D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

AlphaDog posted:

I wouldve hoped that part was obvious, yeah, just trying to remember if there were different "can see in range" and "in range" wordings. I was also asking about stuff like fireball where you pick the origin point. Can you do that when you can't see? I guess you can?

Fireball has no restriction on being able to see the point of origin.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 08:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 15:47

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

Ha. Gonna abuse the poo poo out of that tonight then.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 08:41

Nehru the Damaja: May 20, 2005

The fun thing that happens when tracking vision is that the group faces decisions between sneaking in the dark or revealing their position but having fuller vision. Sneaking in the dark doesn't just make things difficult for people with no darkvision. It changes the passive perception scores for everyone with dark vision since they're in dim light. As a DM you'll have to actually explain this mechanic for it to be played around because nobody remembers dim light = lightly obscured = disadvantage on perception = flat -5 to passive.

Not every group is going to find that choice fun and if the best game for you requires erasing darkvision from the game, by all means do it. But it is possible to use those fiddly rules to have fun.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 12:55

The Crotch: Oct 16, 2012; by Nyc_Tattoo

I've gotten some mileage in the game I run (which is on Roll20, so lighting gets handled automatically if you set up LOS blockers on the map) with shifting terrain periodically blocking off light sources and splitting up the party.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 14:17

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

Mendrian posted:

I'm not saying don't help people who come into the thread looking for alternatives, I think it's just sort of weird and creepy to outsiders and is kind of off putting to the rest of the forum.

Yeah. Ive been saying that for literally years now. Its better (some of the trolls have left(?) or been booted(?)), but it hasnt fundamentally changed (except for the people that aggressively use the ignore button for their own benefit).

AlphaDog posted:

It's really really hard to just talk someone through how both playstyles are valid.

Yeah. I mean Im in the "count your arrows" camp, but the main issue is just making sure that the expectations are in place up front, and you dont have two sets of rules running at the same table.

Valentin posted:

I don't really understand how people who are serious about vision run their games. Mixed-vision parties seem absurdly unwieldy for the DM if you fully engaged with the rules.

In the days of the ancients it was just a part of the game, like tracking rations and ammo. (And yes it took more attention.) Even to the extent that infravison and ultravision were different abilities and could make out different details. It could be interesting if you can track it smoothly, and make it part of the narrative without needing to check references constantly, but it is not in vogue right now, and doesnt work with the current "simplify everything" theme at all.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 14:24

Josef bugman: Nov 17, 2011; Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Heya guys, quick question to anyone who owns Dragon heist, but does anyone know where the picture of Zardoz appears inside the book? I can't seem to find it anywhere!

# ? Sep 23, 2018 14:42

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Valentin posted:

I don't really understand how people who are serious about vision run their games. Mixed-vision parties seem absurdly unwieldy for the DM if you fully engaged with the rules.

Splicer posted:

Defined advantages that remove common penalties are also great if everyone in the party has them or if they're rare /within the party/. If everyone has darkvision that's cool. If only one guy out of four has dark vision that's also cool, because usually you'll have the lights but every time they're off you get to be a superstar. If only one guy out of four doesn't have darkvision then that guy basically had sunlight sensitivity that kicks in every time they're below ground, which is crap for all the reasons posted.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 17:13

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

5e is fun for most players for the same reason 3e was fun for most players, and it's because games stop using rules the longer they go on. The argument of "5e is bad because the rules are bad" is a correct one, and also a flawed one, because the rules being bad doesn't matter for most groups. Games that go on long enough become to straight up freeform roleplaying. Oh, you'll throw in a roll every now and then if they're trying to do something extra dramatic. And you'll break out as many of the rules as you remember when it's combat - which incidentally is what leads to the incredibly common belief that "roleplaying" and "combat" are two different things, which is one of the things that made the perception of 4e so bad. But for the most part, you're just freeforming with your friends. And that's pretty much always a good time, unless your friends suck. yes, much of the game *actively works against it*, but it's still what you end up doing, and it's enjoyable, not unlike how engine and mechanics-wise Bethesda games tend to be complete dogshit, but they give players the chance to make their own OC and play them out.

