|
Serf posted: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? Paladin? Valor Bard? Reik fucked around with this message at 22:53 on May 22, 2018 |
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:00 |
|
|
glitchwraith posted: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. Sounds like the player is a dick.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Reik posted:Paladin? and if you don't want the whole religion or magical aspects of the class?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Reik posted:How else are you going to track a benefit that shouldn't be a full +1 modifier but should get you closer towards one. For example, taking two feats that both give +1 Strength. Wait, you suggest I stop swimming in a lake of poo poo? But I already have these poo poo floaties!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Serf posted:and if you don't want the whole religion or magical aspects of the class? Convert 3.5 Marshall.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Reik posted:Convert 3.5 Marshall. i mean if we're homebrewing you might as well just let the fighter use CHA as their main attribute e: lol
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Reik posted:Convert 3.5 Marshall. And that's adding a bunch more busywork for the DM by lifting a new class wholesale which may or may not be balanced if he has time to playtest it or is a newb themselves. The whole "goons with dirty work" isn't really something that works in D&D unless you're a summoner or necromancer, and those spells are few and far between in 5e. Hirelings in the DMG are intended for noncombat roles mostly. For the Rogue PC I might have delved into some 3rd party material to see if they have a Lazylord equivalent to 5e. But I don't know if there is one offhand.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Serf posted:i mean if we're homebrewing you might as well just let the fighter use CHA as their main attribute Just let the guy buy 15 str, 14 con, 13 cha then? He'll be fine. Multiclass swashbuckler a bit.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Libertad! posted:The whole "goons with dirty work" isn't really something that works in D&D unless you're a summoner or necromancer, and those spells are few and far between in 5e. And hirelings in the DMG are intended for noncombat roles mostly. You could probably make it work in 4th edition with the Lazy Warlord, where you spend your time buffing and healing allies, which you rp as giving orders to the "goons". fake edit: Heh, beaten. But that's besides the point. DnD is marketed as this game where you can role-play as almost any kind of fantasy character you want to play, yet when a new player tries to design their character around that lofty ideal, it more often than not punishes them for it. DMs can help with a lot of guidance or extra work homebrewing, but the issue is that the designers of the game sell it as one thing, but design it as another.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Reik posted:What would be gained? So given that someone would only do it if they hadn't understood the rules or were being a dick on purpose, you'd agree that the ability to make a fighter with their highest score in Charisma is the game offering a false choice?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
My players want me to run a 1-shot this weekend because the cleric has to work late and can't make it. I just had an idea, and I am not sure if it's awesome or really bad yet. I want to have them recreate The Warriors. Basically they go to a gathering for mercenaries/pirates/covens whatever, and someone assassinates the guy who organized all these scoundrels. Then they have to fight their way out of an urban gauntlet, while beset by differently themed merc gangs. I'll have them start with two random characters each, one can pop in when the other gets themselves killed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrEmF4SK3T4
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
posting in the 5e thread is a false choice
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Like, I want to respond to things, but this discussion is so ridiculous that I'm not sure how to approach it. But that's not really new
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:So given that someone would only do it if they hadn't understood the rules or were being a dick on purpose, you'd agree that the ability to make a fighter with their highest score in Charisma is the game offering a false choice? Depends on their build, but most of the time, Charisma is a bad choice.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
I DM for a group of newbies and can confirm explaining spell slots and "do i get 3rd level spells at level 3". They only just started to grasp knowing spells vs. preparing spells, honestly. Here's what you do: tell the fighter to put his stats in STR, and when he wants to be charismatic, just let him do it regardless of what his paper says there. Give him advantage on his +0 persuasion roll when he gets really into it. It's dumb to try and sideline that player actually roleplaying with some dumb "actually your WIS is only 11, you wouldn't behave that way" mentality.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
Reik posted:Depends on their build, but most of the time, Charisma is a bad choice. What fighter builds are primary Cha?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
One thats called a Bard Or hexblade
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:What fighter builds are primary Cha? Fighter 5/Rogue 5/Warlock 10
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
Reik posted:Fighter 5/Rogue 5/Warlock 10 Ah yes, that classic Fighter build.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Mr. Humalong posted:Ah yes, that classic Fighter build. 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Is it a joke?! I don't know what the gently caress is going on in this thread any more.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
Reik posted:Fighter 5/Rogue 5/Warlock 10 The ability to put Cha primary for your fighter is not a false choice if you're actually making a warlock instead?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
This thread has somehow gotten even worse today and I blame everyone who touched Reik’s poop posting.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
How good this thread is is proportional to how far away the topic it's discussing is from D&D NEXT: Dungeons & Dragons: The Fifth One.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
Blockhouse posted:Is it a joke?! I don't know what the gently caress is going on in this thread any more. The fact that it's true makes it the best kind of joke.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
But yeah not having fighters be good is more of a issue of deceptive labeling than an actual in-practice mechanical issue. You can build a totally awesome fighter if you're okay with the class field of your character sheet not saying fighter.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
I think warlock actually achieves every fighter design goal you could possibly want except being called "fighter".
