|
GHOST_BUTT posted:How's Out of the Abyss? We're wrapping up the Across Eberron adventure path soonish and I'm trying to figure out what to run next without having to actually write a story or do things. I had a lot of fun with it. The book suggests it can be used as an open world / sourcebook but it’s really best just run as a linear adventure. It would probably require the least tweaking and the Underdark is a good place for weird shenanigans.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 13:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
Finally got my bear in our Eberron game, right before we go into the Mournelands. I'm not sure how non-horse barding/armor works, but I'm going to annoy our artificer with crudely drawn, crayon-level "schematics" of an armored bear until he helps me figure it out
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 14:14
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:I would suggest Dragon of Icespire Peak -> Storm Lord's Wrath -> Sleeping Dragon's Wake -> Divine Contention Thank you this is very helpful! Except I just found out one of my players has already done icespire peak and Mines. Is there another good initial campaign? Spikes32 fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Aug 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
Hi everyone. I've been running a small 5e core d&d campaign locally for about a year now. I would consider myself a 'novice dungeon master'. I've got 3 regulars, and occasionally a rotating 4th chair for anyone who wants to get involved, and I could use some advice with a problem I'm have. For some context, I've put together a pretty traditional homebrew fantasy world, supplied the party with maps, cities, ruins, mysterious dungeons, with various plot-hooks and sources of motivations for their characters to engage in, while trying to tailor the narrative to the players interests/characters/suggestions. The problem is they're having a great time, and I'm not. The players are extremely, extremely passive, and generally just want to 'do the next thing'. They'll outright ask for the challenge rating, and it feels like I'm simulating a computer game for them more than collaborative interaction. It seems no amount of coaxing will break them from this habit, and that's the experience they want. I realize some dungeon masters would love passive players who enjoy being 'on rails', but I'm bored out of my mind. I imagine many DMs run into this problem. Any advice on how to deal with a DM/players mismatch, and how to enjoy running stories for this type of player?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
I'm finding that of the 5 people in our group, the only two people who seem to engage in the non-combat RP stuff are me and the guy playing our artificer. Which is fine, it's not everyone's cup of tea but it does feel awkward when I'm trying to get info from NPCs and saying "so, can anyone think of anything else we need to ask? Am I missing something?" and there's dead silence from everyone else That said, I'm enjoying being this infinitely optimistic hero-to-be going on and on about justice and helping everyone everywhere, and I've been given Inspiration a few times for it
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Spikes32 posted:Thank you this is very helpful! Except I just found out one of my players has already done icespire peak and Mines. Is there another good initial campaign? It depends a bit on what you're looking for, because some people really want sandbox settings, while others are looking for adventure narratives. I tend to fall in the latter camp (I prefer expanding on a story-on-rails to inserting one into GTA 5e), but a lot of the consensus favorites tend to be modules like Curse of Strahd or Storm King's Thunder, which are extremely open-ended. I'd suggest starting with Lost Mine of Phandalin and then transitioning into Hoard of the Dragon Queen. They have good, detailed, stories and hit all the classic 5e tropes very well. If your players have already done them (which is very possible, since they were the first released modules) then check out "Waterdeep Heist" or "Ghosts of Saltmarsh". There's lots of good DM resources out there, but I'd start with SlyFlourish's campaign guides, which offer advice for each chapter of the official modules. https://slyflourish.com/guide_to_published_adventures.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Hi everyone. I've been running a small 5e core d&d campaign locally for about a year now. I would consider myself a 'novice dungeon master'. I've got 3 regulars, and occasionally a rotating 4th chair for anyone who wants to get involved, and I could use some advice with a problem I'm have. Hello, fellow new DM here. If you want to encourage collaborative storytelling, why not leave some holes in your setting and ask players to fill them in? For example, plan to have the party go to a new region that ties into one particular player's backstory, and while you are planning the session, have a short discussion with that player to flesh out that region. During that session, allow that PC to act as the expert for that region and the people who live there. I recently did something similar with one of my players, and this is the list that I used when we were discussing stuff to flesh out the setting: What's the weather normally like where you are from? What the most dangerous season? What is the normal wildlife like? Does your culture keep animals as pets? Livestock? What plants grow there? What sorts of things do you do with natural materials? What sorts of predators live in the area? Do they hunt in packs? Are they solo hunters? How does your culture deal with them, or keep the predators away from areas that you want to protect? We said previously that you lived in an area that was both coastal and mountainous. How did your tribe settle there? Why did they pick this spot? Are there other tribes, or other races, in the area? How does your culture view mining? Agriculture? Art? Architecture? Do you live in permanent buildings? Are you nomadic, and live in tents? etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