Of course, this is also why people correctly think more groups should get into rules lite and more narrative games. It is, in fact, everything they want from a game - but it's missing the brand, and that depressingly counts for a lot. People are simply more inclined to go after a game named "5e" (because that's what they play) then they are to play a game that actually works the way they play 5e or wish 5e worked (because that's not what they play). They wanna play the game their podcasters are playing. The wanna play the game that's associated with all that nerd poo poo they always liked but kept quiet about, but now that nerd poo poo is big, and while there are no small numbers of gross and dumbfuck gatekeepers - some of whom even literally got paid to make 5e - they're outnumbered. It's not that D&D is only now popular, it's that the ideas behind D&D were always popular, and the creators of D&D were either never in a good position or were simply never able to actually advertise on them - and they are still frankly incapable, because that's not been done by them, it's been done by the Actual Play movement, which again if we're honest, most likely has at least one of it's roots in the Penny Arcade 4e games.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 20:14

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

Josef bugman posted:

Heya guys, quick question to anyone who owns Dragon heist, but does anyone know where the picture of Zardoz appears inside the book? I can't seem to find it anywhere!

Who is Zardoz. Do are you just using it as a nickname for another character?

MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Sep 23, 2018

# ? Sep 23, 2018 20:23

ReapersTouch: Nov 25, 2004; Goodness no, now that wouldn't do at all!

MonsterEnvy posted:

Who is Zardoz. Do are you just using it as a nickname for another character?

Thats the Drow's alias hes using.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 20:44

ReapersTouch: Nov 25, 2004; Goodness no, now that wouldn't do at all!

ReapersTouch posted:

Thats the Drow's alias hes using.

Its Jarlaxle's alias

# ? Sep 23, 2018 20:51

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

Thanks. He does not have a picture sadly. You could always find a fitting one however.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 21:04

TheGreatEvilKing: Mar 28, 2016

ProfessorCirno posted:

5e is fun for most players for the same reason 3e was fun for most players, and it's because games stop using rules the longer they go on. The argument of "5e is bad because the rules are bad" is a correct one, and also a flawed one, because the rules being bad doesn't matter for most groups. Games that go on long enough become to straight up freeform roleplaying.

I'm gonna cut you off here and counter with the fact that rules for anything not named combat have never, ever been good. 3e's diplomacy rules are famously nonsensical so people just freeformed that poo poo. Hell, look at 4e's skill challenges. The entire point of that system was to provide people with something engaging to do out of combat, but Mearls and co hosed it up so bad it had to be errated 50x and no one knows how it works. People would actually use the social rules if you gave them something engaging to do with them but no RPG designer is willing to do this.

This is probably a direct result of the RPG design field needing actual math skills but being a niche market that can't actually afford to hire people competent at anything.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 21:27

Nitrousoxide: May 30, 2011; do not buy a oneplus phone

koreban posted:

Example: dude wants to scribe a level 1 bard spell into his wizard spellbook.

BTW, my DM ended up resolving this by using the copying a spell you already have in your spell book to a backup spell book rule (IE 10 gold worth of rare inks and 1 hour of time per Bard spell level)

# ? Sep 23, 2018 21:30

Nickoten: Oct 16, 2005; Now there'll be some quiet in this town.

ProfessorCirno posted:

5e is fun for most players for the same reason 3e was fun for most players, and it's because games stop using rules the longer they go on. The argument of "5e is bad because the rules are bad" is a correct one, and also a flawed one, because the rules being bad doesn't matter for most groups. Games that go on long enough become to straight up freeform roleplaying. Oh, you'll throw in a roll every now and then if they're trying to do something extra dramatic. And you'll break out as many of the rules as you remember when it's combat - which incidentally is what leads to the incredibly common belief that "roleplaying" and "combat" are two different things, which is one of the things that made the perception of 4e so bad. But for the most part, you're just freeforming with your friends. And that's pretty much always a good time, unless your friends suck. yes, much of the game *actively works against it*, but it's still what you end up doing, and it's enjoyable, not unlike how engine and mechanics-wise Bethesda games tend to be complete dogshit, but they give players the chance to make their own OC and play them out.

