|
Emy posted:It's bullshit. Table F ranges from Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location to Trident of Fish Command to Winged Boots. The top tier items on table F (Winged Boots and Broom of Flying for flight, Gauntlets of Ogre Power for setting your strength to 19) are honestly more useful than most items on Table G. I don't think this is true. What Xanathar's Guide says is that Magic Item Tables A through E are considered Minor Magic items. While Magic Item Tables F through I are considered major items.
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
Blacknose posted:It's not a good day to be playing a Paladin I guess. Poor Gronk, he just wants to help people, and here WotC are loving him. The spells that paladin does get are pretty good. Well, Find Greater Steed and Holy Weapon anyway. Assuming you ever get high enough level to use them. I'm going to see if I can talk my DM into letting me have Guardian of Nature as an Oath of Ancients oath spell. It's extremely on-brand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:What's a thematically appropriate beast for orcs to have with them during a raid? I know goblins like wargs and wolves, and obviously gnolls like hyenas. Should orcs have... I dunno, angry bulls? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Serf posted:what if you have less than four? or more? what does "appropriately equipped and well-rested" mean? or what if you have a party members of differing levels since experience is an idiotic artifact of older editions that means it's possible for that to happen Like is CR meant to be the average level or what? How does that even work when you have such clear breakpoints in power access? Unrelated: anything reeeally good for sorcerers or can I just ignore that poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:What's a thematically appropriate beast for orcs to have with them during a raid? I know goblins like wargs and wolves, and obviously gnolls like hyenas. Should orcs have... I dunno, angry bulls? Yes actually. Volo's guide says Orcs parctiulary the young ones that worship Bahgtru the Orc god of strength like to ride around on Aurochs.  quote:Orcs that revere Bahgtru might tend a stable of war
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Reene posted:or what if you have a party members of differing levels since experience is an idiotic artifact of older editions that means it's possible for that to happen I agree that XP is dumb but there are clear guidelines for creating encounters for diverse parties on page 82 of the DMG. There’s a lot to critique about how well the xp threshold system they use works but the system accounts for this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Serf posted:what is a party
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Reene posted:or what if you have a party members of differing levels since experience is an idiotic artifact of older editions that means it's possible for that to happen is it legit still possible to have parties with levels that aren't all the same? like, okay sure i guess its theoretically possible to do that by the (very dumb) rules, but no one actually does it, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Yeah a 1-to-1 CR system would have made a lot more sense because then it would have scaled with party size. Also you wouldn't need 1/4 CR creatures because what the gently caress why even.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Serf posted:is it legit still possible to have parties with levels that aren't all the same? like, okay sure i guess its theoretically possible to do that by the (very dumb) rules, but no one actually does it, right? Unless they've changed the Adventurer's League rules (entirely possible) then yes, as Milestones were explicitly banned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
This stuff would all be generally solved by a point-based system, but there you go.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
The difficulty of an encounter is nonlinear in its component monsters and I reject any system that tries to wrench it into that mold. If you want to stick with such nonsense, it's not exactly hard to multiply by 4 to get the difficulty for a single character. It will be inaccurate but it always was.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Ok so if I want a boss fight that's an orc riding a giant boar and throwing javelins around, what can I do to make it so that the party can't just kill the orc and make it just a fight against a giant boar? Obviously the boar is the bigger issue, but without its rider it's a much simpler fight, and orcs have pretty low hp in comparison. Should I give the orc an AC bonus while he's mounted? I mean I'm not against them killing the orc or knocking him off, but I don't want it to be too easy. And I don't want to make the orc too strong either or it'll make the encounter unfairly hard.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Give the boar some kind of reaction charge attack/ability so that if an archer or mage or w/e throws poo poo at the rider, the boar gets to punk them (and maybe anyone in its path?) for free.