Tenik posted:Hello, fellow new DM here. If you want to encourage collaborative storytelling, why not leave some holes in your setting and ask players to fill them in? For example, plan to have the party go to a new region that ties into one particular player's backstory, and while you are planning the session, have a short discussion with that player to flesh out that region. During that session, allow that PC to act as the expert for that region and the people who live there. I recently did something similar with one of my players, and this is the list that I used when we were discussing stuff to flesh out the setting: Great idea. I really like the idea of couching it as an 'expert'. It places a player in a position of responsibility. I had gone down this route before, but I got sort of non-committal answers, or the players outright asking me to decide some of these things. "I dunno you're the DM." (to be clear, my players aren't hostile in any sense, but maybe a lot more passive than you may be imagining).
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
Perhaps a silly question, but beyond coaxing and creating opportunities, have you talked to them about this? Just explaining frankly that you feel like you're doing too much of the creative heavy lifting and you need them to pick up some slack for you to have fun could be really positive. Ultimately if they don't know you're not having fun, they're probably not gonna change anything. But if they're having a great time and they know that time is at risk because you're not having a good time, they're way more likely to put the effort in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Great idea. I really like the idea of couching it as an 'expert'. It places a player in a position of responsibility. I had gone down this route before, but I got sort of non-committal answers, or the players outright asking me to decide some of these things. "I dunno you're the DM." (to be clear, my players aren't hostile in any sense, but maybe a lot more passive than you may be imagining). Haha, I had the same response when I first tried it mid-session, but I think it was because I blindsided that player with my question. It worked a lot better when I asked the player outside of the game, and gave them a day or two to think about stuff. Pork's suggestion of talking about it openly is good, too. Clear and honest communication is always good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
We have a rule where you're supposed to avoid numbers and mechanics and keep your descriptions in character as much as possible. "I do 12 bludgeoning damage." or "I heal you for 8 hp." is allowed, of course, but not "I have 16 hp left." Instead they'll say things like "I'm pretty hurt and could use a heal." or "I'm barely alive. Hell, I don't even know how I'm still standing." when they only have a few hp left and stuff like that. Same with weapons and stuff. One of my guys got Kneecapper, a greatsword that does 2d6 extra damage to huge and larger creatures. I described it as a weapon forged specifically to deal with the tribe of hill giants that roam the area, particularly effective against big targets but nothing special against anything smaller. The player got the stats in the handout, but I don't even think he discussed the numbers with the other players, just that it was good against big stuff. If they were to ask about the CR of a monster, or the DC of a roll they failed or whatever I'd shut that poo poo down hard, period. "You don't (get to) know." is the easy answer. CR is entirely on the DM side of things, so they shouldn't even ask. This is all generally speaking, of course. Sometimes they (or even I as the dm) slip, and that's okay. There's room for ooc discussion of mechanics and stuff, and banter after the action or session of course, but there's a time and place for everything. Instituting this rule really helped the players to think of their characters as a role to play, instead of a statblock in a game. The numbers are just a representation of a character and their abilities, so use them that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
pork never goes bad posted:Perhaps a silly question, but beyond coaxing and creating opportunities, have you talked to them about this? Just explaining frankly that you feel like you're doing too much of the creative heavy lifting and you need them to pick up some slack for you to have fun could be really positive. Ultimately if they don't know you're not having fun, they're probably not gonna change anything. But if they're having a great time and they know that time is at risk because you're not having a good time, they're way more likely to put the effort in. I haven't outright said "I'm not having fun", that kind of seems like the nuclear option to me. I've definitely spoke to them, asked what they've wanted out of the game, but any creative question about their character feels like I am giving them homework. They say they'll think about it, but rarely get back to me. The most I've gotten out of them is "We need more healing." (there's no reason they couldn't go on some quests to acquire enough gold to purchase healing potions, or find an alchemist, or play a cleric, go to a mysterious floating island of inter-dimensional elves that are into antiquities trading.) But, I'm often met with "what do YOU think we should do?" when I present choices to the players. I find myself saying "I can't play your characters for you." and "I can't make these decisions for you" about 3-4 times a session. I'm kind of thinking of just digging through old obscure 2nd editions modules and adapting them to 5e, since it'd lighten my workload... or maybe find some sort of online dungeon generator and just go through the motions of monster fights to fill up the sessions. That being said, I feel like I am maybe missing some important aspect about DMing...