Of course, this is also why people correctly think more groups should get into rules lite and more narrative games. It is, in fact, everything they want from a game - but it's missing the brand, and that depressingly counts for a lot. People are simply more inclined to go after a game named "5e" (because that's what they play) then they are to play a game that actually works the way they play 5e or wish 5e worked (because that's not what they play). They wanna play the game their podcasters are playing. The wanna play the game that's associated with all that nerd poo poo they always liked but kept quiet about, but now that nerd poo poo is big, and while there are no small numbers of gross and dumbfuck gatekeepers - some of whom even literally got paid to make 5e - they're outnumbered. It's not that D&D is only now popular, it's that the ideas behind D&D were always popular, and the creators of D&D were either never in a good position or were simply never able to actually advertise on them - and they are still frankly incapable, because that's not been done by them, it's been done by the Actual Play movement, which again if we're honest, most likely has at least one of it's roots in the Penny Arcade 4e games.

There are plenty of groups that still use the rules (yes, even the bad ones) for years because they don't realize how many problems they're having with the game are fundamental elements of its design. Source: I was in one of these groups for 3e and then another one for 5e. You can't really assume that people who play games that work counter to what they want actually do end up at what they want. Not everyone is a game designer, and not everyone has the skills necessary to identify what's causing the game to perform badly.

I'm sure there are people who will slowly over time rip 5e apart and reconstruct it into what they actually need, but they're not so much part of these discussions because they don't need to be. There is a sizeable number of people who are having trouble and don't know why and those people are worth giving more thought to, because they haven't already solved their own problem.

Nickoten fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Sep 23, 2018

# ? Sep 23, 2018 21:36

Harkano: Jun 5, 2005

Conspiratiorist posted:

There's this thread over here.

Yes, basically. It's more of a character customization engine than a game, with a very dense, pseudo-simulationist and antiquated ruleset.

For actual play it's a pain, since for the sake of smoothness it requires you to either throw away half the rules, or for the DM to have an encyclopedic grasp on its workings. Usually both.

Serf posted:

do you have a few minutes for our savior the demon lord?

I've read a bit of Demon Lord propaganda, but some the concerns raised up thread seem like they'd make it tough to sell to people.

After I struggle through the Dragon Heist 5e my friend is running I might try and push running 13th Age Eyes of the Stone Thief down people's throats.

Can you sell the benefits of Demon Lord over 13th? I'm coming off a few years of running EotE Star Wars, so anything with narrative dice and degrees of success definitely appeal.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 22:39

bewilderment: Nov 22, 2007; man what

Harkano posted:

Can you sell the benefits of Demon Lord over 13th? I'm coming off a few years of running EotE Star Wars, so anything with narrative dice and degrees of success definitely appeal.

13th Age is when you want to be rolling buckets of dice at higher levels, SotDL keeps things a bit more towards the lower end of the spectrum math-wise.

The thing that gets most people I see really interested in the game is the class system, which is to me is kind of Final Fantasy Tactics-esque but I think is meant to actually be reminiscent of Warhammer Fantasy careers.

The level progression is as follows:
Level 0: You are a classless nobody of your ancestry - e.g. human, orc, dwarf. You get a bonus ancestry feature at level 4, if you're not a spellcaster; spellcasters will just pick up more spells.
Level 1: You're a member of a 'Novice' path - your overall defining general class. Warrior, Rogue, Mage or Priest. Priests are a little beefier and better at skills than mages, in return for a much more restrictive spell selection. You get additional novice features at levels 2, 5, and 8.
Level 3: You can pick an 'Expert' path out of 16 (in the core book). Things like Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric. However, you can freely mix and match, and mixing and matching works pretty well as long as you're picking right for your stats. So you can be a dwarven Priest-Fighter, or a goblin Rogue-Warlock. You get additional Expert benefits at levels 3, 6 and 9.
Level 7: You get to pick a 'Master' path out of 60ish in the corebook, with a capstone ability at level 10. Again, mixing and matching is fine. Priest-Fighter-Zealot, or Rogue-Warlock-Acrobat.

And of course, players who don't like mixing and matching benefit from sticking close to their core concept - Mage-Wizard-Arcanist works just fine.

At the high-level end there's still some caster supremacy, but being a straight martial dude still lets you play with fun tricks more due to the way the system works, and you'll still be doing super solid damage and will have more health than anyone else in a system where that means a little more; it's meant to be a little bit more on the lethal end of the spectrum.

# ? Sep 23, 2018 23:54

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

TheGreatEvilKing posted:

I'm gonna cut you off here and counter with the fact that rules for anything not named combat have never, ever been good. 3e's diplomacy rules are famously nonsensical so people just freeformed that poo poo.

