|
On a completely unrelated note, I think I broke my rogues heart when we got to play out a surprise attack for the first time with the party jumping the villain. This mean't I had to explain how surprise is now a status effect instead of a surprise round and how the surprised status goes away at the end of a turn not a round.
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
I'm kinda confused as to how to handle that. The party isn't in combat before they attack if they are surprising someone, if my rogue and ranger line up arrow shots at the same time, how could I reasonably treat them differently? (I give them one attack not one turn fwiw but I still feel like I gotta give it to everyone.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I'm kinda confused as to how to handle that. The party isn't in combat before they attack if they are surprising someone, if my rogue and ranger line up arrow shots at the same time, how could I reasonably treat them differently? (I give them one attack not one turn fwiw but I still feel like I gotta give it to everyone.) Right so the way it works in 5e is that you are surprised or not surprised (if anyone is noticed then a character is not surprised but thats the other part of the mess). If you are surprised you dont get an action or reaction. You lose this status at the end of your turn. What happened was a bad guy with the shield spell rolled well on initiative. Had his turn, did nothing cause of surprise and then went the rogue when to attack him, he was free to cast Shield and basically ignore all attacks during round 1, despite not noticing anything until combat started. EDIT: In your example the rogue and ranger are absolutely the same status effect wise but hilariously as a result of the busted system, the initiative rolls still let characters interact extremely weirdly with the surprise itself. kingcom fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I'm kinda confused as to how to handle that. The party isn't in combat before they attack if they are surprising someone, if my rogue and ranger line up arrow shots at the same time, how could I reasonably treat them differently? (I give them one attack not one turn fwiw but I still feel like I gotta give it to everyone.) Surprise is determined at the time the battle is joined - you roll to see who on the side that got surprised is actually surprised, or just blanket make all enemies surprised if they had no way of spotting the party or predicting they'd get attacked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
That is straight up bizarre...lol I'll think about it. I have been letting the rogue's damage roll go first so the ranger gets colossus slayer. Your example is specifically an enemy with a reaction spell, not sure if I've run that. Sounds like I'm actually being a little harsh on them since they only get an attack and not a turn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
I can't figure out what was supposed to be achieved by making "surprised" go away at the end of your turn rather than the end of the round, but since nearly everyone you see talking about 5th ed online thinks surprise rounds are still a thing I'm gonna guess that the majority of players don't notice or care because they've accidentally houseruled it to not be weird without even noticing that it was weird in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
It just doesn't make sense to me how combat starts (in an actionable way for enemies) before they're already hit by the arrows. It wasn't a surprise round, it was just out of combat as I saw it. Mechanically it worked to the players disadvantage anyway though, I never had a surprised status at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:It just doesn't make sense to me how combat starts (in an actionable way for enemies) before they're already hit by the arrows. It wasn't a surprise round, it was just out of combat as I saw it. Mechanically it worked to the players disadvantage anyway though, I never had a surprised status at all. This is how everyone but the 5e devs thought for reference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
My character is forgotten realms magic physicist shooting arrows at a magic target that shields itself in reaction to an attack and having it deflect the arrow only 30% of the time as a result of a phenomenon I call "initiative".
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:My character is forgotten realms magic physicist shooting arrows at a magic target that shields itself in reaction to an attack and having it deflect the arrow only 30% of the time as a result of a phenomenon I call "initiative". Listen friend, I've never seen you, I don't know your there, i don't even know you exist, I don't even know that there is danger. But I go first.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
When I was 12 I loved exploring the woods and my father gave me a compass, real nice brass thing, he said it was made by gnomes. One day I discovered while wandering that if I walked one direction for 10 minutes, then turned 90 degrees and walked for another 10 minutes, I could still reach my exact starting point by walking straight towards it for exactly 10 minutes. I repeated it over and over, convincing myself that it was true, a truly surprising result. I ran home and immediately told my father what I had discovered with excitement. He took away my compass.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:When I was 12 I loved exploring the woods and my father gave me a compass, real nice brass thing, he said it was made by gnomes. One day I discovered while wandering that if I walked one direction for 10 minutes, then turned 90 degrees and walked for another 10 minutes, I could still reach my exact starting point by walking straight towards it for exactly 10 minutes. I repeated it over and over, convincing myself that it was true, a truly surprising result. I ran home and immediately told my father what I had discovered with excitement. He took away my compass. I feel so stupid...is this a story about you not knowing the Pythagorean theorem? Do I know the Pythagorean theorem? Cuz you were wrong...right? gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Raar_Im_A_Dinosaur posted:I feel so stupid...is this a story about you not knowing the Pythagorean theorem? Do I know the Pythagorean theorem? Cuz you were wrong...right? gently caress. Lol the story is from the perspective of a dnd character and, in his world, it's true. *mutters about the target getting better at deflecting his arrows after he's had a couple of drinks*
