|
P.d0t posted:I'd probably change the 4 to a 6, but I think this method puts it closest to where I want the stats to come out. Do any of your players actually have fun rolling the dice, or would they be just as happy pressing a button that spits out the numbers for them to use?
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
4d6 drop lowest x7. Players can then trade stats with each other. Tell them one stat won't be used. Then use the last one as an honor stat, the lower it is, the higher their honor [or infamy, as character appropriate) - assuming those with lower scores traded better dice to their team mates to help them out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
Or don't use rolled stats because one night's bad luck shouldn't neuter a character forever. If you're doing all the wiggling to make rolled stats not terrible, just use point buy or standard array, it's better. If you want to have some randomness in character generation to guide character building, randomise which are the high and low stats rather than randomising how high or low they are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
Or let everyone roll stats, take the best roll and convert to point buy or array and let everyone use it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
Roll 9 sets of 4d6, drop middle. You have the additional stats of luck, beauty, honor and insanity, all of which gain 30% of your 3d6 corruption score. After that Edit: I get it, rolling dice is fun and what you're "supposed" to do, but if you need this many rules to eliminate bad rolling, use point buy at a higher level. 40 point buy, you'll see an 18 somewhere. Gharbad the Weak fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Nov 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:just use point buy or standard array, it's better. The problem is, didn't someone math it out, and these are actually worse on average than your run-of-the-mill "4d6, drop the lowest"? Anyway, don't get me wrong, this is totally how I usually build my characters, I kinda just want to have something fun and mathematically sound, that I can pitch to DMs who have it in their head that we need to be rolling. Gharbad the Weak posted:40 point buy, you'll see an 18 somewhere. Rules for point-buying above 15 sure aren't in the 5e PHB (although I've seen a player do it, somehow.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:The problem is, didn't someone math it out, and these are actually worse on average than your run-of-the-mill "4d6, drop the lowest"? No. The average is very slightly higher, but every class has at least 3, sometimes 4 stats they don't mechanically give a poo poo about, so what really matters is how many >15s you'll get, of which you want at least two, and the math for 4d6 drop low is that you'll get those two less than half the time, whereas in pointbuy they're guaranteed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Why not just do a ridiculous array like 18, 17, 16, 14, 12, 9? Everyone would rather have that than rolling and getting worse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:free action to open the door, move five feet inside the room and go prone on the floor, polymorph into a t rex, use the rest of your movement to get up and walk Oh my god
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:The problem is, didn't someone math it out, and these are actually worse on average than your run-of-the-mill "4d6, drop the lowest"? The eternal paradox which just results in petty tantrums for asking being "If you're so good at roleplay, why does point buy ruin your ability to do so?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
There are a number of online point-buy calculators for 3.5/pathfinder/4e that can go to 18.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:There are a number of online point-buy calculators for 3.5/pathfinder/4e that can go to 18. One of the quirks of 5th ed point buy is that you specifically can't pay for higher than a 15 with the vanilla rules. Which ensures a 16-17 tops after modifiers to start with outside of some edge case bullshit I'm sure can be done. (While in 4th edition, yeah go for that 18 total primary after modifiers in point buy, or 20 if you're feeling sassy). I think the fact that you could potentially roll a 16+ is one thing that keeps drawing the "Dice are better!!!!" crowd when it comes to 5th ed, from the spreadsheet warriors end of things. Section Z fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Nov 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:The problem is, didn't someone math it out, and these are actually worse on average than your run-of-the-mill "4d6, drop the lowest"? You might be thinking of when I defended stat rolling in the method we used. It was fun for a group of newbies and gave a talking point to explain the basics to new players. Later, when it was pointed out this was the wrong fun-having, I looked closer and found it averages a sum of stats about 10 points higher than point buy. I'll run through it again: Player and DM sit together. Roll 4d6 drop lowest six times to make an ability score set. Arrange the set to suit desired class. Put the set aside. Repeat ten times then choose your set. It's difficult to get a