|
Section Z posted:I admit I'm kinda down on perception mechanics nitty gritty as a whole because of how comically poor my edge cases are in any given system. Even without going into how modules keep letting stuff like Minotaurs get free ambushes or whatever to ignore stealth mechanics entirely. The issue here is that DMs use perception (and investigation really) poorly. Passive perception should be used in most cases. Rolling a perception check should be reserved for trying to perceive something specific or to add more detail so that the situation is more like this: "Hello I'm an alien commando super hero. My passive perception is 14." "Despite the dimlight, you think you see a flicker of movement in the distance." "Oh. I try to take a closer look at where I saw the movement, rolling a perc check. Darn it's a 1." "Yeah you really just can't tell what was moving. It may have even just been a trick of your imagination. You'd have to get closer to be sure."
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Rosalind posted:The issue here is that DMs use perception (and investigation really) poorly. Passive perception should be used in most cases. Rolling a perception check should be reserved for trying to perceive something specific or to add more detail so that the situation is more like this: More than are DMs who make you roll when there shouldn't even be one. "I want to check the dead Orc for a key to the locked closet in his room." "Roll Investigation." "poo poo, I got a 9." "You find the key in his pocket." It took a loving roll for that? Would you have told me that I didn't find the key that I deduced he was carrying if I rolled even worse? Should I just keep re-searching until I find it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
What does it mean to use "passive perception". That's a constant - "use passive perception" just means the DM decides whether it succeeds or not. If it's another creature I could roll against the enemy's stealth I suppose but that's still something I made up anyway. I don't have a solution here - my most perceptive player is pretty drat perceptive so mostly it works fine for me to just have them see stuff, but the process "choose a DC and compare against their passive perception" is like, a gamey way to say "the DM chooses if you see it".
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
ChaseSP posted:That's why passive perception is a thing now at least (I know its from 4e) but that doesn't stop a lovely gm from making it every perception check is above your highest perception. The lesson is rules don't prevent assholes from ruining stuff in the end as usual. Like, look at this poo poo. quote:Poison Needle I mean, god drat. Of all the things to keep from 4th edition, of course it's poo poo like this. "But you can get expertise to break even, so-"  "It's okay because the cleric took the observant feat. All we need you for is to disarm them-" 
Section Z fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
"Use thief skill to detect traps" makes it double duty, but it's what I see constantly. Like, at least give a sizable bonus to people who can disarm traps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
In my opinion, the only situation in which hidden traps is interesting is one in which taking the time to find them is a resource you spend, be it time or tools, which would then be weighed against the resources saved walking into the room blindly. Spending the resources should of course mean an auto access. Maybe let the Rogue skip this process for you entirely on a single successful, but difficult, check. If it's just "well we're walking into a room, time to roll perception and then investigation" for every room, that's not even really a decision, nor is it interesting. Just show the players the trap and make the play focus on how they deal with it. If dealing with it is uninteresting, just don't have a trap there or have it be there already sprung to give a hint to a more interesting situation you put the players in later.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Almost nothing should be DC 20 in 5E. Let alone an easily predictable trap. CR 20 Pit Fiends and Balors don't even have an AC of 20. The difference between a DC 13 and 15 is already substantial in 5E compared to 3.5/PF/4E, it's criminal that the amount of fine-tuning that went into spell save DCs and ACs wasn't thought of when it comes to skill checks, which use pretty much the exact same flat/non-scaling as combat rolls, with the added "gently caress you" of most characters not even getting that because there are a lot of skills and you don't get to be good at many of them. edit: And traps should be one roll. If you make the Investigation roll, you notice the trap and can bypass it. If you make the disarm roll, you can bypass it even if you didn't see it "ahead of time." Noticing a trap and then being unable to disarm it is idiotic. I'm definitely not trained in thieves tools or likely to make a DC 15 Dex check, but if "failing to pick the lock" by jiggling a piece of wire in it from more than 3 inches away sets off the trap, I think I'm good. Infinite Karma fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Almost nothing should be DC 20 in 5E. Let alone an easily predictable trap. CR 20 Pit Fiends and Balors don't even have an AC of 20. The difference between a DC 13 and 15 is already substantial in 5E compared to 3.5/PF/4E, it's criminal that the amount of fine-tuning that went into spell save DCs and ACs wasn't thought of when it comes to skill checks, which use pretty much the exact same flat/non-scaling as combat rolls, with the added "gently caress you" of most characters not even getting that because there are a lot of skills and you don't get to be good at many of them. See also, 4th edition's "Level 2 acid pit trap" in the back of the Forgotten Realms campaign guide or whatever. Which had something like 20 Perc, to notice the trapped floor, 25 to notice the hidden control panel. Then 15 Thievery to disarm the control panel. And so on. Some new GM understandably picks out an example trap from a book thinking it's safe to use (or worse, a good guideline) and welp. Section Z fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Lot of people who can't spell lighting on the last page.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
Wrt passive perception, i usually set an "adventure dc" that's fair and low to use for any kind of skill check unless my notes state otherwise. That way I always know the percpetion DC of stupid poo poo. If something is so easy it would reasonably fall below that threshold, I shouldn't be calling for a check or using PP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Don’t call for a check unless failing that check is potentially interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
If you call for a dumb check because you hosed up make a "success" give your PCs an unexpected benefit. Fixed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:it's criminal that the amount of fine-tuning that went into spell save DCs and ACs wasn't thought of when it comes to skill checks I'd say it's likely that it did receive the same fine tuning, which causes issues like "you always get proficiency to attacks, but not all defenses (including AC)".