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Ok so if I want a boss fight that's an orc riding a giant boar and throwing javelins around, what can I do to make it so that the party can't just kill the orc and make it just a fight against a giant boar? Obviously the boar is the bigger issue, but without its rider it's a much simpler fight, and orcs have pretty low hp in comparison. Should I give the orc an AC bonus while he's mounted? I mean I'm not against them killing the orc or knocking him off, but I don't want it to be too easy. And I don't want to make the orc too strong either or it'll make the encounter unfairly hard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:xanathar's finally spells out something you can infer from the disastrous magic item handling in the dmg, which is that the design intent was to quit the 3E/PF/4E model of assuming that every player character is decked out head to toe in magic items after the first few levels and attempt to balance the game with that in mind so that magic items (even poo poo like a +2 sword or whatever) are bennies and special features rather than something the DM is *supposed* to give you to keep up with the game's math and core assumptions From very early in the playtest process it was repeatedly stated by the designers that magic items are intended to be optional - as in you don't need to include any if you don't want to. I guess it would have looked a bit silly to actually say so in the DMG given that over a quarter of that book is rules for magic items, but it's probably for the best that it's finally in a rulebook (even it it is an optional book ~3 years later).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 20:22
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:Give the boar some kind of reaction charge attack/ability so that if an archer or mage or w/e throws poo poo at the rider, the boar gets to punk them (and maybe anyone in its path?) for free. Splicer posted:Let the orc or boar burn their reaction to let the boar tank an attack. Also, charge the crap out people. Prone everyone. Make them fear that pig. If they do kill the orc before the boar have the boar enter a rage state and gain multiattack. I like all these ideas. Also, I was looking for visual aids for my players, so here's an edit of some 4th edition dire boar art I made (I removed the ridiculous spikes all over their bodies) in case anyone has any use for that kind of thing. 
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Ok so if I want a boss fight that's an orc riding a giant boar and throwing javelins around, what can I do to make it so that the party can't just kill the orc and make it just a fight against a giant boar? Obviously the boar is the bigger issue, but without its rider it's a much simpler fight, and orcs have pretty low hp in comparison. Should I give the orc an AC bonus while he's mounted? I mean I'm not against them killing the orc or knocking him off, but I don't want it to be too easy. And I don't want to make the orc too strong either or it'll make the encounter unfairly hard. just make them one creature THE HIDEOUS BOAR-ORC BORC
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:just make them one creature Borc is automatically un...boared when he is at half hit points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:Borc is automatically un...boared when he is at half hit points. in his feral rage he flips into a handstand and starts swinging the boar half of his body at his foes
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:just make them one creature I mean, yeah, but honestly stat them as one creature. Alternatively, give the boar Legendary Actions that protect the orc and/or a version of Legendary Resistance it can use on the orc. That way attacking the orc isn't useless (it takes away legendary actions), but is unlikely to kill the orc outright.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 21:44
|
|
I just gave the orc this thing for now. Debating whether or not it should also trigger a charge attack.Beastmaster posted:Once per round, if the Orc Boar Rider is hit by an attack, it can instead choose to have his mount take the damage.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Ok so if I want a boss fight that's an orc riding a giant boar and throwing javelins around, what can I do to make it so that the party can't just kill the orc and make it just a fight against a giant boar? Obviously the boar is the bigger issue, but without its rider it's a much simpler fight, and orcs have pretty low hp in comparison. Should I give the orc an AC bonus while he's mounted? I mean I'm not against them killing the orc or knocking him off, but I don't want it to be too easy. And I don't want to make the orc too strong either or it'll make the encounter unfairly hard. Lurdiak posted:I just gave the orc this thing for now. Debating whether or not it should also trigger a charge attack. Sounds like you've answered your own question. Definitely do the damage transfer and the charge attack, they're good, interesting ideas. You could probably go with any time the orc takes damage he can redirect it to the mount, and make the charge once/round. It's always good to wonder if you've made something too tough or too weak. When I'm unsure, what I try to do is to have some kind of plan for changing it up if necessary. Here are some suggestions: If the charge attack turns out to be too strong, don't use it again. If the boar itself is too strong, have it throw the orc off and run away the next time it takes damage or has damage redirected to it. If the encounter turns out to be too weak, have the orc blow a horn or whistle or something and summon his other boar. It doesn't need to have the same stats as the first boar. Depending on how easy the encounter is, the one summoned could be the backup mount, or the orc could have been using his backup mount for whatever reason and the summoned boar is bigger and tougher. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:19