You're not wrong, but that's also why the criticism of 4e as "you can't roleplay in it" was always disingenuous - with maybe the exception of the rules never mentioning that you could do a one-roll skill check instead of a full challenge, 4e was not so much different from 3e that you couldn't play it the way you already played 3e.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 00:56

Harkano: Jun 5, 2005

bewilderment posted:

13th Age is when you want to be rolling buckets of dice at higher levels, SotDL keeps things a bit more towards the lower end of the spectrum math-wise.

The thing that gets most people I see really interested in the game is the class system, which is to me is kind of Final Fantasy Tactics-esque but I think is meant to actually be reminiscent of Warhammer Fantasy careers.

The level progression is as follows:
Level 0: You are a classless nobody of your ancestry - e.g. human, orc, dwarf. You get a bonus ancestry feature at level 4, if you're not a spellcaster; spellcasters will just pick up more spells.
Level 1: You're a member of a 'Novice' path - your overall defining general class. Warrior, Rogue, Mage or Priest. Priests are a little beefier and better at skills than mages, in return for a much more restrictive spell selection. You get additional novice features at levels 2, 5, and 8.
Level 3: You can pick an 'Expert' path out of 16 (in the core book). Things like Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric. However, you can freely mix and match, and mixing and matching works pretty well as long as you're picking right for your stats. So you can be a dwarven Priest-Fighter, or a goblin Rogue-Warlock. You get additional Expert benefits at levels 3, 6 and 9.
Level 7: You get to pick a 'Master' path out of 60ish in the corebook, with a capstone ability at level 10. Again, mixing and matching is fine. Priest-Fighter-Zealot, or Rogue-Warlock-Acrobat.

And of course, players who don't like mixing and matching benefit from sticking close to their core concept - Mage-Wizard-Arcanist works just fine.

At the high-level end there's still some caster supremacy, but being a straight martial dude still lets you play with fun tricks more due to the way the system works, and you'll still be doing super solid damage and will have more health than anyone else in a system where that means a little more; it's meant to be a little bit more on the lethal end of the spectrum.

This is awesome. Thanks for that. I�ll probably take it to the DL if I�ve got any more questions though. Sorry 5e thread!

# ? Sep 24, 2018 01:37

KingFisher: Oct 30, 2006; WORST EDITOR in the history of my expansion school's student paper. Then I married a BEER HEIRESS and now I shitpost SA by white-knighting the status quo to defend my unearned life of privilege.; Fun Shoe

Any of you nerds good at converting 3.5 systems and such to 5th?

I have some OGL content (EQRPG) I want to update and adapt to a more 5e style and would like some help or someone to help me think over the decisions.

For example instead of gaining d8+con mod in how per level for 30 levels I want to convert to a 60 level system, and have a fixed how gain per level for each class+con , though with an option rolling.

Anyways lemme know if there's a discord or something I can join to chat with someone on this.

Thanks!

# ? Sep 24, 2018 01:55

kingcom: Jun 23, 2012

Holy poo poo this thread, I go away for one weekend and not check the forums and we get this.

Real talk, the heart and soul of why people are commenting on 5e's problems is because we will have to play or run this system and point out its problems are the first step to fixing it for the most part. So when there is push back on poo poo constantly we just get poo poo grinding to a halt. I mean when there isn't push back on every detail to defend suddenly everything just gets solve no worries.

I mean take an example of the encounters thing. Its pretty universally accepted that 6-8 encounters per day is dumb and wrong and since so much of resting is a mess to begin with, making the game balanced around this is nuts. So accepting that is wrong lets people come up with a more reasonable encounter level, plus gives room for people to solve resting and healing in different ways. I took the approach of building big old right hook encounters because fights that aren't going to be big deals shouldn't be something I break out initiative for to just drain resources. So my healing system is rigged around milestone long rests and healing surges rather than regular healing. Another problem was that level 1-2 were bad and super lethal for no reason and its pretty universally accepted that doing something like adding +constitution score to level 1 or giving characters their level 2 and 3 health to the level 1 character (and then just not getting more health until then) fixes it. But when it gets push back with really unhelpful comments like 'Actually my group had no problems and was great!' then it just devolves into poo poo every time.