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
I think even that Sage Advice rules trivia quiz mistakenly referred to surprise as a "surprise round." It was fixed shortly after it went up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Was that it? I thought it was a tweet that was removed and replaced a couple of hours later. I'm probably wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Since ranged attack rolls have disadvantage against prone targets, if you find yourself in a one vs. one situation with a ranged person does it make mechanical sense to take your action, then drop prone before ending your turn? Then use half movement to stand up, take action, and drop prone again?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
Pleads posted:Since ranged attack rolls have disadvantage against prone targets, if you find yourself in a one vs. one situation with a ranged person does it make mechanical sense to take your action, then drop prone before ending your turn? Then use half movement to stand up, take action, and drop prone again? only if you know that the ranged attacker doesn't have a dagger to try and stab you with while also having Advantage against a prone target
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Pleads posted:Since ranged attack rolls have disadvantage against prone targets, if you find yourself in a one vs. one situation with a ranged person does it make mechanical sense to take your action, then drop prone before ending your turn? Then use half movement to stand up, take action, and drop prone again? Using half your movement that way doesn't sound very smart against an enemy that can then walk away and shoot you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
A rogue can still use their bonus action to move 30 total feet and attack and there's nothing in the rules saying you can't use your bow while prone as far as I can see. They don't have to get up, they can just crawl.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
Or do the same as an eldritch blaster warlock with the 10ft knockback and 10ft slow invocations?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:59
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:A rogue can still use their bonus action to move 30 total feet and attack and there's nothing in the rules saying you can't use your bow while prone as far as I can see. They don't have to get up, they can just crawl. Prone creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls, which sorta makes sense for bows and melee weapons, but seems pretty dumb for crossbows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
Your Lottery posted:Prone creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls, which sorta makes sense for bows and melee weapons, but seems pretty dumb for crossbows. Maybe we need some sort of Prone Shooter feat?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Any Mastery feat should take away prone disadvantage or something. How can you be a master if you can't spin around like a breakdancer and gently caress a dude up with your glaive?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Maybe we need some sort of Prone Shooter feat? NO DONT CROSS THE STREAMS
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Can you cast eldritch blast on yourself to rocket jump another ten feet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Any Mastery feat should take away prone disadvantage or something. How can you be a master if you can't spin around like a breakdancer and gently caress a dude up with your glaive?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Mounted Combatant should let you ride a horse just, like, where ever. Tangentially related - I love the idea of mounted combat mattering, and that feat is cool and paladins can get cool mounts. But in 26 years of D&D, I have never once run into a scenario where mounted combat would be worth investing limited character resources in. You're always in a temple or dungeon or lost ruin and horses just don't work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
kingcom posted:No? This is what armour was made for. Turns out in real life you can't actually dodge attacks for the most part especially if you are fighting in a crowd or against multiple people or are being shot at or whatever. Thats poo poo from movies and films. Back in the bronze age, some people decided that instead they should just put big plates of padding and metal and poo poo between them and the pointy things. So that when they inevitably get hit, they dont give a poo poo. Maybe I'm not explaining my point properly. Forget the real life example and take it purely from a gameplay's mechanics perspective. Heavy armor doesn't restrict your bonus modifier, it sets your stat to an absolute value. So yes, the abstracted concept is that heavy armor is heavy to move around in, so you can't utilize additional speed and agility in it. But because it sets AC instead of restricting your bonus modifier, it results in slow characters speeding up. A -3 to dex becomes a -0 to dex, meaning you're faster in armor than not in it when AC is abstractly calculated. As soon as you take it off, you apply your dex to your AC and get 7, then you strap on chain mail and it's 16. It's just another example where simplified calculations result in incoherent abstractions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Mounted Combatant should let you ride a horse just, like, where ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
