|
Liquid Communism posted:That is never a good assumption. The general takeaway is that mind flayers are a 'gently caress you' monster from back in the day that is drastically under-cr if encountered cold, on the asumption that players should have the metagame knowledge of how they work to trivialize them. I don’t have the MM handy, so I’m just looking at internet stat blocks. Does it say anything about that in the other entry text?
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
I found a d&d fansite while doing some googling. Hadn't been updated since 2014. This is the last post. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
Thanks for... sharing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
get this boys...someone doesn't like barack obama
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:get this boys...someone doesn't like barack obama 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Reducing this to "they're the same they had the same effect" is arguing that missing a shot on goal and sitting on the bench is the same experience for the player. It's not. Missing a shot can contribute things in sports, because sports "mechanically" fail forward In gridiron a missed pass can result in an interception, in hockey, basketball and football a missed shot can rebound to a teammate or an opponent who then goes on to do something The closest thing in sport to the same sort of failure state is I guess striking out or popping up in baseball, which can still result in things happening (sac flies, freak errors, a swinging third strike that the catcher mis-handles and the runner gets on anyway) A fighter swinging and missing their attack mechanically does nothing, RAW. It's as if it didn't happen. It's effectively identical to not being in the game at all, and it's absolutely awful. At least when you're stunned you can't be fooled into thinking you're capable of doing something. Edit: I guess to put forward a fully complete thought, it's that ultimately yes, not having an effect on combat brutally sucks. But singling out crowd control effects is missing the forest for the trees. Waffles Inc. fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Jan 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Missing a shot can contribute things in sports, because sports "mechanically" fail forward quote:A fighter swinging and missing their attack mechanically does nothing, RAW. It's as if it didn't happen. It's effectively identical to not being in the game at all, and it's absolutely awful. No, that’s just a pitcher throwing a strike. It advances the game without a meaningful resolution other than advancing a counting system forward one step. The game analogue is that the party will lose some measure of resource throughout a round but will not have advanced towards the reduction of the opposing resource through their act. quote:At least when you're stunned you can't be fooled into thinking you're capable of doing something. Ever see Barry Bonds intentionally walked? Same difference.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:A fighter swinging and missing their attack mechanically does nothing, RAW. It's as if it didn't happen. It's effectively identical to not being in the game at all, and it's absolutely awful. It's not identical because you still took your turn; you chose to move or not, weighted your options, then decided to attack. It failed, but you still engaged with the game. If you're incapacitated, you just pass. There's no decision-making involved whatsoever, nor any roleplay opportunities. You're a non-entity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
Some of you guys seem almost irrationally opposed to anything that makes any player not 100% effective, ever. Mind flayers are absolutely iconic D&D creatures. Their signature ability is the psychic blast that stuns opponents, much, much more so than slurping up brains. One of the most memorable sections of the Drizzt trilogy is him being captured by mind flayers and having to work out an escape. Like, this is in the zeitgeist of D&D. Don’t use Mind Flayers against new players. Don’t use them against low level players. Don’t use them wantonly or as a way to “get back” at your players. But for fucks sake, by all means, use them and let your players take a stun every once in a while. If they’re particularly badass and strutting around like their poo poo’s impermeable, let them get overwhelmed and captured and have to play out an escape from the Mind Flayer lair. Use the things to shut down and kidnap the casters instead of the martials. Now Kludgy McNobrains and Berserker de la Axeface have to figure out how to rescue their friends. Don’t do this every game, but, Christ, how MMO-like do you want your RPG that you can never get stunned and are always 100% effective regardless of what the institutional definition of a creature’s ability says it should do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
That's a nice strawman, but have you considered that there's ways to limit player character effectiveness without outright removing them from the board in the most lazy way possible?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Goddamn, you nerds. Mind Flayers only came up because someone who wasn't familiar with them accidentally hosed up his players by trusting CR. CR being broken as gently caress isn't controversial, it doesn't work as an encounter building formula the same way 4e XP budgets or 13A tables do. Its a valid critique of 5e. Its written with the assumption that the DM knows Proper D&D expectations. New DMs are able to stumble into this stuff all the time and it has nothing to do with 5e critics being entitled babies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:A fighter swinging and missing their attack mechanically does nothing, RAW. It's as if it didn't happen. It's effectively identical to not being in the game at all, and it's absolutely awful. In a whiteroom with only you and one opponent, and only making melee attacks while not moving, then yeah, sure. Otherwise not just no but gently caress no. When you miss, you can still move, interact with the environment, choose to chug a potion, disengage, flat out run away, switch weapons, etc. That you decide that doing so is not optimal is beside the point. The decision to engage the RNG based attack and do nothing else was yours to make. You were playing the game. Even if you choose (that's the important bit!) to stand still and just attack and miss, you still threatened one or more opponents with the attack/s. You can still make an OA. You're still blocking movement through your space. You can still take a (not-minor) action. It's not the same as being out of the game, at all. It's still awful, but feeling like you have no useful, meaningful decisions to make is a different issue from not getting to play at all. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jan 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:When you miss, you can still move, interact with the environment, choose to chug a potion, disengage, flat out run away, switch weapons, etc. Not to take away from the rest of your argument, but you probably can't chug a potion, and unless you're a rogue, probably not disengage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:Goddamn, you nerds. Mind Flayers only came up because someone who wasn't familiar with them accidentally hosed up his players by trusting CR. CR being broken as gently caress isn't controversial, it doesn't work as an encounter building formula the same way 4e XP budgets or 13A tables do. As the guy who used said Mind Flayers and received the "I might as well not have come tonight" response from my players re: mind blast, I'm definitely agreeing that 10 round stuns aren't nearly the same circumstance as "i missed my attacks this round." My players aren't getting up from their desks to do other things or alt-tabbing from the Roll20 window when they've missed their attack on their round; they're collaborating with their party members and plotting their next moves because they'll have opportunities in future rounds to be effective. Mind Flayers, however, have a 60-foot cone of "STOP PLAYING THE GAME" because their stun can last the majority, if not all, of the combat. There's no tactical counter to this, there's no intuitive way using the monster as-written to prevent it, it's just a roughly 75% chance per character to say GO HOME. Nobody's having fun with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Not to take away from the rest of your argument, but you probably can't chug a potion, and unless you're a rogue, probably not disengage. With you on the disengage thing (plus some monks and rangers too though?), but really no potions as a not-a-minor-action-action? I guess we houserule that one. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:With you on the disengage thing (plus some monks and rangers too though?), but really no potions as a not-a-minor-action-action? I guess we houserule that one. Potions are a full action. It's one of the things stopping people from just chain-chugging healing pots Diablo-style.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
I made a variant mindflayer that just did it's mind blast damage every turn until you passed a save, like it was still reverberating in your mind...only 1 person died it was fine. 10 round stun seemed dumb/lazy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Potions are a full action. It's one of the things stopping people from just chain-chugging healing pots Diablo-style. Got a page reference? I'm not disagreeing with you, definitely prepared to believe that's what's supposed to happen, I just can't remember seeing it written down anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Got a page reference? I'm not disagreeing with you, definitely prepared to believe that's what's supposed to happen, I just can't remember seeing it written down anywhere. DMG 139: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:
Right. And the point is that, this "empty" round happens frequently. People miss, often. The math is something like, what, 40% of every swing is a chance to miss on a medium encounter and goes up from there? So you have to look at it not in the scheme of Mind Flayer vs Missing. You have to look at it in the original context, which is "what are the chances you do nothing this turn?". Against a Mind Flayer, you have a 75% of doing nothing for a turn, every encounter with a mind flayer. Compare that to 40% of the time doing nothing on a turn because you swung your sword. Sure, you can also maybe bonus action, or move assuming AOO mechanics won't nail you, but otherwise you're not contributing anything to the fight on a miss. So, to me, it's a really weird to make a huge deal out of losing your turn due to fighting a mind flayer, when you routinely lose your turn because you missed, and you'll miss far more often than eating mind blasts from Mind Flayers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 00:17
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:DMG 139: Great, thanks. Neither of my groups do that. Might see about starting. Potions don't seem to come up that often for us anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 00:17
|
|
|
User0015 posted:you routinely lose your turn because you missed You have not retroactively lost your turn when you miss with an attack, any more than you've retroactively lost your turn when your spell is resisted or you didn't meet the DC to get up the wall.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 00:26
|
|
|
There's a difference between rolling to see if you hit (moment of drama) and failing (still small amounts of drama), and not rolling at all and just going on your phone for the next Vague While. Also Mind Flayers are a classic monster and should be written with actual encounter rules instead of just shoved into the Enemies Folder along with literally everything else. Honestly, pretty much everything extremely big, dangerous, and noteworthy should be set up as a full scale encounter, not just a random monster. And I don't mean that this is something that the GM should just know how to do - the books need to be so, SO much loving better at presenting monsters and how they should be interacted with mechanically. Ah, but I just said the forbidden m word.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Honestly, pretty much everything extremely big, dangerous, and noteworthy should be set up as a full scale encounter, not just a random monster. And I don't mean that this is something that the GM should just know how to do - the books need to be so, SO much loving better at presenting monsters and how they should be interacted with mechanically. Ah, but I just said the forbidden m word.  , the MM or DMG should have more guidelines like what “The Monsters Know What They’re Doing” provides.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:There's a difference between rolling to see if you hit (moment of drama) and failing (still small amounts of drama), and not rolling at all and just going on your phone for the next Vague While. But that isn't this situation. The same moment of drama to see if you hit -> fail is the same moment of drama to see if you save -> fail. The stun isn't a flat 1 minute. You still make attempts to shake it off, and you get two rolls by the end of your first turn, which other players can assist with by either inspiring you, granting advantage, using spells, etc..