really poo poo roll that way, as it's just repeat till you get something you like, obviously. In practice we rarely got to ten rolls, as it is time consuming. Then to do it faster on roll20 you run: [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1] = Set 1 [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1] = Set 2 [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1] = Set 3 [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1] = Set 4 [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1]] | [[4d6d1] = Set etc and you're done in five or ten minutes. Or as someone said whack 10+ points onto point buy. Whatever. But for the fun mini-game feel with new players it worked and gives fairly consistent higher than point buy results. One player ended up with a character with ability set equalling point buy, I think she got sick of rolling earlier than the others. So the sum of her set is ten points lower than the table average. It's made zero difference in game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Basic: write down the 2 or 3 worthwhile ways to arrange whatever point buy total you think works, then get the players to roll to see which one they get. Then they can trade with another player if they like. Advanced: come up with a way to gently caress around with the actual method of rolling the dice so it looks more complicated than that. Beyond Next: See if you can make it look like there's a chance to come up with NO I REALLY AND TRULY ROLLED 3 18s TWO 16s AND A 12, AGAIN BUT OOPS I PICKED UP THE DICE BEFORE ANYONE COULD SEE without that actually being possible. Extra Credit: your method takes more than 10 minutes to complete and always produces one of 17, 15, 14, 12, 10, 8 or 17, 15, 14, 11, 10, 9 or 17, 15, 14, 10, 10, 10.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Even if you legit roll well, if you're outside the mean the other players attitude to you will be functionally identical to as if you had cheated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
More importantly, why does a high Dexterity not grant more interact with object opportunities? Why are so many otherwise phenomenal athletes and acrobats still struggling with opening doors and stowing weapons?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:More importantly, why does a high Dexterity not grant more interact with object opportunities? Why are so many otherwise phenomenal athletes and acrobats still struggling with opening doors and stowing weapons? Even some guys who made some homebrew deck of playing cards based super hero game I ran across, would brush off questions of "Why is it that peak human physical attributes still need to *equivalent of rolling a 10* to do something as simple as crossing the street?" with "Well, it's not like we'll ever make you pass a DC for basic actions!" ignoring the bigger question of "Why does bootleg Captain America suck at opening doors?" style game design.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
Been getting into Divinity 2:OS and I like the action point system. Tying movement, action opportunity, racial variables etc all down to one currency of action points is tidy and consistent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:The problem is, didn't someone math it out, and these are actually worse on average than your run-of-the-mill "4d6, drop the lowest"? Even if they are, the important part is that they're balanced and the same for everyone. The problem with rolling isn't that the average is good bad or indifferent, it's that the person who rolls 2 18s a 17 a 12 and 2 10s is going to have a very different game experience from the person who rolls a 16 a 15 a 14 a 12 and 2 9s. Every single roll and save the former makes has essentially a +1 or +2 bonus over every single roll the other person makes, and that's just going to make the entire game for the latter person worse. Rolling *can* work out fine, and if you gently caress with it enough to reduce the variance, it can work out even better. But the more you gently caress with it, the closer you get to determinist methods anyway, so why not just use one? As noted, you can still randomise those if you want to decide which order your stats go in, to set out what direction you want for a new character if that's your thing. But you're not going to end up with a significant numbers gap for the entire campaign because someone got lucky and someone else got shat on by RNGesus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:More importantly, why does a high Dexterity not grant more interact with object opportunities? Why are so many otherwise phenomenal athletes and acrobats still struggling with opening doors and stowing weapons? Section Z posted:Even ignoring the jokes about "gently caress martials", there seems to be some kind of disease in all game creators along those lines. Because, and I'm not trying to be facetious or funny here, loving with the action economy is guaranteed to break any version of D&D (usually badly), and in D&D-alike games action economy is genuinely difficult to design for. So 5th ed tries to deal with this by getting rid of move action and minor action and full round actions and stuff, and just says "Stuff you can do on your turn: Move. A single Action. If