User0015 posted:Maybe I'm not explaining my point properly. Forget the real life example and take it purely from a gameplay's mechanics perspective. Heavy armor doesn't restrict your bonus modifier, it sets your stat to an absolute value. So yes, the abstracted concept is that heavy armor is heavy to move around in, so you can't utilize additional speed and agility in it. But because it sets AC instead of restricting your bonus modifier, it results in slow characters speeding up. A -3 to dex becomes a -0 to dex, meaning you're faster in armor than not in it when AC is abstractly calculated. As soon as you take it off, you apply your dex to your AC and get 7, then you strap on chain mail and it's 16. I"m not sure that I agree. I read 5th as heavy armor setting a static AC value, due to the defensive value coming entirely from the resiliency of the armor and not from any efforts on your part to evade attacks. I'm not sure how I feel about it, other than not really caring too much. But I understand the underlying logic. In light armor, you can take full advantage of your ability to maneuver but are limited in how resilient your armor is due to the lightweight or materials, medium armor is tougher and a bit heavier, so it limits your movement some, and heavy armor you just don't really bother moving anyway so it's a moot point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
User0015 posted:Maybe I'm not explaining my point properly. Forget the real life example and take it purely from a gameplay's mechanics perspective. Heavy armor doesn't restrict your bonus modifier, it sets your stat to an absolute value. So yes, the abstracted concept is that heavy armor is heavy to move around in, so you can't utilize additional speed and agility in it. But because it sets AC instead of restricting your bonus modifier, it results in slow characters speeding up. A -3 to dex becomes a -0 to dex, meaning you're faster in armor than not in it when AC is abstractly calculated. As soon as you take it off, you apply your dex to your AC and get 7, then you strap on chain mail and it's 16. Your Dex modifier has literally nothing to do with speed, except maybe Initiative I guess. Heavy Armor only affects Dex in how it alters your AC. You still have a Dex penalty to saving throws and initiative. There is literally nothing that makes you "faster" when you put on Heavy Armor with a negative Dex mod.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:Tangentially related - I love the idea of mounted combat mattering, and that feat is cool and paladins can get cool mounts. But in 26 years of D&D, I have never once run into a scenario where mounted combat would be worth investing limited character resources in. You're always in a temple or dungeon or lost ruin and horses just don't work. They are a+ super good in hexcrawls.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
of course a Paladin can bring their pony into the dungeon. Have none of you squares ever played Nethack?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
User0015 posted:Maybe I'm not explaining my point properly. Forget the real life example and take it purely from a gameplay's mechanics perspective. Heavy armor doesn't restrict your bonus modifier, it sets your stat to an absolute value. So yes, the abstracted concept is that heavy armor is heavy to move around in, so you can't utilize additional speed and agility in it. But because it sets AC instead of restricting your bonus modifier, it results in slow characters speeding up. A -3 to dex becomes a -0 to dex, meaning you're faster in armor than not in it when AC is abstractly calculated. As soon as you take it off, you apply your dex to your AC and get 7, then you strap on chain mail and it's 16.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:of course a Paladin can bring their pony into the dungeon. Have none of you squares ever played Nethack? There were no small number of halfling paladins/rangers doing mounted lance charges on riding dog back down dungeon corridors in 3.x games I was in. (Or medium sized Dinosaur back when Eberron came out.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
NeurosisHead posted:Tangentially related - I love the idea of mounted combat mattering, and that feat is cool and paladins can get cool mounts. But in 26 years of D&D, I have never once run into a scenario where mounted combat would be worth investing limited character resources in. You're always in a temple or dungeon or lost ruin and horses just don't work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Plate Armour gives you (listed value + 5) + dex mod AC but caps your dex mod at -5. A negative number cap. Makes sense to me!  Anyways, it's just not intuitive at first blush, but that's how it works so we'll go with it. All that means is I think I made the right choice in dumping dex for my Paladin X/Warlock 3 build and we just had our first game. Everyone is level 1, so it's still introductory period, but I think this character will be fun to try out. I'm still not certain if I want to dip into warlock early with Paladin 2, Warlock 1-3, back to Paladin, or wait until Pal 5 for extra attack, then dip. Or even Paladin 6, but that's late in our module. Now that I think about it, this character is going to struggle a little with action economy. Shillelagh, hunters mark, smite spells, Q.staff bonus attack will all be competing for that precious bonus action. User0015 fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
User0015 posted:A negative number cap. Makes sense to me! There's not going to be any bonus action struggle since, when available, the bonus attack will always be the best option. On that note, the smite spells are actually a bad use of slots for paladins. If you go hexblade you only need 1 level to use CHA for melee. But since you have what, 15-16 Strength? You're better served sticking to Paladin till 6 for Aura of Protection before any multiclassing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
User0015 posted:Maybe I'm not explaining my point properly. Forget the real life example and take it purely from a gameplay's mechanics perspective. Heavy armor doesn't restrict your bonus modifier, it sets your stat to an absolute value. So yes, the abstracted concept is that heavy armor is heavy to move around in, so you can't utilize additional speed and agility in it. But because it sets AC instead of restricting your bonus modifier, it results in slow characters speeding up. A -3 to dex becomes a -0 to dex, meaning you're faster in armor than not in it when AC is abstractly calculated. As soon as you take it off, you apply your dex to your AC and get 7, then you strap on chain mail and it's 16. Splicer posted:Plate Armour gives you (listed value + 5) + dex mod AC but caps your dex mod at -5. No it does not. Unless your talking about an earlier version of the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:No it does not. Unless your talking about an earlier version of the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 18:06
|
|