|
I'd be down for burning hp for better accuracy, that rules. I mean they'd only do it for Blood Mages instead of barbarians, but if a martial character had it you could end fights by owning yourself repeatedly.
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:34 |
|
|
Glagha posted:Allowing someone to make a blatantly worse choice in their character does not become viable at any table. It doesn't matter if the game isn't geared toward optimized characters, making challenges and events in your game well balanced toward characters that are just objectively worse at doing things than other characters is only shifting the burden of actually balancing your drat game on the GM to fix your game for you. It also makes it so that any player who makes even the barest of optimal choices like "putting ability scores in the right place" just... better than other people in the group, which sucks for both the player who now feels like they're upstaging everyone, and the rest of the group, who is being upstaged. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to build a character that is good at doing the things their class does. If I try and build an 8 Intelligence Wizard it's my fault, not the system's.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Reik posted:I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to build a character that is good at doing the things their class does. If I try and build an 8 Intelligence Wizard it's my fault, not the system's.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Why? If I pick the class that says "Your spells hit better with a high Intelligence and your spell DCs are better with a higher Intelligence." and my response is "LMAO gently caress it, I'm tanking this stat," I am the problem. If my wife gives me a grocery list and I ignore that list and just buy a bunch of ramen it is not my wife's fault for not designing a grocery system that prevents me from only buying ramen.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
I genuinelly don't understand why it is expected that you will not have at least a long rest in between big fights because it seems like a very long process to go through in order to set this kind of thing up over and over. It's not like when I play Heroquest and can adjust the difficulty on the fly there seems to be a level of planning that I just don't understand.Reik posted:If I pick the class that says "Your spells hit better with a high Intelligence and your spell DCs are better with a higher Intelligence." and my response is "LMAO gently caress it, I'm tanking this stat," I am the problem. Without explanation which do you think a Sorcerer would need to be better at using spells, Charisma or Intelligence? How are you meant to know without some providing at least some guidance.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
I'm fine with RPG system designed for the player should have a measure of system mastery. D&D, the RPG That New People Try, should not be one of them.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I genuinelly don't understand why it is expected that you will not have at least a long rest in between big fights because it seems like a very long process to go through in order to set this kind of thing up over and over. It's not like when I play Heroquest and can adjust the difficulty on the fly there seems to be a level of planning that I just don't understand. It says in the book under "Sorcerer" that your spellcasting stat is Charisma. I think they even bolded it?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Reik posted:It says in the book under "Sorcerer" that your spellcasting stat is Charisma. I think they even bolded it?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:I'm fine with RPG system designed for the player should have a measure of system mastery. D&D, the RPG That New People Try, should not be one of them. If spells are too confusing for new players in the group, have them play a Fighter.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Reik posted:If I pick the class that says "Your spells hit better with a high Intelligence and your spell DCs are better with a higher Intelligence." and my response is "LMAO gently caress it, I'm tanking this stat," I am the problem. quote:If my wife gives me a grocery list and I ignore that list and just buy a bunch of ramen it is not my wife's fault for not designing a grocery system that prevents me from only buying ramen.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Does the game ever spell out what an acceptable minimum is for your primary ability score? If Ability X is my primary ability and the standard array it gives me is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 I'm going to put my 15 in to my primary ability because it is by definition my primary ability.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
Reik posted:It says in the book under "Sorcerer" that your spellcasting stat is Charisma. I think they even bolded it? Yes but surely the second most important one would be smarts. I am going to need that and, oh wait, that was a bad choice because int does nothing. "Why do I have to prepare spells" is another good one. Is there an actual reason why I can't just launch a fireball at people? Why do all of these spells only have a few uses? Why is it that we only get into 2 fights per session because otherwise we get nothing else done?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
Reik posted:If spells are too confusing for new players in the group, have them play a Fighter. help, i've fallen through a portal to the land of bad gaming advice
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