an ability permits, a single Bonus Action". Which really isn't that bad, but then of course it has your not-really-an-action object-interaction action catch-all thing which is all handwave-y and sits in a weird place where it's not crunchy enough if you want crunch and not freeform enough if you want freeform*. Clusterfuck, while it's not really what I'd want out of a game, what you could do is to separate those catch-all not-actions (I'll call them Minor Actions just to give them a name) into categories. Then you could have "Stuff you can do on your turn: Move. A single Action. If an ability permits, a single Bonus Action. A Minor Action". Let's say your categories are Move-related (open/close a door, pull a rope up behind you, etc) Environment-related (kick a stone, pull a lever, scoop up a handful of sand, etc) Weapon-related (draw a weapon, stow a weapon, pick up a weapon) Social-related (yell instructions, gesture for allies to go around the trap, etc) <whatever else> then you could write rules that say, for instance, that a given character type/class/etc gets an extra Minor Action of whatever category. Like for example you could say that Fighters and Rogues always get an extra Weapon Related Minor Action, allowing them to switch weapons twice, or switch weapons while also opening a door, or if your dex is above 16 you can have an extra Move Related Minor Action (make sure it's not just dex getting a bonus - charismatic characters get an extra Social Minor Action. Maybe strong characters could get an extra MInor Action in the Destroy category. There's no real reason that similar things couldn't appear in more than one list, either) I feel like that might be crunchy enough for you without being as fiddly as "Characters with 16 dex can interact with two doors (open, close, or lock) plus one door for every two points of dex above 16" and poo poo *But ask your DM! Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Nov 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Even if they are, the important part is that they're balanced and the same for everyone. Just as clarification, it doesn't make that much of a difference early on since everyone deals low damage and has tiny HP pools and you don't run into many dramatic DC effects, but if there are any shared roles (and you're not deep in Dunning–Kruger territory) you'll absolutely notice when one martial has 24 more HP and deals half again the damage of another, or one caster already maxed out their DCs and spells available, never fails their concentration checks, and is now starting to take cool effect feats like Alert/Lucky/Observant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Also of all the stats to give additional legs to, Dexterity is a lovely choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Even if they are, the important part is that they're balanced and the same for everyone. 100%. You get a stabler set of ability scores, more balanced and even for all party members, the more you let them roll sets again. If each player can only roll 4d6d1*6 once and must use that set you will definitely get an uneven, unbalanced party. If each player can roll 4d6d1*6 10+ times and can cherry pick the set they like you will very likely get an even, balanced party, with higher average stats than point buy. So there's a 1 to 10 gradient there which predicts how even the party will turn out. Fun for new players but then the illusion of randomness fades so when it stops being fun switch to some point buy. Main thing is keep the party even to prevent resentment amongst players. Unless they really want that randomness for some reason, clearly most don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
Had my first D&D session last night, and it was fun, but I'm looking for a bit of advice as to how to engage a pair of my friends characters. Background I believe it's the sunless citadel adventure, but don't know anything past that. It is a lvl 1 adventure, and our party is a human fighter (myself), a human wizard (my brother), a dwarven cleric, a half-orc paladin (who is a ward of the cleric), a half elven ranger, and an elvish rogue (going for a pirate style). The wizard, cleric, and paladin have been sent by their respective organizations to find out what the trouble in oakhurst is, and deal with it. Myself, the ranger, and the rogue over hear the opportunity, and get ourselves employed on this job. The first session went well, however the ranger and rogue were a little tight lipped, and I want to be able to engage with them as we have a job to do. The ranger has been living as a bit of a hermit, does not want to divulge too much, but did ask for a bit of cash for info. The rogue seems to look down on non elven races, but has fallen on hard times, and is willing to risk this mission to get the reward. Any ideas on how I may be able to get them to warm up to my character a bit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Because, and I'm not trying to be facetious or funny here, loving with the action economy is guaranteed to break any version of D&D (usually badly), and in D&D-alike games action economy is genuinely difficult to design for. Yeah cheers but this is really just thought experiment stuff, I'm good with just tweaking interact