KingFisher posted:

Any of you nerds good at converting 3.5 systems and such to 5th?

I have some OGL content (EQRPG) I want to update and adapt to a more 5e style and would like some help or someone to help me think over the decisions.

For example instead of gaining d8+con mod in how per level for 30 levels I want to convert to a 60 level system, and have a fixed how gain per level for each class+con , though with an option rolling.

Anyways lemme know if there's a discord or something I can join to chat with someone on this.

Thanks!

Do not convert, there is no 1:1 conversion that will work as there are fundamental differences in design principles for how these things cross across. You want to instead figure out the theme and goals of the content and find something that matches that in 5e and copy those monsters/powers instead.

kingcom fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Sep 24, 2018

# ? Sep 24, 2018 02:04

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

KingFisher posted:

I have some OGL content (EQRPG) I want to update and adapt to a more 5e style and would like some help or someone to help me think over the decisions.

For example instead of gaining d8+con mod in how per level for 30 levels I want to convert to a 60 level system, and have a fixed how gain per level for each class+con , though with an option rolling.

What was the original mechanic?

# ? Sep 24, 2018 02:27

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

kingcom posted:

Do not convert, there is no 1:1 conversion that will work as there are fundamental differences in design principles for how these things cross across. You want to instead figure out the theme and goals of the content and find something that matches that in 5e and copy those monsters/powers instead.

In general yeah, for any D&D 3.5 or later and also most parts of most other versions.

So in specific:

KingFisher posted:

For example instead of gaining d8+con mod in how per level for 30 levels I want to convert to a 60 level system, and have a fixed how gain per level for each class+con , though with an option rolling.

What exactly are you trying to do?

5th ed has 20 character levels. Do you want your PCs to finish on level 60 while being roughly equivalent to a 20th level 5e character, or do you want 5th ed but with an extra 40 levels? Or something else?

Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Sep 24, 2018

# ? Sep 24, 2018 02:37

Serf: May 5, 2011

koreban posted:

I�m sorry Mike Mearls is a lovely person and made one of your friends feel bad during playtesting.

holy ignorant bullshit batman!

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:01

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

koreban posted:

I�m sorry Mike Mearls is a lovely person and made one of your friends feel bad during playtesting

GO gently caress YOURSELF

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:03

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

This sounds like something we should be made aware of. Is Mearls a gator?

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:07

Piell: Sep 3, 2006; Grey Worm's Ken doll-like groin throbbed with the anticipatory pleasure that only a slightly warm and moist piece of lemoncake could offer; Young Orc

Mike Mearls is a piece of poo poo who supports pieces of poo poo

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:11

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Pollyanna posted:

This sounds like something we should be made aware of. Is Mearls a gator?

At the time gamergate wasn't even a thing, but Mearls is friends with most of the people who tried to make Gamergate a thing in RPGs. Check out the OP of the thread for a cursory explanation. RPGPundit was another contributor to the 5e core rulebooks who actually believes the gamergate spiel about current games being the downfall of western civilization and who argues vehemently against representation/for alt-right poo poo.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:12

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Pollyanna posted:

This sounds like something we should be made aware of. Is Mearls a gator?

One of the credited consultants for D&D 5th Edition is a serial harasser of LGBT people, and another is an alt-right shithead. When the consultants were accused of this, Mearls tried to crowdsource proof of it, and then sent the submissions back to the consultants themselves to ask them if they were true, which has lead to at least one person having had to pull out of the industry entirely on the back of a concerted campaign of harassment that was reignited by Mearls himself allowing them to be re-targeted.

To characterize it as having made some people "feel bad" is ludicrously uninformed at best, and unconscionably callous at worst. It's not loving worth going to the mat over in the goddamned 5e thread. This game fuckin' sucks, deal with it.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:15

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

gradenko_2000 posted:

One of the credited consultants for D&D 5th Edition is a serial harasser of LGBT people, and another is an alt-right shithead. When the consultants were accused of this, Mearls tried to crowdsource proof of it, and then sent the submissions back to the consultants themselves to ask them if they were true, which has lead to at least one person having had to pull out of the industry entirely on the back of a concerted campaign of harassment that was reignited by Mearls himself allowing them to be re-targeted.

To characterize it as having made some people "feel bad" is ludicrously uninformed at best, and unconscionably callous at worst. It's not loving worth going to the mat over in the goddamned 5e thread. This game fuckin' sucks, deal with it.