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
warlock: it's cool
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
Yeah, I got it already and that's why I said that. e: Like, I knew he was just shitposting when he started tossing in circular logic lmao
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:This thread has somehow gotten even worse today and I blame everyone who touched Reik’s poop posting. It's p**p, you barbarian.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
A warlock barbarian who burns all his spells and goes into a rage because he's just a martial class now.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:The ability to put Cha primary for your fighter is not a false choice if you're actually making a warlock instead? I'm sorry the player has to put in a loving iota of effort to make a character that has a good Charisma score and fulfills the "fighter" role? Bunch of loving crybabies.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
This is the best thing that's happened all week
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
Reik posted:I'm sorry the player has to put in a loving iota of effort to make a character that has a good Charisma score and fulfills the "fighter" role? Okay so we've had this argument like a hundred times before. There's a difference between, "hey thread, how can I do <thing> within the strictures of D&D The V" versus, "is D&D The V well designed toward <goal> or indeed, any goals at all?" Can D&D be played and be fun? Sure! I love dumbmans and dragons. It's great! Is it a well designed game? Well... no. It isn't. Counter-intuitive design is like the hallmark of bad design. Pretending otherwise is just ignoring like 20+ years of game design. Like, no, it isn't 'hard' to make a 'Fighter' using a Warlock; nothing about PnP gameplay is 'hard' in the way that, say, fixing up an old car or running a marathon is 'hard'. D&D is supposed to be evangelized a.) by it's namebrand and b.) by us, the players. There are no (current) television ads for D&D. There's no movie trailer. People are sucked in by podcasts and watching games at their local store. And that enthusiasm should be rewarded. "Those louts didn't even read this whole book to figure out the nuances of what they want to achieve" is a real stupid take. I don't know about you but the way I play boardgames with friends is that one person is usually the most familiar with the rules and then they teach it to other people. If you were to explain the Friendly Fighter problem to a newbie, I'd have to convince him that what he wants is a Warlock, not a Fighter, and that's nuance that will be lost on someone who is just dealing with, "So what's this roleplaying thing I've been hearing about?"
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
Reik posted:I'm sorry the player has to put in a loving iota of effort to make a character that has a good Charisma score and fulfills the "fighter" role? 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:36
|
|
|
Reik posted:Just let the guy buy 15 str, 14 con, 13 cha then? He'll be fine. Multiclass swashbuckler a bit. so now we're not gonna homebrew in an entire class from 3.5?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:This is the best thing that's happened all week It's only Tuesday, things can get ever weirder. So, I guess since I'm posting the 5e thread, I might as well ask the question on my mind. I want to make a professional wrestler. I want to do grabs and throws and strikes. What is the method through which D&D Next, the game in which I will eventually play this character, allows me to approximate that? Because searching the internet for ideas has left me going "But I just want to superkick dudes and throw them your sperglords."
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
Serf posted:so now we're not gonna homebrew in an entire class from 3.5? Rogue with swashbuckler archetype.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
karmicknight posted:It's only Tuesday, things can get ever weirder. You could either go the Monk route or the fighter route. For Monk take the Grappler and Brawny feats, for Fighter add in the Tavern Brawler feat.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:00 |
|
|
The majority of the games I play in top out around level 7 or so, and I like playing Fighters in 5E. Battle Master is fun as heck for me, and pretty much just what I always wanted out the class. The ability to yell the name of special moves you are about to do. I never minded playing the mundane martial guy. Maybe I'm broken. Picking Fighter (or Rogue sometimes) frees up a bunch of cool "swordsman" "plucky hero" characters I come up with for fun. 5E Rogue has only let me down by removing Whip from their proficiency. I just straight up asked my DM if I can trade Whip for the boring but best Rapier. I know everyone wants their Fighter to compete with Wizard and stuff, but I'm kind of okay letting those Wizard players play out that fantasy. I never feel like Fighter isn't doing what I want it do. I never got the impression that Fighter meant Hercules, either. That's not to say you couldn't think of it that way, I'm not trying to be reductive! Firstborn fucked around with this message at 02:02 on May 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 01:59
|
|