with an object a little in the way I described. I think that rule's just a loose end in an otherwise fairly straighforward system that people either handwave or do the drop / pick up / mouse cord tied to wrist shenanigans. I don't wanna open up a new category can of worms by defining every other action conceivable. Most response in this thread has been "Sane people handwave this" and tbqh D&D:NEXT:Sane people handwave this works for me when running a game most of the time. I only sound more crunch obsessed when (poo poo) posting. otoh, I kind of like the thought experiment of converting 5e to operate on Divinity's action point system and how that would play out or fail miserably. Mendrian posted:Also of all the stats to give additional legs to, Dexterity is a lovely choice. Yes fair point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
LemonRind posted:Had my first D&D session last night, and it was fun, but I'm looking for a bit of advice as to how to engage a pair of my friends characters. Background I believe it's the sunless citadel adventure, but don't know anything past that. It is a lvl 1 adventure, and our party is a human fighter (myself), a human wizard (my brother), a dwarven cleric, a half-orc paladin (who is a ward of the cleric), a half elven ranger, and an elvish rogue (going for a pirate style). The wizard, cleric, and paladin have been sent by their respective organizations to find out what the trouble in oakhurst is, and deal with it. Myself, the ranger, and the rogue over hear the opportunity, and get ourselves employed on this job. The first session went well, however the ranger and rogue were a little tight lipped, and I want to be able to engage with them as we have a job to do. The ranger has been living as a bit of a hermit, does not want to divulge too much, but did ask for a bit of cash for info. The rogue seems to look down on non elven races, but has fallen on hard times, and is willing to risk this mission to get the reward. Any ideas on how I may be able to get them to warm up to my character a bit? Kick two other players since this is a problem inherent in with large groups.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:100%. If you've got new players who want to do the randomness thing for whatever reason (probably because it's what everyone knows about D&D, right?), you owe it to them, and to yourself, to grab a copy of Mentzer Basic and just run it perfectly straight. 3d6 in order for stats. Random starting gold. Roll for hit points, meaning most characters will have about 4 and some will have 1. Carlos the Cleric is killed by a Carrion Crawler? Frank Fighterman fell in the fire? Finish your drink, roll up a new random dude, and they get to arrive in the dungeon in ~5 minutes when you're done. You'll get every dumb D&D trope out of everyone's system and it'll actually be fun instead of a goddamn drag because characters take <5 minutes to generate so falling in a pit and dying in the first room is "Haha, oops. <rolls dice> Oh hey my next dude's a dwarf" instead of "...are you loving kidding me?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
LemonRind posted:Had my first D&D session last night, and it was fun, but I'm looking for a bit of advice as to how to engage a pair of my friends characters. Background I believe it's the sunless citadel adventure, but don't know anything past that. It is a lvl 1 adventure, and our party is a human fighter (myself), a human wizard (my brother), a dwarven cleric, a half-orc paladin (who is a ward of the cleric), a half elven ranger, and an elvish rogue (going for a pirate style). The wizard, cleric, and paladin have been sent by their respective organizations to find out what the trouble in oakhurst is, and deal with it. Myself, the ranger, and the rogue over hear the opportunity, and get ourselves employed on this job. The first session went well, however the ranger and rogue were a little tight lipped, and I want to be able to engage with them as we have a job to do. The ranger has been living as a bit of a hermit, does not want to divulge too much, but did ask for a bit of cash for info. The rogue seems to look down on non elven races, but has fallen on hard times, and is willing to risk this mission to get the reward. Any ideas on how I may be able to get them to warm up to my character a bit? This might be the sweetest new player post I've ever read. My advice is: don't worry about it. Are you friends in real life? Then good. Keep a line between player and character. Some people want to play a more reserved character. As time goes on and the players get more comfortable and their character become more developed you will also be sharing experiences together and become more of a team. The game naturally leads to a narrative of growing respect as you save each other, fight together, and find causes in common (unless the characters are opposed enough that it would come to blows, then you need an out of character discussion on how you can gel things). If your character is a friendly kind of guy that would push trying to be friends, do that. Engage them in conversation, give them drinks, whatever. Or don't do that if you are also playing a more serious and reserved character. Roleplay your character as you