Reik posted:If I pick the class that says "Your spells hit better with a high Intelligence and your spell DCs are better with a higher Intelligence." and my response is "LMAO gently caress it, I'm tanking this stat," I am the problem. I mean maybe in the reality of 5e, sure. I can play that way and it works okay. But if I was designing a system from scratch, it would be dumb. You've got this whole class system right there that's supposed to compartmentalize your features. What freedom are you offering your players exactly to let them hamstring themselves? The way most people use ability scores is: be really good at (class stuff) to be slightly worse at most other things OR be slightly less good at (class stuff) to be slightly better at some other gimmick or niche. Almost nobody tanks their central ability score on purpose, yet the option is there for some reason. Ideally you'd have an "all in" option and a "generalist" option but D&D people think this means stifling ~role-playing~ even though almost nobody will ever do anything else in practice.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:So you're arguing that a game system that freely allows you to do something stupid and terrible is better than a system that provides minimal safety rails because ...? It's only better if the minimal safety rails also take away non-false choices from the player. quote:Fortunately, there are some RPG authors who are better at making rules than you are at making analogies. If you keep railing on me like this I'm going to have to go ignore my grocery list again and stress eat a gallon of ice cream.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Like, it's insane that your smart and charismatic fighter needs to spend vital, limited character resources to be smart and charismatic - and that it will irrevocably make him worse at his job (fighting) because the game rules treat Int and Cha as equally valuable to every character.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Yes but surely the second most important one would be smarts. I am going to need that and, oh wait, that was a bad choice because int does nothing. Int makes you better at Arcana and History checks. If those are important to your character or the campaign then it does something. If your campaign is more combat intensive, Con would probably be a better choice, but that's something your DM could help you out with because this is a collaborative game. Josef bugman posted:Yes but surely the second most important one would be smarts. I am going to need that and, oh wait, that was a bad choice because int does nothing. The D&D magic system is definitely more complicated than the usual mana based systems people are used to from video games. I'll tell this to new players, and we'll figure out whether or not they want to stick with a simpler character to start with or we can go over spells more in depth before playing. Serf posted:help, i've fallen through a portal to the land of bad gaming advice If someone will have more fun with a simpler Fighter instead of bungling through the spell system, it's not bad advice to start with a Fighter dwarf74 posted:Like, it's insane that your smart and charismatic fighter needs to spend vital, limited character resources to be smart and charismatic - and that it will irrevocably make him worse at his job (fighting) because the game rules treat Int and Cha as equally valuable to every character. If you're good at fighting and smart and charismatic why even bring the Wizard and the Bard when we could just bring 3 Smart Charismatic Fighters? Reik fucked around with this message at 20:57 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
Reik posted:If someone will have more fun with a simpler Fighter instead of bungling through the spell system, it's not bad advice to start with a Fighter what if that person was really sold on playing a wizard, because they wanted to be a fantasy elf who shoots magic spells? are you going to hand them a swordguy and tell them to deal with it?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
Reik posted:If you're good at fighting and smart and charismatic why even bring the Wizard and the Bard when we could just bring 3 Smart Charismatic Fighters? What even are you trying to argue here?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
In a game where a Smart, Charismatic Fighter is a thing, ideally ability scores/skills are divorced from class enough that you could have a Swole Bard and a Wise Old Wizard.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
muscle wizard or bust
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Yeah, like, really, what are the grim game balance concerns over a Fighter with say, 16 Int or Cha, or a Bard with 16 Str or a Rogue with 16 Wis? This is what I'm saying - D&D's rules pretend that all stats are equally useful to all characters, when this is most assuredly not the case. I feel like there's a path through this without going full-on DTAS*, but lol @ calling this coherent game design. * DTAS is probably the correct solution, however, as it almost always is in a system where you also have both races and classes, and where you're not actually rolling them up.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
rename “spell levels” to “spell tiers” rename “spell slots” to “spell charges” bring back the standard/minor/free action terminology three quick ways to make 5e’s bullshit terminology slightly less confusing for players without previous ttrpg experience
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Bladelock is hands down the best class simply because it uses cha for everything important. Just wish DNDbeyond supported the tiefling winged variant with the different attributes. Wanna dump that +1 int for dex, con or even strength to get closer to 13 for multiclassing but the wings are fun.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Serf posted:what if that person was really sold on playing a wizard, because they wanted to be a fantasy elf who shoots magic spells? are you going to hand them a swordguy and tell them to deal with it? I wouldn't prevent them from playing a Wizard, I would just let them know the rules are more complicated and do my best to prepare them. dwarf74 posted:I mean, this is just a shot in the dark, but... because Wizards cast spells real good, and Bards can ...well, this is 5e so... do literally anything? The limited resources of ability scores force players to collaborate to solve problems. If Fighting isn't an option, the Bard can charm their way past the guards. If it's a puzzle or a trap, the Wizard or the Rogue can figure out how to disable it. If you have to swim across a dangerous river to tie off a rope, the Fighter can take off his full plate and hulk out. By allowing one person to have the benefits of all of the ability scores, it could hinder collaboration. escalator dropdown posted:bring back the standard/minor/free action terminology Bonus actions really are the worst designed/explained mechanic. Reik fucked around with this message at 21:46 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
