|
Honestly the Heroics Paladin seems partially inspired by this logic.  Except it's win and look cool.
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
I like advantage, but I do feel it's overused. Especially since they essentially capped AC and such, it makes more sense to me to have tiers +2/+5/Advantage. Which is what I houseruled flanking to be. Basic positioning giving advantage is way too powerful. Not necessarily for the players, but for my monsters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Can I grapple someone as an astral monk and keep beating rear end if my arms are summoned? I have two pairs at that point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
Nasgate posted:I like advantage, but I do feel it's overused. Especially since they essentially capped AC and such, it makes more sense to me to have tiers +2/+5/Advantage. Which is what I houseruled flanking to be. Basic positioning giving advantage is way too powerful. Not necessarily for the players, but for my monsters. Advantage maths out to be statistically equivalent to about +5 on average rolls and +2 on difficult ones. Also if you don't like Advantage why are you using flanking?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Nasgate posted:I like advantage, but I do feel it's overused. Especially since they essentially capped AC and such, it makes more sense to me to have tiers +2/+5/Advantage. Which is what I houseruled flanking to be. Basic positioning giving advantage is way too powerful. Not necessarily for the players, but for my monsters. The weird thing about advantage is that its effect on your odds of success are tricky to calculate. Like, if they have an AC of 16 and I have a +4 to hit then I have about 40% odds to hit. If I have advantage then how does that change my odds? It's definitely doable to calculate but not nearly as easy as a straightforward addition/subtraction. Advantage also has relatively little effect at the extreme ends of the scale. If my wizard needs to make a DC20 STR check, then having advantage doesn't substantially improve his odds. I like Kaiser Schnitzel's idea of just handing out additional die-based modifiers. I haven't thought deeply about it though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:17
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The weird thing about advantage is that its effect on your odds of success are tricky to calculate. Like, if they have an AC of 16 and I have a +4 to hit then I have about 40% odds to hit. If I have advantage then how does that change my odds? It's definitely doable to calculate but not nearly as easy as a straightforward addition/subtraction. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:20
|
|
|
Nasgate posted:I like advantage, but I do feel it's overused. Especially since they essentially capped AC and such, it makes more sense to me to have tiers +2/+5/Advantage. Which is what I houseruled flanking to be. Basic positioning giving advantage is way too powerful. Not necessarily for the players, but for my monsters. I normally use Advantage normally, but I have Flanking as just a plain +2 so that it's a bonus, but not a massive one like advantage. change my name posted:Can I grapple someone as an astral monk and keep beating rear end if my arms are summoned? I have two pairs at that point. I would say yeah, cause it's cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
The fact that people made a table to tell you how advantage/disadvantage affects your odds rather proves my point, doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
I like that advantage won't do much to fatten a slim chance, so you can't easily brute force a tall order just by stacking bonuses. On the other hand, it's clear they had an idea on how to hand out other types of bonuses in the form of Inspiration and Blessing, and then they just... dropped it almost completely. I might start trying out bonus dice as a supplement/replacement for advantage in my own campaign, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:26
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The fact that people made a table to tell you how advantage/disadvantage affects your odds rather proves my point, doesn't it? No, because the actual values don't matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
Oath of Heroism is so perfect for my current character my DM and I just decided I could switch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The fact that people made a table to tell you how advantage/disadvantage affects your odds rather proves my point, doesn't it? Nope, that’s good practice for any dice system. Probability isn’t intuitive and visualizing distributions or at least comparing tables is always a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
I just DM'd a great session last night that I want to share because it felt like great D&D. I've described the party and setting before, but basically it's a group of 6-7 colleagues who are mostly completely new to D&D. I ran them through Sunless Citadel 1-3 to learn the ropes and then started them on my own adventure, an intrigue/murder mystery type deal. They arrive to the capital of the kingdom they've so far resided in to learn that the king is suffering from a strange illness and is dying. Rumours around town are that the royal doctor thinks he's got about a week to live. In the city are some minor characters and two major players: the Borghese family, who are old money and run a slavers' market as their primary source of income, and the Tinker family, who are (very) new money and run a smith and a bank. The players learn that the two families have historically been at odds, but that they have started to establish more friendly relations lately. There are some minor secrets the players can find to use as leverage (a daughter of the Borghese family is in love with the son of the Tinker family, the king has a bastard) but mainly the goal is to find out what's going on with the king and possibly save him. The players learned last session that the Borghese family used to sell child slaves on their market too, but stopped doing this a couple of years ago. At some point, a couple of players in the group decided that there must be a connection between this and the king's illness. They tried snooping around, tried bribing slavers' market guards and even tried to approach the Borghese family directly and buy a child slave to gauge their reaction, and all they really learned from that was that the Borghese family still acquired child slaves but sold them all, in secret, to a single buyer. One of the players called out "they're sacrificing them for blood magic!" which is exactly correct, though they didn't know who was doing this and to what ends. To get to the bottom of this, the slightly unlucky and so far ineffective gnome wizard used Disguise Self to turn himself into a human child, swallowed the party's Ring of Tracking (a magic ring that when attuned lets the attunee know where it is for 24 hours) and then two other party members sold him to the Borghese family. He was packed into a concealed crate in the back room of the Slavers Market