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Sounds like you've answered your own question. Definitely do the damage transfer and the charge attack, they're good, interesting ideas. I think I'll modify the ability so it triggers a charge but only works on a ranged attack. If one of my players climbs up on the boar and starts meleeing the orc or something else creative, I figure he's earned it.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I just gave the orc this thing for now. Debating whether or not it should also trigger a charge attack.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I think I'll modify the ability so it triggers a charge but only works on a ranged attack. If one of my players climbs up on the boar and starts meleeing the orc or something else creative, I figure he's earned it. Splicer posted:Tank melee attacks, let ranged do damage but trigger charges. That sounds great, yeah. Maybe you could also describe the saddle and stuff as looking like it's got lots of handholds that could be grabbed on to to encourage them to climb up on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:28
|
|
Splicer posted:Tank melee attacks, let ranged hit the orc but trigger charges. It's a medium humanoid on top of a Large creature, I figure he's out of melee range already, and nobody in the party is rocking a polearm or anything. So like I said if they want to melee it, they have to climb up there somehow.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:The difficulty of an encounter is nonlinear in its component monsters and I reject any system that tries to wrench it into that mold. While no system that is not purely mathematical (it is a game with dice and unbalanced components, after all) is going to be perfect, the designers' refusal to establish a baseline system math for monsters is what is loving up the potential of a point system, not the idea itself. I always thought minions were overvalued in 4E points, for example, and solos in many cases undervalued. But the underlying system was solid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:While no system that is not purely mathematical (it is a game with dice and unbalanced components, after all) is going to be perfect, the designers' refusal to establish a baseline system math for monsters is what is loving up the potential of a point system, not the idea itself. That doesn't mean the implementation in 5e is good - in fact it's awful and useless. I just am skeptical that 4e actually did any better - measuring the difficulty for a single PC seems a little ludicrous to me. The general process of adding together four CR 1 monsters cannot possibly be equivalent to a CR 4 monster in that sense. The dice and unbalanced abilities aren't actually an issue at all - it's totally tractable to reason about probabilistic systems and how they work, and letting players dominate an encounter by doing their thing at the right time and place is cool and fun!!! Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:No system that allows you to add the CRs of monsters together and calls that the CR of the encounter will work unless the monsters are quite boring. 5e is right to think about the CR for the party, not an individual, because generally encounters are created for parties. Not being able to take synergy into account makes that system dead in the water to me - the most interesting encounters are the ones where the monsters abilities lever each other up in interesting and effective ways, such that the players must use their own synergies to overcome it. 4E math was pretty tight on basic expected hit points, attack bonuses, damage, and defenses per level. 5E is not, at all. 4E party resources were also a heavily-codified thing. You could reliably put together a string of multiple encounters in 4E and know based on what you budgeted how challenging it was going to be. 5E is real bad at this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
4 CR 1 monsters weren't equal to a CR 4 monster in 4e, FYI. It also worked at the group level, it was just that 4e balanced at group versus group instead of group versus one like 3e and 5e do. For entire adventuring party versus one monster fights, 4e had solo monsters, the precursors to 5e's legendary action monsters, and solos were explicitly equal to four monsters of their level (and again, that's not the same as 1 monster of 3 levels higher.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
yeah if you were willing to work with it, the 4e xp chart produced pretty sound fights. in my first session, the players fought four dinoman berserkers in a tavern brawl, a robot assassin and a goblin scientist with a shotgun and it all went perfectly. according to the 5e rules, a good challenge for a party of four PCs at level 1 is... one bugbear...
