|
Just give the character who does the least prophetic visions/a plot item to make them important to the narrative and keep them engaged
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Talking about Combat, Exploration, Social pillars is a big deal here, then. Most everyone agrees that all the classes have plenty of agency in Combat. A few classes lag and a few classes/builds really excel, but mostly they all get work done. The 'pillars' fundamentally dont work though and even the developers admit as much. The Exploration pillar is straight up not used in many tables and has almost no mechanics associated with it to begin with but any real problem has 5 or 6 magical solutions and the Social pillar is extremely hollow as well, coming down to improv from the players without any real mechanics holding it up. The only mechanical way to interact with it is rolling a skill check; which are vague and indeterminate for when these are even used and/or what success and failure even does, and magic which lol. The only fleshed out pillar is combat and even then casters get to click their fingers and solve a lot of the problems inherent in combat encounters anyway. change my name posted:Just give the character who does the least prophetic visions/a plot item to make them important to the narrative and keep them engaged Thats not really a good option as you're banking on the player even liking or want that stuff because prophetic visions are a tough to get right and actually be useful and ironically take away agency rather than giving them narrative agency and because they really often don't gel with a lot of character concepts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Omnicrom posted:If you want magic that's magical you're better off trying Mage. Yeah, that game has lots of rules and crunch and system mastery to exploit, but it's also much better at getting across the idea you're someone wielding a bizarre otherworldly force beyond the ken of mortal man. I'd love to play Mage, but I've never even gotten close to it. Josef bugman posted:I suppose it depends if folks are actively trying to be good at the game. That can accidentally be a huge problem. In 3.5, me and another person both made level 3 characters. I didn't min-max or anything, not a super optimized character. They made a fighter/rogue/swashbuckler, and I made a Crusader. Even if I wasn't using a Big Weapon with power attack, there're issues. And that's something that can happen to a table of people completely new at the game. "I want to be a holy dude with a big fuckoff sword, ok Crusader seems to do more than Paladin, power attack sounds good, let's go." Even if you're not actively trying to be good at a game, there can be really big differences in power. Edit, forgot this bit: And then the third player picks "Wizard" and suddenly the rogue/fighter/swashbuckler isn't even the person who gets to just win OUT of combat stuff. The rogue/fighter/swashbuckler is kinda just bad. Gharbad the Weak fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 03:25
|
|
|
I've never looked back to my many sessions with my mostly martial characters and thought "boy I'm bored, the caster is getting to do everything!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
Arthil posted:I've never looked back to my many sessions with my mostly martial characters and thought "boy I'm bored, the caster is getting to do everything!" I have and my players have in the past.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 04:13
|
|
|
Arthil posted:I've never looked back to my many sessions with my mostly martial characters and thought "boy I'm bored, the caster is getting to do everything!" My first 3.5 campaign was like that where I was a rogue and two of my buddies went wizard and druid. There were two other characters too but I remember them stealing the show and 5e isn’t that much different. I just play the wizard all the time now 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 04:16
|
|
|
I was thinking of playing a hexblade next time I roll a character, but the twist is that everyone else will think he's just a sword and board fighter until poo poo really hits the fan and he's forced to use magic (maybe shame/regret/damnation from the pact). I'm kind of expecting this to be really boring, though
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 04:19
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:My first 3.5 campaign was like that where I was a rogue and two of my buddies went wizard and druid. There were two other characters too but I remember them stealing the show and 5e isn’t that much different. At this point I've given up expecting any sort of balance or verisimilitude from this dumb elf game so I just try to figure out which full caster does the best job fulfilling my character concept. At least the worst fail cases of 5e character building aren't nearly as painful to witness as they were in 3.5, like when I saw a player wanted to boost his fighter's CHA so he could qualify for the Goad feat to get better at tanking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 05:03
|
|
|