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 18:57
|
|
|
I think what you're missing is a group that's right for you. I'd go for the nuclear option. Tell them you're not having fun because all you're doing is running the numbers for them, and they should find a multiplayer computer game or cooperative board game if that's what they want. Tou don't have to be their computer for them if you're not enjoying it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
I might be joining an online game soon. If it comes together I'm thinking of playing a Dwarven alchemy artificer who's potions are their craftbrews. Any tips or pitfalls to watch out for. GM will likely allow everyone to take a bonus feat at level 1, and probs starting level 3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
Taeke posted:I think what you're missing is a group that's right for you. Yeah, I might wait until I wrap up this part of the story, but I think pivoting to a different game is the way to go with this group. They all have more d&d experience than me (which seems to be a problem, because they often refer to past rulings from different games (path finder, 3.5, other DM's house rulings), which leads to confusion. An example is a player finally got back to me requesting a staff of healing (it can only be attuned to a cleric, druid, or bard. none of which are in the party). I could easily house-rule it in for convenience or whatever, or turn it into a quest. The problem I'm having is not understanding if I'm even engaging the game correctly? Am I having a common problem, or is it an outlier issue with DMs/Players?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:I haven't outright said "I'm not having fun", that kind of seems like the nuclear option to me. I've definitely spoke to them, asked what they've wanted out of the game, but any creative question about their character feels like I am giving them homework. During a session, is there any point where it’s clear the players are having a lot of fun? If so, do more of that - maybe they don’t know what they want out of the game, or don’t know how to phrase it, but you might be able to guess. That said, if that makes the game into something you don’t enjoy, you aren’t obligated to keep running for this group. If you can’t pick out anything your players particularly enjoy and they won’t talk to you about it, that’s a good sign that’s nobody really wants to be there and it’s time to pack it in and find a new group.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Yeah, I might wait until I wrap up this part of the story, but I think pivoting to a different game is the way to go with this group. They all have more d&d experience than me (which seems to be a problem, because they often refer to past rulings from different games (path finder, 3.5, other DM's house rulings), which leads to confusion. An example is a player finally got back to me requesting a staff of healing (it can only be attuned to a cleric, druid, or bard. none of which are in the party). I could easily house-rule it in for convenience or whatever, or turn it into a quest. The problem I'm having is not understanding if I'm even engaging the game correctly? Am I having a common problem, or is it an outlier issue with DMs/Players? Sounds like you want a collaborative game with an open world that the PCs call home, and your players want a familiar tactical strategy game filled with predictable skirmishes. 5e is a game that can fill both of those niches, but not all groups/players/DMs want to engage with those sides of the game in equal measures. If there's some mismatch between you and your players, that's fine, and there's nothing wrong with your preferences. You just want to do different things. Soylent Pudding posted:I might be joining an online game soon. If it comes together I'm thinking of playing a Dwarven alchemy artificer who's potions are their craftbrews. Any tips or pitfalls to watch out for. GM will likely allow everyone to take a bonus feat at level 1, and probs starting level 3. I'm DMing for a tiefling alchemy artificer right now. As neat of a concept it is, the main class doesn't really do enough to embrace the idea that you are crafting new items, and the subclass doesn't focus on the concept of alchemy enough. Ask your DM if the two of you can iron out some rules for crafting potions or other magic items, and try to embrace the idea of consumables and the setting's economy. As a DM, Artificers seem like they could be a really neat class concept, since their infusions interact with a different side of how games are normally balanced, but that also means that the DM has to buy in to that being your character's identity and coming up with ways to integrate your special mechanics most sessions. I'm uh, still trying to find a good way to do that with my game's artificer...