None of that has anything to do with the actual game.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:21

Rip_Van_Winkle: Jul 21, 2011; "When life gives you ghosts, you make ghost-robots"

I think this is a philosophy we can all aspire to.

Piell posted:

Mike Mearls is a piece of poo poo who supports pieces of poo poo

gradenko_2000 posted:

One of the credited consultants for D&D 5th Edition is a serial harasser of LGBT people, and another is an alt-right shithead. When the consultants were accused of this, Mearls tried to crowdsource proof of it, and then sent the submissions back to the consultants themselves to ask them if they were true, which has lead to at least one person having had to pull out of the industry entirely on the back of a concerted campaign of harassment that was reignited by Mearls himself allowing them to be re-targeted.

To characterize it as having made some people "feel bad" is ludicrously uninformed at best, and unconscionably callous at worst. It's not loving worth going to the mat over in the goddamned 5e thread. This game fuckin' sucks, deal with it.

not an emptyquote

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:23

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

MonsterEnvy posted:

None of that has anything to do with the actual game.

kingcom posted:

Real talk, the heart and soul of why people are commenting on 5e's problems is because we will have to play or run this system and point out its problems are the first step to fixing it for the most part. So when there is push back on poo poo constantly we just get poo poo grinding to a halt. I mean when there isn't push back on every detail to defend suddenly everything just gets solve no worries.

I mean take an example of the encounters thing. Its pretty universally accepted that 6-8 encounters per day is dumb and wrong and since so much of resting is a mess to begin with, making the game balanced around this is nuts. So accepting that is wrong lets people come up with a more reasonable encounter level, plus gives room for people to solve resting and healing in different ways. I took the approach of building big old right hook encounters because fights that aren't going to be big deals shouldn't be something I break out initiative for to just drain resources. So my healing system is rigged around milestone long rests and healing surges rather than regular healing. Another problem was that level 1-2 were bad and super lethal for no reason and its pretty universally accepted that doing something like adding +constitution score to level 1 or giving characters their level 2 and 3 health to the level 1 character (and then just not getting more health until then) fixes it. But when it gets push back with really unhelpful comments like 'Actually my group had no problems and was great!' then it just devolves into poo poo every time.

You wanna engage? Engage. The ball's in your court #basta

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:24

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

MonsterEnvy posted:

None of that has anything to do with the actual game.

Oh gently caress off. Those people were paid contributors to and provided feedback on the actual game. They made 5e what it is. And Mearls' entanglement with them damns him, specifically, even more.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:24

Serf: May 5, 2011

MonsterEnvy posted:

None of that has anything to do with the actual game.

it does if you want to know if the people making the game are subhuman dreck

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:24

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

Serf posted:

it does if you want to know if the people making the game are subhuman dreck

That was already a post on it in the op. and it's a banned topic.

gradenko_2000 posted:

You wanna engage? Engage. The ball's in your court #basta

I don't have any issues with what he said.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:27

Serf: May 5, 2011

MonsterEnvy posted:

That was already a post on it in the op. and it's a banned topic.

who cares yo. people ought to be informed if at all possible before spending money on a trash game made by trash people

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:29

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

Honestly given that article linked, at this point I don't blame him for not believing you guys about Zak S. You guys can be such assholes.

Cause the article that you guys linked makes Zak sound bad which I agree with, and makes Mearls sound naive and gullible, not malicious.

MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Sep 24, 2018

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:32

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

MonsterEnvy posted:

None of that has anything to do with the actual game.

You don't have to post this

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:34

Serf: May 5, 2011

MonsterEnvy posted:

Honestly given that article linked, at this point I don't blame him for not believing you guys about Zak S. You guys can be such assholes.

haha there it is at last

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 15:47

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

MonsterEnvy posted:

Honestly given that article linked, at this point I don't blame him for not believing you guys about Zak S. You guys can be such assholes.

You gently caress off right now. This was an actual attack on a valued member of this forum that contributed far more than you ever have. It is completely non-negotiable here that Zak, Pundit, and Mearls are all harasser pieces of poo poo. If you don't like people being mean to you, then stop covering for reactionary oppressors.

# ? Sep 24, 2018 04:35

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

«‹›1608 »