Reik posted:I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to build a character that is good at doing the things their class does. If I try and build an 8 Intelligence Wizard it's my fault, not the system's. Reik posted:The limited resources of ability scores force players to collaborate to solve problems. If Fighting isn't an option, the Bard can charm their way past the guards. If it's a puzzle or a trap, the Wizard or the Rogue can figure out how to disable it. If you have to swim across a dangerous river to tie off a rope, the Fighter can take off his full plate and hulk out. Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:12 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
If the rules explicitly said "Your class lists a primary ability score. That ability must be your highest", what would be lost?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Better question, why does the person who wants to play a gnome druid end up with a worse character than the one who wants to play a gnome wizard or a kenku druid? Because Gnomes are better at certain things, including Intelligence stuff, in the D&D universe. You can have fun and enjoy playing a Gnome Druid. Your Bard or Rogue spending expertise on Athletics instead of Persuasion or Investigation is a resource spent that they wouldn't have needed to otherwise. Your Wizard has to prepare Fly instead of another spell. AlphaDog posted:If the rules explicitly said "Your class lists a primary ability score. That ability must be your highest", what would be lost? What would be gained? If you don't understand the rules enough to know that you shouldn't make a 15 Charisma fighter, your DM should help you out. If you understand the rules enough and do it anyway, you're a jerk player. Reik fucked around with this message at 22:26 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
oh no what a big issue it is that i have to prepare fly that ever so niche spell that i would never prepare in any other circumstance
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:23
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:oh no what a big issue it is that i have to prepare fly What if the river is in an anti-magic field?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Reik posted:The limited resources of ability scores force players to collaborate to solve problems. If Fighting isn't an option, the Bard can charm their way past the guards. If it's a puzzle or a trap, the Wizard or the Rogue can figure out how to disable it. If you have to swim across a dangerous river to tie off a rope, the Fighter can take off his full plate and hulk out. By allowing one person to have the benefits of all of the ability scores, it could hinder collaboration. Also, I noticed you just literally went with the default prime requisites for each class, which is kind of the whole point under discussion.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Reik posted:What if the river is in an anti-magic field?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:What Yeah. I know right? 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Reik posted:What if the river is in an anti-magic field? 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Reik posted:What if the river is in an anti-magic field? An antimagic field is by RAW a 10 foot radius sphere with an hour long duration. This is a case of a DM pulling out all stops and invalidating a character's most prominent features. It's akin to making an enemy entirely immune to a Rogue's sneak attack (which happened a lot in 3.5), or having a dragon always fly out of range of the Barbarian so he can't use his heavy-hitting melee attacks. It's basically gimping one PC as a means of letting the others shine in the spotlight. I can get that there's a time and place for throwing up challenges to make players think on their feet, but pulling out the antimagic field is the nuclear option, especially when half or more the party has classes whose core features are spellcasting. Now if we're doing a "river crossing" thing as an encounter or obstacle, I wouldn't have merely crossing it be the sole feature. Have some aquatic monsters which can leap out of the water to attack flying PCs (like a black dragon), and maybe some kind of gondola which sahuagin may try to board. Libertad! fucked around with this message at 22:36 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDS!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
But srsly, D&D is flawed, it has always been flawed and always will be flawed. Stats DO have a certain level of correctness to them, but being able to make dumb un-optimized characters is sometimes fun as long as everyone else is in on the joke.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Reik posted:If you don't understand the rules enough to know that you shouldn't make a 15 Charisma fighter, your DM should help you out. If you understand the rules enough and do it anyway, you're a jerk player. what if every person playing is new? what if your character concept is "charismatic axeman" and you need that sweet CHA to make it work?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
What if you have to move a bunch of goal posts and the Wizard didn't prep telekinesis?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:34 |
|
|
I have a buddy who ended up in an office DnD game, mostly newbies to the game. One guy wanted to play a kind of criminal master mind who never got his hand dirty, leaving that to his goons. With this in mind, he proceeded to make a rogue with his highest stat in Charisma, who refuses to ever participate in combat. When it was pointed out that Bard would be better mechanically suited to this, he complained about not wanting to be a dumb lute player. Not surprisingly, the character is useless in the game. Yes, a good DM would have seen how the character was being made and guided them to better options. But the fact remains that the players handbook does a terrible job of emphasizing how much or how little a stat will matter in the long run to new players, because with the exception of a blink or you'll miss it suggestion at the start of each class, each stat is presented as equally important.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:49
|
|