and the Cleric, who was attuned to the ring, then received real-time updates about where the crate was being moved to. I've previously made a map of the city and the players have identified and visited all major hotspots of the city at this point, so they were very curious to see, where the crate was going. In a separate room, I revealed to the Wizard that he saw light again when the box was opened in a cellar, at which point he saw two old men, one of which he recognized as the head of the Tinker family. He was thrown in a cage that already held two other children, and he overheard the two men say, that they would sacrifice all three children the next morning. The other players didn't know about this time table, so when I described the transport carrying the crate turning off towards the Tinker villa, everyone gasped and panicked. They engaged on an impromptu late-night rescue mission to get their gnome friend (who at this point had turned back into a gnome, after the captors had left) out. They managed to save both their party member and the two children right before we ended the session. I hope next time that the players pull just a couple more strings to learn the truth: The recent wealth of the Tinker family comes from using blood magic to craft powerful magic weapons and armor, which is why they have negotiated for exclusive rights to child slaves with the Borghese family. Both families have initially gained wealth and power from this move, leading to them colluding to poison the king to then vie for power over the kingdom. I realized too late that much of what I was setting the players up to do would realistically be better suited for much higher level players than 3-4, but I've tried to dial back expectations a bit by making it clear that this is a tiny kingdom with little outside influence. Once the king is either saved or replaced, a northern kingdom will go to war against the campaign kingdom, and the players will ultimately lose that war, to help teach them that they are not, yet, all-powerful. But really, I just loved that I was playing a game with colleagues and friends where one (my direct supervisor) described turning himself into an 8-year old boy and swallowing a magic ring so his friends could sell him into slavery.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
They both seem fine to play but I'm bummed about the Bard. I've wanted to do an orator bard before and this doesn't really feel like it grabs me. Bard is already a class really focused on the crunch and this feels like more of the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
I just read that Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron is getting updated with the Artificer class in November, but with only one subclass. Have they specified which? It's pretty likely that it'll be one of the three going into RFtLW, but I'm wondering if there's a chance Wayfinder's will end up with Archivist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
The Mash posted:
I just want to imagine this line without context. The Mash posted:Once the king is either saved or replaced, a northern kingdom will go to war against the campaign kingdom, and the players will ultimately lose that war, to help teach them that they are not, yet, all-powerful. The current Kingdom sounds like an rear end in a top hat what with the major players being slavers and blood magic creeps. So I doubt many will mourn it. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Sep 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:I just read that Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron is getting updated with the Artificer class in November, but with only one subclass. Have they specified which? It's pretty likely that it'll be one of the three going into RFtLW, but I'm wondering if there's a chance Wayfinder's will end up with Archivist. Alchemist. The three full classes will be Alchemist, Artillerist, and Battlesmith. Homunculus will now be available to all Artificers and Artillerist is going to get some of the Gunsmiths stuff, from what I heard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
Rip_Van_Winkle posted:Expedious Retreat really should've been renamed to just "Expedite" or "Swiftness" or something because hoo boy it's a dumb name for a spell that almost never gets used to retreat but muh tradishuns you do know what edition you're playing right
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The weird thing about advantage is that its effect on your odds of success are tricky to calculate. Like, if they have an AC of 16 and I have a +4 to hit then I have about 40% odds to hit. If I have advantage then how does that change my odds? It's definitely doable to calculate but not nearly as easy as a straightforward addition/subtraction. With disadvantage it's chance to hit * chance to hit I don't like advantage because it lacks granularity and as a result is oversaturated, but statewise it's pretty straightforward
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Alchemist. I was really hoping that they weren't gonna stick with the pet features. Cool that some of the gunsmith stuff is coming back though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Haven't pets been a part of the Artificer since forever? At least the 5e ones seem okay/useful. As someone who played a 4e artificer let me tell you: those pets were not what I was thinking of when I took the class.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
It's interesting that they went that route (Artillerist = gunsmith) because one of the best ways to play an Artificer right now, at least in a low-level game, is a Battlesmith with a heavy crossbow (or gun, campaign permitting), stacking the Repeating Weapon infusion, the Arcane Weapon spell, and (spec-granted) Smites and being a ranged DPS machine with some utility and a decent pet. If Artillerist becomes the new gunsmith spec, I guess they'll just lean more into Battlesmith being an explicitly melee-combat oriented one or something? I don't deny that Artillerist sucked rear end in the last version, both conceptually and mechanically, but I'm sad to see Archivist abandoned instead of being tuned.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
Cthulu Carl posted:Expeditious Retreat seems to makes sense too if you view it as "charging into the thick of battle"/"Swooping in to rescue an ally in need" For sure. And also there's the example of the Marathon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Advantage maths out to be statistically equivalent to about +5 on average rolls and +2 on difficult ones. Also if you don't like Advantage why are you using flanking? Which is why advantage for flanking is too powerful. Similar level cr to player level, the game has been made so that accuracy and AC meet well enough so everyone hits regularly on average rolls. You could easily tpk with kobolds using advantage for flanking for quite a few levels. I'm using flanking because D&D is designed around combat, so may as well try to make it interesting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 05:15
|
|
|
Doctor, it hurts when I do this...