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:The problem I'm having is not understanding if I'm even engaging the game correctly? Am I having a common problem, or is it an outlier issue with DMs/Players? If you're not enjoying yourself in a group activity, that is not your fault. Don't martyr yourself here. It's good for everyone to be open about what kind of game they want to play/run, and regardless of whether those desires are "outliers", people should be reasonable about meeting other peoples' expectations. Hell, the DM is the first person who should be enjoying themselves, because odds are if the DM isn't having fun, then that will impact everyone else's experiences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Yeah, I might wait until I wrap up this part of the story, but I think pivoting to a different game is the way to go with this group. They all have more d&d experience than me (which seems to be a problem, because they often refer to past rulings from different games (path finder, 3.5, other DM's house rulings), which leads to confusion. An example is a player finally got back to me requesting a staff of healing (it can only be attuned to a cleric, druid, or bard. none of which are in the party). I could easily house-rule it in for convenience or whatever, or turn it into a quest. The problem I'm having is not understanding if I'm even engaging the game correctly? Am I having a common problem, or is it an outlier issue with DMs/Players? I'm fairly inexperienced as well, so others could probably be more help. I was briefly in a group like the one you describe, dm included, as a player though, and I quit after two sessions. It just wasn't the right fit. He'd do the adventure strictly by the book, roleplaying was limited to quips during battle (if that) and it was boring as gently caress. We'd hand in the quest item to the npc and there wouldn't be any roleplaying at all. Just a "he thanks you for the item and gives you your reward. With the info you give him he concludes that x is the next place to go. He wishes you well." We got to a city where there was an eternal light shining on it all day and all night. Intriguing stuff, so I ask if there's other people on the road as we approach the city. Bustling merchant center, so yeah. I ask a random passerby if they could tell me more. Nope, it's just always been like that. I ask the DM if maybe there's a temple or something where I could get some more info on it. "Probably, but they won't want to tell you. It's not relevant to the story anyway." Alrighty then. I'm super lucky with the group I'm DMing now. We're all pretty close personal friends of varying levels of experience, and just gel really well together. One of the players is super experienced as a player and dm but new to 5e, but he lets me do my thing and only giving advice when I ask for it or he notices I'm struggling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Hi everyone. I've been running a small 5e core d&d campaign locally for about a year now. I would consider myself a 'novice dungeon master'. I've got 3 regulars, and occasionally a rotating 4th chair for anyone who wants to get involved, and I could use some advice with a problem I'm have. Get them to play Gloomhaven instead? It sounds like exactly what your group wants out of DnD. Explore a fantasy world, do some tactical combat with a character that you can customize as you use them more, go through a story. You'd probably enjoy it more too, since you wouldn't have to do all the prep work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Yeah, I might wait until I wrap up this part of the story, but I think pivoting to a different game is the way to go with this group. They all have more d&d experience than me (which seems to be a problem, because they often refer to past rulings from different games (path finder, 3.5, other DM's house rulings), which leads to confusion. An example is a player finally got back to me requesting a staff of healing (it can only be attuned to a cleric, druid, or bard. none of which are in the party). I could easily house-rule it in for convenience or whatever, or turn it into a quest. The problem I'm having is not understanding if I'm even engaging the game correctly? Am I having a common problem, or is it an outlier issue with DMs/Players? Not sure if this is