like. It's a bit blunt to say that you should cut them, but as very general advice people seem to think the game is for 6 people but that's pushing it. Any roleplaying game works better with 3-5 just because of "screen time" and how long you have to wait until you get to do something as groups get bigger. That doesn't mean you should try to cut your friends from the game, but it does mean if you ever organize a game it is better to be strict about player numbers right away so everyone has a better time in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Because, and I'm not trying to be facetious or funny here, loving with the action economy is guaranteed to break any version of D&D (usually badly), and in D&D-alike games action economy is genuinely difficult to design for. I can agree that action economy while a very important subject, gets super fuckey, yeah  I'm glad there is no more "Gentleman's agreement that everyone 'forgot' you need some form of action to draw your sword or bow, until the awkward moment somebody decides to play it by the book" I'm exasperated by friends who embrace 'just throw it on the floor and pick it back up as part of your attack action' exact words when I ask why they won't let me just sheath multiple items at once without a feat. LemonRind posted:Had my first D&D session last night, and it was fun, but I'm looking for a bit of advice as to how to engage a pair of my friends characters. Background I believe it's the sunless citadel adventure, but don't know anything past that. It is a lvl 1 adventure, and our party is a human fighter (myself), a human wizard (my brother), a dwarven cleric, a half-orc paladin (who is a ward of the cleric), a half elven ranger, and an elvish rogue (going for a pirate style). The wizard, cleric, and paladin have been sent by their respective organizations to find out what the trouble in oakhurst is, and deal with it. Myself, the ranger, and the rogue over hear the opportunity, and get ourselves employed on this job. The first session went well, however the ranger and rogue were a little tight lipped, and I want to be able to engage with them as we have a job to do. The ranger has been living as a bit of a hermit, does not want to divulge too much, but did ask for a bit of cash for info. The rogue seems to look down on non elven races, but has fallen on hard times, and is willing to risk this mission to get the reward. Any ideas on how I may be able to get them to warm up to my character a bit? This has lead to my "I just want to be a professional Mercenary, heroism for free doesn't pay the bills" sorts regularly going full crusade against Generic Evil Mercenaries because these fuckers giving the term "Mercenary" a bad name  Which has consistently won over storybook hero types.Or Half-Orc fighters that started adventuring because it beats more workplace accidents, just completely aghast at the lack of OSHA compliance and horrible ideas they encounter. "So the constructs EXPLODE when they break, AND are powered by a demon shoved inside them? No wonder this is an abandoned mine with everybody dead." Now he has an in universe reason why he can ID poo poo like animated rugs with often forgotten battlemaster tricks. Have the back of your brooding (but not disruptively so) companions, treat it like it's just part of life. You give the ranger asking to be paid for exposition his money because "Aw, you're just too embarrassed to ask for a fiver. It's cool buddy, I've been there"  Section Z fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:If you've got new players who want to do the randomness thing for whatever reason (probably because it's what everyone knows about D&D, right?), you owe it to them, and to yourself, to grab a copy of Mentzer Basic and just run it perfectly straight. 3d6 in order for stats. Random starting gold. Roll for hit points, meaning most characters will have about 4 and some will have 1. Carlos the Cleric is killed by a Carrion Crawler? Frank Fighterman fell in the fire? Finish your drink, roll up a new random dude, and they get to arrive in the dungeon in ~5 minutes when you're done. I completely agree and I also think the stat rolling system I described that you're responding to, works as intended in 5e, with consistent survivability and even results across the party. It's modern fake randomness. Really I think the comparison between point buy and rolling 4d6d1 repeatedly until you get what you want is marginal. Main attribute stat, Con and probably Dex should be good and it barely matters at all if the rest are 8's or 10's or 12's. If the party is reasonably balanced then fine. But then I am unironically a 1e grognard lost in the modern times, I actually would want to churn characters in that Mentzer Basic game. That would make a nice change from the over wrought my precious loving snowflake baseline approach. / grog
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
Rolling stats is only fun in a game where character creation takes less than one minute total
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