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I just want to imagine this line without context. The players will have the chance to influence who becomes king (or if the current King survives). If the players confront either of the two powerful families, those families will attempt to bribe or fight the players. It's up to the players whether the two dominant rear end in a top hat families still exist at the end of the adventure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 07:32
|
|
|
Flanking is absolutely necessary because fighters need stuff that can make them stay good in combat without needing the complexity of 4e martial classes or 3.5 charop shenanigans. The obvious solution to a kobold swarm being overpowered is to not go out of your way to tpk your players.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 07:33
|
|
|
Flanking is decent. But as mentioned I do think Advantage is a bit too good for getting it. The simple +2 works wonders as long as it is not stacked up too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 07:45
|
|
|
rodbeard posted:Flanking is absolutely necessary because fighters need stuff that can make them stay good in combat without needing the complexity of 4e martial classes or 3.5 charop shenanigans. The obvious solution to a kobold swarm being overpowered is to not go out of your way to tpk your players. A person without a firm grasp of math may not understand just how powerful a group of flanking kobolds can be without some level of help. I wouldn't say it's them going out of their way, and is closer to a natural consequence. If you're using flanking rules, you have to go out of your way not to do that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 13:47
|
|
|
I’m just gonna start poaching abilities and stuff from 4e for my group, like minions and special actions for fighters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
"Advantage for flanking is too powerful!" people say in a game where literally any source of Disadvantage cancels it out. If you crave more detailed combat, this isn't the game for you. If you don't crave more detailed combat and are houseruling Advantage, you probably don't understand the game very well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 14:13
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:I’m just gonna start poaching abilities and stuff from 4e for my group, like minions and special actions for fighters. I tend to use the base statlines from 5E monsters with abilities and other interesting things from 4E. Or just make things entirely off of the statlines from gradenko's calculator and stapling on abilities and flavor, though sometimes if the monster already actually exists it can throw off the players if it is significantly stronger/weaker than they expected. Thankfully my table hasn't played any DND outside of our game in a decade and don't have much meta-gaming knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 14:18
|
|
|
homullus posted:I cannot imagine how advantage-disadvantage is a leading cause of issues with the system. I cannot connect those dots -- what is the difference between going for advantage vs. going for more granular situational bonuses, except that the latter takes more time and math? homullus posted:literally any source of Disadvantage cancels it out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 14:22
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:A person without a firm grasp of math may not understand just how powerful a group of flanking kobolds can be without some level of help. I wouldn't say it's them going out of their way, and is closer to a natural consequence. If you're using flanking rules, you have to go out of your way not to do that. They don't even need to flank - all you need is a single kobold marching forward and now all his friends can shoot you with advantage from behind cover. homullus posted:"Advantage for flanking is too powerful!" people say in a game where literally any source of Disadvantage cancels it out. Sources of disadvantage are nowhere near as ubiquitous as you can make flanking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
homullus posted:"Advantage for flanking is too powerful!" people say in a game where literally any source of Disadvantage cancels it out. Ah yes, disadvantage, which is extremely rare compared to advantage, completely evens out being able to get advantage by moving one square. How could I have forgotten  Verisimilidude posted:I’m just gonna start poaching abilities and stuff from 4e for my group, like minions and special actions for fighters. The first time I had a unit use an ability to make their allies move, everyone lost their minds(in a good way) because I'm the only person that played 4e
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
Flanking sucks because it causes the 4e conga line poo poo
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Flanking is decent. But as mentioned I do think Advantage is a bit too good for getting it. The simple +2 works wonders as long as it is not stacked up too much. Do you still let Rogues get sneak attack when they flank an enemy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
Epi Lepi posted:Do you still let Rogues get sneak attack when they flank an enemy? Well, given that if they're flanking that means an ally is adjacent by definition I would really hope so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 17:10
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:They don't even need to flank - all you need is a single kobold marching forward and now all his friends can shoot you with advantage from behind cover. Nasgate posted:Ah yes, disadvantage, which is extremely rare compared to advantage, completely evens out being able to get advantage by moving one square. How could I have forgotten The DM has 100% control over how much the monsters flank, and enormous control over the availability of PC flanking in an encounter (as well as encounter-specific sources of disadvantage). Did you guys flunk flank or something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
Pendent posted:Well, given that if they're flanking that means an ally is adjacent by definition I would really hope so. I don't remember the wording for sneak attack but I'm guessing from your post that it specifically calls out the adjacent ally bit which makes sense since flanking is an optional rule. I just remember sneak attack as "you have it when you have advantage" so I guess I'm dumb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 17:46
|
|