helpful, and probably not any different from what others have already said, but definitely communicate with the rest of your group. I had a group break up earlier this year because the DM and the players had different expectations of the game we were playing and the DM finally blew up after maybe six months or so. He was expecting something sandboxy, half the players just wanted to try out interesting builds and play whack-a-mole and the rest of us weren't the type to rock the boat so we just went along with whatever and weren't terribly active. It sucks because we'd been playing with them for 6 or 7 years and they're good people, but the game kinda rolled out in an odd way and that definitely didn't help.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 21:43
|
|
|
Not to rehash edition wars, but why was there such a large kickback against 4e? From what I gather, combat was changed up significantly but that can't be the only reason? 4e brought back Dark Sun, so it can't be all bad
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Not to rehash edition wars, but why was there such a large kickback against 4e? From what I gather, combat was changed up significantly but that can't be the only reason?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
Is there any reason not to go battlemaster fighter after level 5 for my beastmaster ranger? Revised ranger's perks past that are... fine, I don't super care about my bear getting better saving throws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:11
|
|
|
Thanks for the solid advice everyone. I'm realizing there's definitely a player mismatch. I don't want to be their Dungeon Mom, and I have to accept I'm not going to get player engagement at the level I find enjoyable. I may just have fun and throw them in a series of rooms until I wrap up my story and then quietly never mention wanting to run a game again to them. Maybe each room has one more gold in in than the last room. They'll love it. They've genuinely been telling me they've been having a great time playing through my story too. I think the most baffling think to me is I took the "make the game you'd like to play yourself" approach... Turns out, my player group is from a completely different planet than I am, and they seem very happy to let me take the reins and tell them what to do... I just have no desire to do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:15
|
|
|
change my name posted:Is there any reason not to go battlemaster fighter after level 5 for my beastmaster ranger? Revised ranger's perks past that are... fine, I don't super care about my bear getting better saving throws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:20
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Recused Ranger? Your bear's HP and ability score increases are tied to your ranger level not your hero level Revised ranger's pet gets ASIs when you do and uses your proficiency score for a bunch of things (including AC and damage), your ranger level isn't tied to it at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
hell astro course posted:Thanks for the solid advice everyone. I'm realizing there's definitely a player mismatch. I don't want to be their Dungeon Mom, and I have to accept I'm not going to get player engagement at the level I find enjoyable. I may just have fun and throw them in a series of rooms until I wrap up my story and then quietly never mention wanting to run a game again to them. Maybe each room has one more gold in in than the last room. They'll love it. They've genuinely been telling me they've been having a great time playing through my story too. For what it's worth, this sort of issue is definitely part of why I like having adventures with strong narratives. When players are willing to participate in collaborative storytelling it's generally really easy to adapt because there's already plenty to draw from, and when they aren't that into it then the DM doesn't have to carry all the creative weight. I'd suggest looking through a list of premade mini-modules (such as Adventurers League) and finding a couple that look related to the story you want to tell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:40
