having a 3rd thing slows down the game too much ( I mean, that's what early 3e, and 3.0 Core was even just Half-Actions and Actions because it was still inheriting stuff from AD&D, but I think they had to invent the Swift action eventually because they couldn't keep assigning effects as riders or as "Free Action, but only usable once per". Like, how would you structure Healing Word without Bonus Actions?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
"Free Action, but only usable once per turn or per round or per combat" would be perfectly fine but no let's waste our time on half or quarter action which basically do exactly the same*. But yeah the attempt to remove bonus action is really trying to fix something that's not really broken. *except it forces you to choose one free action per turn. Toplowtech fucked around with this message at 09:12 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Like, how would you structure Healing Word without Bonus Actions?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
Splicer posted:An incidental or lesser action, if you will. What about an ancillary, or dependent action?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:40
|
|