What's the worst character you can make in 5e while still making a good-faith attempt at a character? That is, trap choices rather than intentional sabotage like dumping strength and dexterity for a Fighter. Beastmaster Ranger?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:What's the worst character you can make in 5e while still making a good-faith attempt at a character? That is, trap choices rather than intentional sabotage like dumping strength and dexterity for a Fighter. Beastmaster Ranger? Single-classed non-Hexblade bladelock. Wild Sorcerer with really clueless spell picks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 06:52
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I will say, one thing mentioned above that is absolutely true is that spellcasters are usually almost just as boring as martial characters. There's almost no flavor to any of the spells, and they're all 100% reliable and 100% standardized that there's nothing really "magical" about them. The only thing that defines a spell is "it's an ability a character can do." Like, wizards have 10 subclasses, and maybe three of them are actually interesting. But spellcasters have basically the opposite problems of martials - martial characters are dull because they have only limits, and wizards are dull because they have essentially no limits, making them a mush of everything, and just as bland as a mush of everything would be. Vancian casting is amazing because it manages to make magic as boring and predictable as accounting. It's like a system an actuary came up with.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:What's the worst character you can make in 5e while still making a good-faith attempt at a character? That is, trap choices rather than intentional sabotage like dumping strength and dexterity for a Fighter. Beastmaster Ranger? Anything not a full caster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 13:26
|
|
|
DEX-based barbarian? You lose access to a lot of your class features in favor of getting better unarmored defense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:What's the worst character you can make in 5e while still making a good-faith attempt at a character? That is, trap choices rather than intentional sabotage like dumping strength and dexterity for a Fighter. Beastmaster Ranger? I'm pretty sure this would come down to 'play a spellcaster and pick bad/noncombat spells', and repeating via taking levels in new casters every time you get close to levels where there stop being actively bad spells. I've not tried yet but I suspect you could get to about level 15 before you absolutely had to take a damage cantrip.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
I mean, actually trying to use the ability score system as described is more than enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
You guys are going way too deep. Melee ranger
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Vancian casting is amazing because it manages to make magic as boring and predictable as accounting. It's like a system an actuary came up with. Or was your post  ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:DEX-based barbarian? You lose access to a lot of your class features in favor of getting better unarmored defense. While this is most certainly a garbage approach, it hinges on a gimmick build around a 2-sentence ability without any fluff to it, that is incompatible with half the abilities in the core class kit. Compare with Pact of the Blade, which is presented as an equal option to the other two build-defining Pact picks, has the longest description of all of them and various associated "cool" ribbon benefits on top of its mechanics, and is backed by several exclusive Eldritch Invocations. poo poo like Berserker, Beastmaster and Wot4E is comparable to playing their class without an archetype once you realize the features suck, but Pact of the Blade actively encourages you to screw yourself over in gameplay style, stat distribution, and feat and spell and eldritch invocation picks. If we're talking about a "good faith" attempt at making a character, with thought put in the player's decisions but not quite enough system mastery to inform them, that'd be my go. Well that and the aforementioned Sorcerer with bad spell picks. Bard still has class features, Cleric and Druid can swap spells between rests, and Wizards get the most spells on level up and can just find new spells on the go - but following the rules Sorcerers have very strict spell picking. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
I've never had issues with wizards/sorcs being too good at taking the spotlight and making martials useless, but I've definitely seen it come up with druids, bards, and clerics. Moon druid is insanely powerful at certain level ranges (like, up til 7, then from 13-16), and one of those ranges is literally where 90% of games seem to end. I've watched a moon druid make a fighter and barbarian BOTH feel useless with their ability to turn into X big thing, and run at the big boss with their now 100+ hp at level 6. I actually got requested, twice, when playing the same bard to change my skill layouts, because my lore benefits and tons of skills (and ability to put attributes in non efficient places) was making me rock every Religion check, as compared to our Paladin who was like 3 under me, and then had the same issue with our wizard getting mad at me having more arcana of her due to expertise + 16 int to compare to her 20 int and just proficiency. Not to mention that said wizard was originally a rogue, until they decided my bard was good enough with