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Technically about why fighters can't have nice things but it's only a month old so *shrug* It's good, one genuine question: I see Big 4E Guys make the claim that 4E massively outsold 3E and Pathfinder and every other game under the sun all the time without ever attributing it. Is there any non-anecdotal evidence of that? Cuz like in my experience trying to figure out those kind of numbers for games and hobbies is tough. I get why it's frustrating, though; it seems pretty clear at a casual observation that Age of Sigmar becoming a real game is a part of GW's killer financials for the last few years, a thing that some Warhammer people categorically refuse to believe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Baku posted:It's good, one genuine question: I see Big 4E Guys make the claim that 4E massively outsold 3E and Pathfinder and every other game under the sun all the time without ever attributing it. Is there any non-anecdotal evidence of that? Every single edition of D&D has outsold the previous edition and nobody has ever outsold D&D. You can google the WotC quarterly sales calls, but it's not anecdotal edition warring and anyone selling games could tell you it's obvious to them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Not to rehash edition wars, but why was there such a large kickback against 4e? From what I gather, combat was changed up significantly but that can't be the only reason? - Splicer explains it pretty well in that post. Paizo weaponized incurious 3E grognards and toxic players who like the bad things about 3E to sell more copies of Pathfinder, extending 3E's popularity well past its sell-by date. - 4E is a lot more structured and isn't trying to sell itself as a magnificent toolset to do absolutely anything. 4E is about dungeon crawls. There isn't a subsystem to figure out how many d4s of coppers you can make by crafting xd6 leather jerkins a day. There aren't seven maneuverability models for flying creatures. There's not a handbook for designing and purchasing custom castles. 4E is not trying to sell itself as a simulation of whatever the hell is going on in 3E. - The relative complexity and fine tuning of the design is such that it's actually pretty hard to make custom content for 4E, even if there was still an OGL. As Splicer points out, in 3E the points are made up and the rules don't matter, so go ahead, whip up an entire spellcaster class in an afternoon, there's nothing there to wreck with your idea. - 4E lore is designed to be functional to its focus and is otherwise pretty bare-bones, often crossing the line into dull. Meanwhile, 3E books were bathroom reader tomes about cultures and how they interact. So while a lot of absurdity has been dispensed with, 4E is not trying that hard to suck anyone in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Had my very first session this Saturday. I'm doing a hybrid thing where I've created my own setting and inciting event that's going to segue in to Dragons of Icespire peak (with some names changed). My group has 5 folks only two of which have ever played D&D at all (and none in 5e). First session was reviewed pretty well so I'm encouraged going forward. For the following it's relevant that we're playing fully remote thanks to social distancing. The biggest obstacle to fun was actually more to do with fighting with roll20. It's really nice to be able to click on a character sheet and have it execute the right rolls but map management feels really clunky. Does anyone have a preferred tutorial video? I've viewed the ones on roll20 itself but honestly found them not amazing. I feel like I want to watch something made by someone not affiliated with roll20 who might give tips on common Roll20 gotchas. Also, my wife made an interesting observation. Since we're playing remotely there are times (particularly during improvised scenes) that the players are kinda left staring at nothing. She mentioned it might be nice to have some generic fantasy art I can put up. The inside of a shop, a field or castle, a bustling town and the like that I can slide in as just something to help set the mood. Obviously I can't just pre-prep for every random tangent my party goes on but I could pre-load some more obvious stuff. Anyone tried this? Any artists you like? We are not doing video chat which I know is not ideal but a good chunk of my party simply can't participate in the video aspect (lack of camera, broken camera etc).