clusterfuck posted:I completely agree and I also think the stat rolling system I described that you're responding to, works as intended in 5e, with consistent survivability and even results across the party. It's modern fake randomness. That was me, I only got over it maybe 7-8 years ago. I play a short Hackmaster game every year or two just to get it all out of my system. Basic is really nothing like AD&D. It's got some of the same tropes but they come across as... I dunno, less overblown/serious/straightfaced, somehow. Probably because there's not 3 paragraphs of "the perspicacious DUNGEON MASTERTM will obviously comprehend that to devise a verisimilitudinous milieu, it is incontestably of unconditional paramountcy that..." to explain that water flows downhill.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Rolling stats is only fun in a game where character creation takes less than one minute total nah, elaborate lifepath character creation is fun not that that has much of anything to do with D&D stats
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
LGD posted:nah, elaborate lifepath character creation is fun Lifepaths would be a great option for D&D though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
LGD posted:nah, elaborate lifepath character creation is fun Yeah that's a different thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
Lifepaths bake in a lot of setting, I don’t think they’d work for D&D where it’s a lot more variable. They rule though, most fun way to do chargen
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:19
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:That was me, I only got over it maybe 7-8 years ago. I play a short Hackmaster game every year or two just to get it all out of my system.  true. I see why you recommended Hackmaster to me earlier, ok ok I'll give it a go.On Lifepaths, I hadn't heard of it but is this the idea?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:Same. It’s plot is very OK and the setting is cool but it’s led to a very low combat campaign for us (which can be fine but check with your group.) If you want to give them the more typical D&D experience, LMoP is hard to beat for an official product. It has also been out much longer than the Waterdeep stuff so we can give you advice on things to tweak or watch out for. I ran LMoP for a group of total newbies last year and it went really well. That is actually solid advice! I'm used to more experienced players and tend to design stories and encounters that match that. Getting involved with complete newbies is a challenge and using the mines might make for a better start. I've never run LMoP but I did read some things here on the forums about certain encounters being to deadly for a group of 1st level characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 08:07
|
|
|
Everything is deadly for 1st level characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 08:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:I agree, it shouldn't be a bonus action. I'm completely on board with opening a door just being a thing that happens. I'm being an rear end about naming conventions. Right on. XCOM lets you open and shut a door at will if you're standing next to it, and if you're going through an unopened door from a distance, you always kick it open and keep going without an intervening action. clusterfuck posted:More importantly, why does a high Dexterity not grant more interact with object opportunities? Why are so many otherwise phenomenal athletes and acrobats still struggling with opening doors and stowing weapons? You are drifting dangerously close to the 90's design mindset of "more Dexterity/Agility = more actions", which would always be the most powerful effect in any game it was in by a country mile. There's a case to be made that you could limit this to very specific effects, such as ... [checks 3e] ... the Quick Draw feat, but a generalized rule would be very dicey. clusterfuck posted:
Yes, lifepaths are a mechanic by which you make a series of "Choose Your Own Adventure" choices (or you roll a result instead of choosing one), and each choice yields a certain stat increase or whatever for your character. The reason they tend to work better than other character generation procedures is that they can give out discrete packages of character progression advances - they don't have to be concerned with being "balanced" or "equal", but at the same time the choices/results also tend to be mutually-exclusive against others, which prevents the thing from being or "munchkin'd". Theoretical example: the problem with Barbarians and Monks is that they require multiple ability scores to be high. If you tried to make up for this with rolled stats, everyone else gets even more of an advantage from having higher stats to play with. Same goes for point-buy - if you give everyone 40 points to play with so that the Barbarian can max-out Strength and Constitution ... the Paladin also gets to max-out Strength and Charisma. Lifepath systems essentially allow you to give Barbarians/Monks a set of increased bonuses that they and only they can access, as they select the ... life choices that would lead them to becoming Barbarians and Monks. (it's technically true that you can also just give the Barbarian, and only the Barbarian, a higher roll/point-budget to play with, but lifepath systems are more organic that way) gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 08:32
|
|