sleight of hand + thieves tools to take their role. And clerics... most of my issues with them in the past have come from magical healing and the death of exploration or cures. Four times I've seen players other than me take the Medicine skill, and make it a big part of their character. The Paladin who wants to save every life and never let people die. The rogue poison master who used to be a court doctor, etc. But mundane healing and the Medicine skill is entirely a superflous, useless thing that is never used, because of clerics (and druids, and bards, tbf, but I've rarely seen druids take any healing stuff besides goodberry). Oh, a mysterious disease afflicting the king? Cure disease. A master of poisons slipped something into someone important's food? Remove poison. Someone powerful was stabbed through the gut? Spirit of Healing, they're at full hp again. Meanwhile mundane Medicine does literally nothing in the system, besides stabilize people who are downed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:I've never had issues with wizards/sorcs being too good at taking the spotlight and making martials useless, but I've definitely seen it come up with druids, bards, and clerics. Kinda have to agree. The sorcs have a limited spell choice, which helps make situations where they can't solve the issue themselves. They have good AoE and they probably have something strong for social encounters, and can do a lot of utility cantripping, but as a whole they don't destabilise the game. Wizards can be a crapshoot. If the GM rations the spellbooks and the ink, they will not have every tool in the box, and they have to prep spells, too. If the GM gives these out willy nilly, wizards quickly grow into gods. I would say clerics are often played as buffbots by a helpful player, so they by nature don't take the spotlight. In many ways, a Paladin is a stronger choice. They do basically make other healy classes feel useless, but most tables only get one dedicated healer, so I'd call that kind of situation unusual. But moon druids are bonkers. First off, they are the best scouts hands down, just turn into a spider. They have crazy spells and they can turn into the best martial in the team, too. Their versatility is crazy. And the bard is a few notches more bonkers. They're the best skill monkey - more skills they have proficiency in than not. They're the best support caster. They're the best crowd control. And thanks to cribbing spells at half their intended level from half-caster classes, they can become the best healer, the best caster controllers, the best AoE dealer. In addition to that, they have beastly charisma, making them the best face with their skill choices - not to mention the social spellshit they get. And that still doesn't even factor in bardic inspiration or cutting words. The class is so outlandishly good it is absolutely crazy. dex_sda fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
I just wanted to add that I also really dislike Vancian casting, but at the same time I'm not sure how to play without having codified spells - perhaps I'm just too to used to this latter aspect and lack imagination. Years ago during my 2nd edition days, we basically ended up with an approach that was halfway between mage and sorcerer before sorcerer was A Thing. I won't go on about it unless someone is interested, but we tried to introduce a system that counted for how many spells one could hold in the head versus how many one could actually cast, and it worked reasonably well. There was still memorisation, though, so take that as you will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Wizards can be a crapshoot. If the GM rations the spellbooks and the ink, they will not have every tool in the box, and they have to prep spells, too. If the GM gives these out willy nilly, wizards quickly grow into gods. This is true in every edition really. It costs a fortune to scribe spells and spellbooks are only like 100 pages and spells take one page per spell so if the GM actually enforces anything a high level wizard needs to haul around an entire library with him at all times if he wants all the spells with him, or has to spend scribing costs multiple times if he only wants to haul a couple of books with him with the basics he needs. When all that's ignored the wizard gets OP very very fast since they can spend money on equipment at the same rate as everyone else too
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
As someone currently playing a divination wizard, I would hate to be house ruled into only knowing divination spells considering there’s only one in all of the officially released material that does any damage, and 3rd and 4th level don’t have enough spells to choose from. It might be okay to do what 2e did where each wizard specialization had two opposing schools that they couldn’t learn, while Divination only had one. You’d still just have a lot of people dropping Illusion and Necromancy though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Nemo posted:As someone currently playing a divination wizard, I would hate to be house ruled into only knowing divination spells considering there’s only one in all of the officially released material that does any damage, and 3rd and 4th level don’t have enough spells to choose from. Yeah, a single school would be too restrictive just because the spell lists are too limited. The sweet spot is probably two or three? Maybe start with two, get a third at level 6 or 10? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:Meanwhile mundane Medicine does literally nothing in the system, besides stabilize people who are downed. And Healer's Kits are 5 gold.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I just wanted to add that I also really dislike Vancian casting, but at the same time I'm not sure how to play without having codified spells - perhaps I'm just too to used to this latter aspect and lack imagination. Years ago during my 2nd edition days, we basically ended up with an approach that was halfway between mage and sorcerer before sorcerer was A Thing. I won't go on about it unless someone is interested, but we tried to introduce a system that counted for how many spells one could hold in the head versus how many one could actually cast, and it worked reasonably well. There was still memorisation, though, so take that as you will. Ars Magica is a system I really like for spells that isn't vancian casting. But that game is made for wizards to be 'sort of gods', so it's fine that they are. And even that system, a smart fighter can loving wreck a wizard. So even that's better than D&D lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:What's the worst character you can make in 5e while still making a good-faith attempt at a character? That is, trap choices rather than intentional sabotage like dumping strength and dexterity for a Fighter. Beastmaster Ranger? Four elements Monk without a background that gives proficiency in thieves tools. At least beastmaster rangers can scout with their pets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:DEX-based barbarian? You lose access to a lot of your class features in favor of getting better unarmored defense. Even then, that can get kind of bonkers. Naked dexbarb with bear or wolf totems dipping 3 rogue levels for Assassin can potentially get Quite Silly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:Even then, that can get kind of bonkers. Naked dexbarb with bear or wolf totems dipping 3 rogue levels for Assassin can potentially get Quite Silly. Not really, no. What's the synergy here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Ars Magica is a system I really like for spells that isn't vancian casting. But that game is made for wizards to be 'sort of gods', so it's fine that they are. Ars Magica is also a system where players are meant to have multiple characters because Wizards are going to be spending lots of time in their wizard labs inventing magics because getting good at magic requires a lot of time and effort in Ars Magica. And it's also a setting where Wizards literally need representatives because having magic inherently makes people hate you. Ars Magica knows it has Caster Supremacy and still made wizards (and all the other weird rear end characters you can play) interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Not really, no. What's the synergy here? You're a stealthy, deep HP pool high AC, damage resistant, dodging as bonus action trapmonkey with multiple attacks per round, advantage on initiative and danger sense and virtually guaranteed rounds of brutal crits multiplying your sneak attack. The DM then presumably also provides items on top of this inbuilt ability unless they're a dick. To do this you give up 2-3 bonus damage per raged attack (that doesn't get multiplied with crits) since you won't use strength. That's a good trade considering by level 8-9 depending on how you prioritize the build, you're a better tank buck-assed naked with a mundane rapier and shield than a sword and board fighter in full plate. Willie Tomg fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:virtually guaranteed rounds of brutal crits multiplying your sneak attack Please don’t trigger consp like this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:I've never had issues with wizards/sorcs being too good at taking the spotlight and making martials useless, but I've definitely seen it come up with druids, bards, and clerics. I regularly saw the use medicine checks for forensic analysis (speak with dead doesn't work so well with monstrous or hostile targets), but that is something a campaign and setting-contingent sort of thing. Also, it was used for the surgical removal of a parasite that probably would not have responded to "cure disease", though perhaps some kind of magical bullshit would have worked, who knows. It made a better story as a medical check.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:You're a stealthy, deep HP pool high AC, damage resistant, dodging as bonus action trapmonkey with multiple attacks per round, advantage on initiative and danger sense and virtually guaranteed rounds of brutal crits multiplying your sneak attack. The DM then presumably also provides items on top of this inbuilt ability unless they're a dick. To do this you give up 2-3 bonus damage per raged attack (that doesn't get multiplied with crits) since you won't use strength. That's a good trade considering by level 8-9 depending on how you prioritize the build, you're a better tank buck-assed naked with a mundane rapier and shield than a sword and board fighter in full plate. Rogue doesn't Dodge as a bonus action. What are these guaranteed rounds of brutal crits you speak of?