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
Quiet Feet posted:Not sure if this is helpful, and probably not any different from what others have already said, but definitely communicate with the rest of your group. I had a group break up earlier this year because the DM and the players had different expectations of the game we were playing and the DM finally blew up after maybe six months or so. He was expecting something sandboxy, half the players just wanted to try out interesting builds and play whack-a-mole and the rest of us weren't the type to rock the boat so we just went along with whatever and weren't terribly active. It sucks because we'd been playing with them for 6 or 7 years and they're good people, but the game kinda rolled out in an odd way and that definitely didn't help. hell astro course posted:Thanks for the solid advice everyone. I'm realizing there's definitely a player mismatch. I don't want to be their Dungeon Mom, and I have to accept I'm not going to get player engagement at the level I find enjoyable. I may just have fun and throw them in a series of rooms until I wrap up my story and then quietly never mention wanting to run a game again to them. Maybe each room has one more gold in in than the last room. They'll love it. They've genuinely been telling me they've been having a great time playing through my story too. I wanna reiterate that talking to your players and expressing how you're feeling isn't a nuclear option, and it isn't nearly as scary as it can sound if you're not used to that sort of conversation, and you should communicate your needs and expectations to the group. If they aren't on board with what you want, then as suggested play Gloomhaven (or Kingdom Death!). It seems like you're deciding to end the game without, like, talking to them. eta - disposable - i do this with npcs often, as well as key items, vistas or views, and maps of areas. I use google image search a lot, /r/battlemaps (particularly afternoonmaps), and pinterest. I make maps with Inkarnate. I don't have everything for any given session, but I'll try to make sure I've got a few likely possibilities.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
change my name posted:Revised ranger's pet gets ASIs when you do and uses your proficiency score for a bunch of things (including AC and damage), your ranger level isn't tied to it at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
The only class thing that scales with character level in 5e is cantrips
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
I just want to tell a story of a great session my group had this last weekend. A while ago I had a legendary triton pirate steal the group's magical ship. Since nothing motivates a DnD group like having their poo poo stolen, they immediately chartered a ship to go find those fuckers and get their poo poo back. The captain the chartered vessel was an NPC they cleaved to pretty much right away, and in the final encounter the triton pirate killed the captain in a duel, escaping when his "father" arrived, eating the group's original vessel. His father was a massive kraken with hundreds of other ships built around him, so he's basically a gigantic warship. Since they were level 7, the kraken was already dead but kept alive magically as a slave to the triton pirate. Saturday's session was also one of the players' birthday, so we actually played in person, with lots of drinking and stupid fun poo poo. They chased down the triton pirate, cornering the krakenship in a cove. At this point the birthday player had decided she was done with planning a surprise attack at night, and used her bardic feats of persuasion to rile up the chartered crew for a head-on attack at this obviously stronger enemy. But it wasn't just any assault they wanted. When they first chartered the ship, I had given it a ramming prow. So, the players being well and truly drunk, went full speed into the krakenship. The bard started singing the chorus to this song, the rest of the players joining in as they smashed into the other vessel, surprising the triton pirate. It was a desperate fight, and very nearly resulted in a party wipe but they eventually came out of it alive. So now they have a magical krakenship, which is obviously undead and evil, that they have to decide what to do with next session.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Not to rehash edition wars, but why was there such a large kickback against 4e? From what I gather, combat was changed up significantly but that can't be the only reason? People have mentioned Paizo but they are missing the core issue of just how terrible the 4e launch was. Essentially they were given two years to make 4e. 10 months in they realised what they had on their hands was a turkey and went back to the drawing board. They still shipped on time, but this meant that what thy shipped was a buggy beta; 4e is popular round here because most of us have played the post-patches version but what was shipped was definitely a buggy beta with monster math that didn't scale properly. And books that were written with all the charm of a technical manual; they are great in play but not good to read on the loo. The second thing that no one has mentioned is the online tools. A lot was promised - but either just before launch or just after launch (I forget which) the lead developer of the IT tools killed his ex-wife and himself in a murder/suicide. The virtual tabletop never appeared and they released a replacement character builder. The third thing is that the initial adventure was dire. Contrary to popular misconception what 4e does well is not dungeon crawling. Dungeon crawls require lots of minor incidental combat that isn't really threatening, and 4e (and 5e) has combat that takes too long for that. What 4e combat is awesome at is high budget set-pieces, or even low level challenges. A key thing about 4e is that most characters and many monsters have a lot of "forced movement" abilities that don't have