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:2 level Warlock dip for Devil's Sight, or 3 level Gloom Stalker dip for Umbral Sight, is mandatory on Shadow Monk IMO. This is not trying to make a gotcha moment but I recall last time we discussed this you had a view that the cost in ki points is too high and one should run monk as a pure class. Maybe you were thinking of non shadow monk? I've ended up thinking my shadow monk should probably be monk /swashbuckler / gloom hunter. Or maybe monk / swashbuckler / mystic (master of light and darkness) - though the MAD on that is awful (only rolled stats makes it possible I guess). If I found an item that allowed me some kind of blindsight I'd probably go monk / rogue. In considering my shadow monk I've come to think the Warlock shouldn't be tied to Charisma as the plot hook value of selling soul for abilities is undermined by the ability point dependency. Warlock should be a costly temptation for any character but if Charisma is your dump stat (a mistake in 5e most of the time I've come to learn) it just doesn't apply to you. That doesn't sit well with the fluff of supernatural intervention. Similarly wrt the mystic, the fluff around monk would suggest an affinity with mystics and psionics (think githzerai) but 5e is awful mechanically on this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:This is not trying to make a gotcha moment but I recall last time we discussed this you had a view that the cost in ki points is too high and one should run monk as a pure class. Maybe you were thinking of non shadow monk? Yes. If you're playing Shadow Monk you're in it for the ninja memes. The level 6 ability should've been called "Teleports Behind You". Pollyanna posted:Don’t call for a check unless failing that check is potentially interesting. And remember, you can always get the same anxiety-inducing effect of randomly asking everyone to roll perception then continuing as if nothing happened, by asking the player who's on point what their passive perception is, then going "ok" and moving on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:And remember, you can always get the same anxiety-inducing effect of randomly asking everyone to roll perception then continuing as if nothing happened, by asking the player who's on point what their passive perception is, then going "ok" and moving on. I'm not even a DM, and I love this poo poo. Just inject it straight into my veins
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
Anyone given Oath of Conquest a shot yet? It seems just worse than the phb oaths, but I could see it being fun with a polearm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Anyone given Oath of Conquest a shot yet? It seems just worse than the phb oaths, but I could see it being fun with a polearm. I'm playing it now, I like it a lot. You have to pump CHR to get the most out of the abilities, but you can really shut down the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 10:43
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Anyone given Oath of Conquest a shot yet? It seems just worse than the phb oaths, but I could see it being fun with a polearm. That channel divinity is dope, but the best part of Conquest is that you get Spiritual Weapon in your spell list, which is amazing in a class that gets very few bonus action options beyond smite spells.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
Having a lot of fun doing a PBP over Discord right now. There's a sweet 5E chatbot called Avrae that really helps. Hope they don't get a C&D from Wizards anytime soon. Seems to have a lot of spell info and stats that aren't just from the SRD.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Game 4 as a DM coming up this weekend. Gonna try out some longer term story hooks since me running sessions is becoming a regular thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
Anyone got any good resources on setting up a music bot in discord?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Anyone got any good resources on setting up a music bot in discord? Rythm (https://rythmbot.co) seems pretty good. It plays YouTube videos as audio. I suppose you could make private youtube videos and link to it? It is, by default, very loud. I have not played around with it much but there do seem to do volume settings. If you like it and wanted to write up a tutorial... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
So I bought the three core books in print a few months back and am now deciding I want to go a little more digital. Still doing in person sessions but using a laptop for monster stats, spell descriptions, etc so I’m not flipping back and forth between three different books in the middle of the game, can search for keywords, click a spell link in a stat block and go immediately to its description, etc. I understand I’ve been hosed by Wizards and won’t be able to get a free copy from either Roll20 or Beyond just because I bought the physical book but trying to understand how to get the least hosed. Roll20 books are $50 a pop whereas Beyond are significantly cheaper. But Roll20 is more fully featured so if I start to transition more stuff there (e.g. initiative tracking, campaign notes, etc I’m in a better place to do so)? Is that the basic conundrum? Does Roll20 ever have sales on these books? Is there like a subscription or trial I can use for a few weeks to get an idea of how much more I’m getting than just a PDF?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Roll20 gets you laid-out maps and npc tokens and stuff, if you want that I think you pretty much gotta buy it. Beyond has a character builder which I hear is nice but most of the info you can just grab a pdf instead and It's Fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