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Arivia posted:4 CR 1 monsters weren't equal to a CR 4 monster in 4e, FYI. It also worked at the group level, it was just that 4e balanced at group versus group instead of group versus one like 3e and 5e do. For entire adventuring party versus one monster fights, 4e had solo monsters, the precursors to 5e's legendary action monsters, and solos were explicitly equal to four monsters of their level (and again, that's not the same as 1 monster of 3 levels higher.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:Okay this sounds a lot better then, pardon my ignorance! Did they have rules for arbitrary combinations of monsters of different levels and how the party was expected to fare? I find it frustrating because some monsters are thematic and cool and story-relevant, and I tend to think of those first when I'm coming up with an encounter, and trying to work backwards to figure out what to put with it is pretty much impossible in 5e. (The irony of the previous edition doing it right and thus being relegated to the dustbin forever is darkly funny.) I basically concluded CRs were useless like, 2 sessions in, I just don't have a substitute. Yep. You picked whether you wanted a hard, normal, or easy encounter, which gave you the encounter level in relation to your party. You had an XP budget (level of encounter * number of players, which is important to accommodate for different group sizes), and then you bought monsters for your encounter out of that budget to your total. Monsters had a CR and a type - the CR tells you what level of challenge it's meant to be, and its type explains how hard a monster it's supposed to be at that level. The default was that regular monsters of the same level and number as your party was balanced, but if you wanted more or less you could use minions (1/4th of a regular monster), elites (2 regular monsters), or the aforementioned solos (4 regular monsters, a solo fight all to themselves usually.) If you wanted to use a CR 3 monster in a 2nd level fight, that was fine - you just pay for that out of your budget. The books did a pretty okay job of describing the gotchas if you went too far from monsters of the same level (higher levels too dangerous, lower levels useless). edit: In a parallel to what got this all started, 4e was very strict on making sure the entire party was all the same level so that its math worked. Having a level 3 in a party of level 4s would make the system blow up very quickly, but that's fine - having characters of different levels and different experiences really doesn't fit 4e's play at all well. Arivia fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:just make them one creature 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
Note that 4e goes all to hell if you use monsters outside of a party level +/- 4ish band. I honestly prefer to keep it +/- 2 or even less. This may seem pretty restrictive, but it's fairly easy to tweak the numbers to make them work. You just have to watch out for number/type of attacks and status effects. And for the truly lazy, just grab something appropriately levelled and reskin. This has the added benefit that monsters often moved down the solo/elite/standard/minion scale as the party levels up, which really adds to the feeling of progression even if relative to-hit numbers are pretty static. At level 3 you might fight a standard Skeleton Warrior. By level 6 the Skeleton Soldier is a minion. And at level 9 you might be fighting a Skeleton Mob standard swarm. e: Got the name of the level 6 skeleton wrong. ImpactVector fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Cooking up an alternate in case my black metalist bard dies, considering a fully LG paladin, absolute goody goody, or a wicked bog standard wizard, old guy in robes, any way to spiff that up a little?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Note that 4e goes all to hell if you use monsters outside of a party level +/- 4ish band. I honestly prefer to keep it +/- 2 or even less. And making new monsters and adjusting monsters is super, super simple and easy. 4e's monster creation is a goddamn dream, I use more custom monsters than anything else when I run 4e because it's actually fun to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:Cooking up an alternate in case my black metalist bard dies, considering a fully LG paladin, absolute goody goody, or a wicked bog standard wizard, old guy in robes, any way to spiff that up a little? Spiff up mechanically or conceptually/RPwise? I think one of the best ways to make a stereotypical wizard fun is to really lean into all the stuff about magic the game glosses over. Pay attention to material components and if you - like most people - do the sane thing and downplay questions about where your non-expensive ones are coming from, get weird with that. Start making up stuff about how you need X or Y part from the monster the party just killed for some kind of ritual. Describe how your "Fireball" looks, and the specific process you're using to cast it. This stuff is part of what makes magic feel real and interesting and scary in literature and film, and is often totally overlooked in D&D. Play with that contrast between being kind of a boring, genial, scholastic old man and the insane, disgusting trappings of your trade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:12 |
|
|
Always be describing your spells. My go-to example is Magic Missle. "It doesn't have to be three boring-rear end "glowng darts of magical force", it can be a see-through green flaming skull that screams insults as it flies out your mouth and then splits into three smaller skulls* with higher pitched voices which rocket into your opponents and explode in flashes of blackish-green light. Get as weird as you like". * At higher levels,  MORE SKULLS
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 23:44
|
|