major opportunity costs the way Bull Rush forces you to give up your attack. With most PCs able to push monsters (and sometimes vise-versa) it means that if there's something useful on the map like a campfire, a harbour-side, or even a summoning circle the players are going to try and have the PCs push the monsters into/off/through them. And because a lot of 4e tactics revolve around the terrain and pushing monsters into their own pit traps rather than simply not stepping into pit traps 4e combat makes combat in other RPGs look like acting against a green screen as opposed to the shooting on location of 4e. How is this relevant to Keep on the Shadowfell? The adventure is fine until you reach the keep. The keep itself is from memory 17 combat encounters in a row with no significant exploration or room for RP - and I think there are only three encounters in the entire keep where there is any terrain you can push monsters onto, off, or through (and I don't think it's ever stated what exactly happens if you push the summoner straight through his own portal and in to hell). In short the keep sucks for dungeon crawling and sucks twice as hard in 4e because combat takes twice as long thanks in part to having enemies it's worth pushing into campfires. It's as if someone created Sonic the Hedgehog, made the first three stages pretty good - then after the first zone was done all the levels in all three remaining zones were water levels. As for how profitable 4e was, the PHB outsold previous PHBs - a pattern that is fairly standard. But what 4e did for profitability (as opposed to gross total revenue) was that they managed to turn players into subscribers to the online service at $10 a month for the entire 4e Dragon Magazine archive, the character builder with access to all the material, the monster builder, and a few other things - with no printing or distribution costs and the other costs already being sunk. We know roughly how many people had a subscription in 2014 (after the launch of 5e) because each subscriber was given access to a specific forum on the WotC boards for subscribers to D&D Insider - and those numbers mean that 4e was raking in from memory $6 million/year in almost pure profit, years after the last book was printed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 03:15
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:The third thing is that the initial adventure was dire. Contrary to popular misconception what 4e does well is not dungeon crawling. Dungeon crawls require lots of minor incidental combat that isn't really threatening, and 4e (and 5e) has combat that takes too long for that. What 4e combat is awesome at is high budget set-pieces, or even low level challenges. A key thing about 4e is that most characters and many monsters have a lot of "forced movement" abilities that don't have major opportunity costs the way Bull Rush forces you to give up your attack. With most PCs able to push monsters (and sometimes vise-versa) it means that if there's something useful on the map like a campfire, a harbour-side, or even a summoning circle the players are going to try and have the PCs push the monsters into/off/through them. And because a lot of 4e tactics revolve around the terrain and pushing monsters into their own pit traps rather than simply not stepping into pit traps 4e combat makes combat in other RPGs look like acting against a green screen as opposed to the shooting on location of 4e. Yeah 4E moves away from ticky-tack encounters you can resolve in 5 minutes and do on the fly. Regardless of what us 4E people say, 4E is not a great game on the fly. What it does do is ask you the DM to have involved, at least fairly well-planned encounters that are balanced to be challenging and not "the table says 2d6 goblins appear." 4E is also terrible without significant terrain details; if you play it lazily on a flat plane it just doesn't work, that will actually break certain characters' builds. If the DM accepts this responsibility it allows them to budget out an interesting "adventuring day" and not accidentally over-extend characters or give them hopeless encounters. The trade-off to all this planning is that in a four-hour session you're probably going to run at most two, maybe three fights, so you if you're running your own adventure you don't want to meticulously plan too far ahead. I'm also pretty sure all the 4E adventures are terrible, at least all the ones I've played. They're in my experience on rails, where the most choice you have is in what order you do the setpieces. I remember several descending into grinds as you described. The further starter adventures via Encounters were all very cookie cutter until late in the development cycle and I didn't care for Murder at Baldur's Gate, the big changeup, at all, because it moved back to the tried and true FR trope of a bunch of unkillable DMPCs and you got to decide who you served. Name Change fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Nov 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 03:41
|
|
|
Presented that way it seems like a really interesting set of choices. Would you prefer a game where you do three encounters in an evening but they're all planned and have a lot of challenge inherent to them, or ten or so encounters of 7ish goblins in hallways, followed by one big battle against like a wizard?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
theironjef posted:Presented that way it seems like a really interesting set of choices. Would you prefer a game where you do three encounters in an evening but they're all planned and have a lot of challenge inherent to them, or ten or so encounters of 7ish goblins in hallways, followed by one big battle against like a wizard? There are actually selling points to both and it disappoints me that 5E threw the baby out with the bathwater, because you can totally make a game as tactically fulfilling as 4E with lighter overhead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2020 04:07
|
|