Eggnogium posted:So I bought the three core books in print a few months back and am now deciding I want to go a little more digital. Still doing in person sessions but using a laptop for monster stats, spell descriptions, etc so I’m not flipping back and forth between three different books in the middle of the game, can search for keywords, click a spell link in a stat block and go immediately to its description, etc. Roll20 is for running games online. It is not a campaign planner tool, and if you're running games in person it will be extra work for literally zero gain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
I ended up getting pdfs of all the books and loading up my old ipad mini. Got the pdf expert app which lets you transfer pdfs over wifi, and they load up much faster than the built-in reader. Also loads in the bookmarks and categories the pdfs came with which is nice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
I think roll20 is pretty cool in person if you have a way to display it reasonably. I primarily play online but we meet up sporadically and its cool to use electronic means to display a map and reveal parts of the map. The interface is pretty bad and it certainly has problems but it's not a crazy thing to buy even if you own the physical book, while beyond is kinda worthless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
I do a group that uses roll20 on a projector for maps off of a chromecast. Although I also play a game where a guy has a projector that he's just projecting directly from his PC and it's not any faster or slower. The only difference is once in a while community resources can be easily pulled for the roll20 game whereas we can have some pretty long image editing delays on the PC (of course that group moves so slow anyway it's no big deal).
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Anyone got any good resources on setting up a music bot in discord? I use Fredboat with my group. It can be pretty loud but that's a nonissue if everyone turns it down. Had mixed success, last session it hung on playing a track I uploaded and then refused to exit the server while blasting max volume music into one group of players' ears. So, YMMV
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
Hm I don’t really have a great setup for doing TV casting of the map or anything so maybe I’ll try out Beyond. From clicking around what’s available in the SRD it seems like all spells are available so I won’t need the PHB, just MM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
Eggnogium posted:Hm I don’t really have a great setup for doing TV casting of the map or anything so maybe I’ll try out Beyond. From clicking around what’s available in the SRD it seems like all spells are available so I won’t need the PHB, just MM. Note quite all the spells. But most of them are there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Thinking of running a Githzerai druid though I have a hard time imagining what beast shapes would be for a druid who's never seen an actual grizzly bear, just its ideal form in astral space
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Thinking of running a Githzerai druid though I have a hard time imagining what beast shapes would be for a druid who's never seen an actual grizzly bear, just its ideal form in astral space A bear shaped assemblage of stuttering geometric shapes
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Thinking of running a Githzerai druid though I have a hard time imagining what beast shapes would be for a druid who's never seen an actual grizzly bear, just its ideal form in astral space Githzerai live in Limbo. So you would have seen a chaos bear instead. (Or to be exact chaos matter briefly taking on bear form.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 08:55
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:never seen an actual grizzly bear, just its ideal form in astral space Visually confusing, it's initially somewhat nauseating to behold. Your vision keeps sliding off it, as though to protect your mind from experiencing it. Once you concentrate for a while, you're pretty sure that what you're looking at is a 3-dimensional depiction of the 4-dimensional representation of a bear as painted long ago by <insert appropriate ancient/indigenous culture> on cave walls. As if you're seeing not only the ideal bear here and now but the ideal bear at all times and places that an ideal bear could exist. You're incapable of motion as you realise what the beauty and horror you've just comprehended actually means. The bear mauls you anyway. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 11:04 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 11:02
|
|
|
It's a featureless sphere with
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 11:24
|
|
|
During your druidic training on your native plane, the twisting chaotic energies of Limbo manifested themselves into a bear wearing a tuxedo. It has been your only point of reference for bears.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 12:19
|
|
|
You see a collection of abstract numbers and flickering imagery in keeping with your position on the bear alignment chart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Re: void bear, have you ever seen the movie 'Annihilation'? If you haven't [spoilers]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYlIwaUhGi8
Imagined fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 13:57
|
|