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:And that still doesn't even factor in bardic inspiration or cutting words. The class is so outlandishly good it is absolutely crazy. The 5E Bard in general and Lore in particular feels like some mad nerd who was tired of people making fun of his pet class deliberately overpowered it to make people play it, like they did with Cleric and Druid in 3E. Which is weird because AD&D Clerics and 3.X/PF Bards weren't actually bad to begin with. Even in 2E the meme of the Bard as useless fifth wheel was a thing, but the worst class was very obviously the single-class Thief. It's like they're preoccupied with the notion that support must be inherently boring, and the only way to fix that is to make support characters do everything well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:You're a stealthy, deep HP pool high AC, damage resistant, dodging as bonus action trapmonkey with multiple attacks per round, advantage on initiative and danger sense and virtually guaranteed rounds of brutal crits multiplying your sneak attack. The DM then presumably also provides items on top of this inbuilt ability unless they're a dick. To do this you give up 2-3 bonus damage per raged attack (that doesn't get multiplied with crits) since you won't use strength. That's a good trade considering by level 8-9 depending on how you prioritize the build, you're a better tank buck-assed naked with a mundane rapier and shield than a sword and board fighter in full plate. Okay the Barbarian can get decent HP, if they invest in CON, a few levels of Rogue will lower that a bit. Damage resistant when Raging yes, that is pretty much the ONLY reason to actually take Barbarian in most cases. Advantage on Initiative is kind of good. But they absolutely are not "virtually guaranteed rounds of brutal crits" in any way. At all. Like if a Barbarian gets to 5th level or higher, and is always using Reckless Attack so they always have Advantage they will be getting Sneak Attack regularly, but only on one attack per turn. But remember Reckless Attack only works when attacking with Strength, so will not work if you are trying to build a Dex based build to get the most out of Unarmored Defense. The DM would hopefully, but not even close to presumably, be providing you with magic items. And hopefully some that will actually be useful to you, absolutely not a guarantee. Rage is not used for the damage bonus, for the most part, as the damage bonus is pure and utter garbage. So that part is less important, but again Reckless Attack doesn't work on non Strength based attacks, which is the only way the Barbarian is getting Advantage reliably, which still isn't going to make them all that likely to crit in any given fight. If you manage to max out Dex and Con, this will not happen by 9th level, and probably not before say 16th level, you can have comparable AC to someone with non-magical Plate and a Shield, but not a Fighter or Paladin with non-magical Plate and a Shield. Magical armor and shields are also more common than the few items that could potentially increase the Barbarian's AC, and most of the items that can increase the Barbarian's AC will also increase the AC of the Fighter or Paladin. That said a Raging Barbarian can take more punishment, depending on damage type, but most of them end up with mediocre to bad AC. Oh and by the way NEVER go Assassin. It is a garbage fire. It is absolutely terrible. There are a few vaguely useful abilities, but the big thing is based off Surprise. And that doesn't happen without an extremely kind, or incompetent, DM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Rogue doesn't Dodge as a bonus action. Ah yeah that's right, I got it mixed up with the Monk's patient defense. It's still pretty drat good though with the damage resistance and high AC and deep HP. Assassins get guaranteed crits if they get surprise rounds, and then advantage is advantage so as long as the party has a little bit of tact you'll be hitting those brutal crits fairly often. quote:Oh and by the way NEVER go Assassin. It is a garbage fire. It is absolutely terrible. There are a few vaguely useful abilities, but the big thing is based off Surprise. And that doesn't happen without an extremely kind, or incompetent, DM. I'd flip that and say you guys have some dickhead DMs if everything that doesn't have a Lair its currently occupying is constantly alert and omniscient, but every table's different I guess. Willie Tomg fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Jun 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Rogue doesn't Dodge as a bonus action. The first round, assuming you can surprise your opponents. Assassins automatically crit if they hit a surprised target.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:05
|
|
|
What if you're not the attacker?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:Ah yeah that's right, I got it mixed up with the Monk's patient defense. It's still pretty drat good though with the damage resistance and high AC and deep HP. It's just a little bit of extra damage once per battle when the stars align and you get to Surprise and go first and hit with your attacks (4d8+4d6 at level 12 assuming you hit with both) - nothing to write home about. Naked AC is also merely comparable to half plate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:11
|
|