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:
I remember the 3e monster manual provided some round to round tactics for some bigger and more complicated monsters. Some of that would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
I think a way to help mitigate the "You miss your attack roll." is to narrate it more accurately. I mean, a round is 6 seconds, and it isn't the Goblin standing patiently for you to take your one swing per turn and then vice versa. It's sword hitting sword, shields knocking away arrows, a spear glancing off or failing to penetrate your plate armor in a back and forth fight to the death. The extra attacks aren't a literal second swing of your sword, it's an abstract representing the fact that you're so good at swording that you are likely to score more damaging blows than the average Person who isn't You and cut deeper when you do find the stabbable parts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
I think this conversation about "functionally you had no turn" vs "the feeling of agency is important" is definitely going places and I hope nobody ever realizes we're talking about two completely different priorities and can instead keep repeating these things back and forth. It's about as constructive as comparing peanut butter vs the color green.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I think this conversation about "functionally you had no turn" vs "the feeling of agency is important" is definitely going places and I hope nobody ever realizes we're talking about two completely different priorities and can instead keep repeating these things back and forth. "The feeling of agency is important". Yes. Definitely. I don't think anyone is objecting to that or really even talking about it. But: Waffles Inc. posted:A fighter swinging and missing their attack mechanically does nothing, RAW. It's as if it didn't happen. It's effectively identical to not being in the game at all, and it's absolutely awful. "Functionally you had no turn" or "effectively it's the same as not getting a turn" is wrong. You chose to make the attack instead of doing something else, and there's a bunch of other stuff you could do before/after missing even if you feel like it's not much or not useful. "Accomplished nothing I felt was useful" is not "was not allowed to try". It can feel like that while it's going on and that really sucks, but that's not what's going on. User0015 posted:it's a really weird to make a huge deal out of losing your turn due to fighting a mind flayer, when you routinely lose your turn because you missed "Acting and not acting are the exact same thing" is not just wrong, it's obviously intentionally disingenuous. E: For real, if you're playing D&D and you really really feel like your entire range of options is "stand still and attack" and you have a bad time when that doesn't work ~1/2 the time... then yeah, that's poo poo. That's really poo poo and I would have a really bad time with it. I don't think it relates to dumb stun abilities though. It's not my experience that D&D has to, or is supposed to, play like that. Anyone experiencing that should look for a way to fix it. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between acting & not acting. you imbecile. you loving moron"
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
Failing a save that causes you to be stunned for 4 (or more) rounds isn't the same as missing your attack on one given round, because you still get to roll attacks on the other three rounds and might hit then. It would be more similar (but still not the same) if we were talking about an effect that stuns you for one round, versus missing your attack on one given round, and in that case, the stun would be far more reasonable. It would also be more similar if we were talking about being able to roll a save against the effect every round that it came up, and shaking off the effect as soon as a save is successfully rolled. That would also be a reasonable change, IMO. User0015 posted:So, to me, it's a really weird to make a huge deal out of losing your turn due to fighting a mind flayer, when you routinely lose your turn because you missed, and you'll miss far more often than eating mind blasts from Mind Flayers. The idea isn't to excuse the design of Mind Flayers under the guise of missed attacks, because missed attacks are also not-good design. A spellcaster will often still be able to deal lesser damage/a lesser effect even if the enemy successfully saves against their spell. If we look back on 4e a Fighter that missed their attack still Marked the target, so they still accomplished something. A Ranger with Double Strike would be hard-pressed to miss with both attacks. Powers were designed more like spells in that they still had effects even on a miss, some even explicitly designed to be a "safe" power that always did something. Other powers were "reliable" and weren't expended if they missed. I'm not bringing this up in an "edition warring" sense, but to illustrate how it is possible to avoid the idea of "okay, I missed, nothing happened for me this turn" because that in itself is a problem. EDIT: Other ideas include Strike!'s miss tokens, Sine Nomine's Fray die (a roll separate from one's attack, that goes straight to being a damage roll because it always hits, with a few restrictions), or The Nightmares Underneath's feature for Fighters where they always deal damage whenever they attack, but then they also deal damage a second time if they roll an attack and hit. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Great, thanks. Neither of my groups do that. Might see about starting. Potions don't seem to come up that often for us anyway. Interesting. We houseruled that drinking a potion is a bonus action, while feeding one is a standard. We never run potion heavy campaigns so it's never a big deal. If you're chugging a potion it means poo poo has hit the fan, and it's cooler to chug the potion, throw it to the ground and then do your suicide charge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Great, thanks. Neither of my groups do that. Might see about starting. Potions don't seem to come up that often for us anyway. If you or someone in a rule-making position in your group watches Critical Role, it may have come from there. They have a house rule that my group adopted where taking a potion is a bonus action, but making another player drink a potion (like if they are unconscious) is a full action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
Webguy20 posted:Interesting. We houseruled that drinking a potion is a bonus action, while feeding one is a standard. We never run potion heavy campaigns so it's never a big deal. If you're chugging a potion it means poo poo has hit the fan, and it's cooler to chug the potion, throw it to the ground and then do your suicide charge. I have yet to play in a game where potions were a big deal. I have no idea why. One group has them as a bonus action. The other group is barely D&D right now so gently caress knows. I'd wrongly assumed it was bonus action in the rules. I'm gonna talk to that DM and see what her reasoning was and discuss what would be different if we changed it to the RAW. Trojan Kaiju posted:If you or someone in a rule-making position in your group watches Critical Role, it may have come from there. Thanks! I think that's unlikely, but I'll ask. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
So, erm, this is tangentially related but what is the general consensus on Critical Role? I personally really enjoy it, but want to see what others think. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So, erm, this is tangentially related but what is the general consensus on Critical Role? It's fun but not really my kind of show. It also had a thread itself over in TV https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3850885 MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 03:04
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So, erm, this is tangentially related but what is the general consensus on Critical Role? They need to make an edited show or animated series based on voice clips or something. I fell off around the start of the Chroma Conclave stuff because 4 hours per episode was too much even with downloading old episodes and listening on the bus or w/e. My only other thought is that it has created unrealistic expectations in some new players. Everyone wants a Matt Mercer when a good half of DMs don't even try to do voices. Which isn't a slam on them because DMs all have their own benefits and shortcomings and stuff. To his own credit Mercer is aware of that line of complaint and hasn't taken it personally or gotten lovely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:They need to make an edited show or animated series based on voice clips or something. I fell off around the start of the Chroma Conclave stuff because 4 hours per episode was too much even with downloading old episodes and listening on the bus or w/e. He's on record doing the complete opposite actually. There was a big post on I wanna say the plain old DnD subreddit where someone was connecting the dots and just feeling really bad cause their players seemed to be expecting something they couldn't really do. Matt came in and apologized, even though it isn't his own fault, and emphasized the fact that different people have different strengths when running a game and I believe he also went over some of his own weaknesses. He ended the post with a quote for the OP to tell his players, straight from the Mercer's Mouth. The OP was overwhelming shocked and thankful for that response.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 04:20
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:So, erm, this is tangentially related but what is the general consensus on Critical Role? I feel like it could be renamed to Matt Mercer Power Hour and the players are mostly incidental. The Adventure Zone is real good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
At 6th level, Evokers get Potent Cantrip: Creatures that successfully save against their cantrips take half damage. At 10th level, Evokers get Empowered Evocation: they add their Int modifier to damaging evocation spells. Number of damaging evocation cantrips with saves in the PHB: Zero. Da fuq?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 04:39
|
|