|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANdG2DGm0CQ It's no Deadalewives but what is?
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
Splicer posted:Guidance would have worked a lot better as an x/day class ability or a more powerful version as an alternate use of channel divinity. As it stands its effectively a passive numerical bonus with mainly narrative restrictions, which is always an awful idea. In another unnamed system, you become immune to guidance for 1 hour after if is cast on you, it only lasts for 1 turn, and it can't apply to checks that take longer than the duration (i.e. you could not use it on a performance check for an entire song.). Works out pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 00:25
|
|
|
theironjef posted:The whole point on the VSMs was originally supposed to be "These are the types of hindrances that make this spell difficult/obvious/cumbersome in some important way." Obviously this has been long forgotten so yeah, probably. The first time I played, my friend and I intended to cause a distraction by him casting grease and then me casting some fire spell to set it ablaze. We did this and the DM informed us how VSM stuff works and that now all the guards in the room are looking at us and the grease fire they know we started, roll initiative. The more you know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 02:54
|
|
|
Still worked as a distraction!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
change my name posted:Is it too much of a copout to judiciously use Nystul's Magic Aura to throw off PCs in my wizard's university murder mystery? For instance, the groundskeeper is actually a sentient flesh golem with one of those Disguise Self at-will hats and has been killing students, but using detect magic would immediately recognize that. His partner, a mindflayer arcanist, could easily use Nystul's to make him appear non-magical, and likely would. But the thinking is that this is a university for leaning magic, they're pretty well versed in it, and any logical wizard would do the same to protect their valuables etc Make him a beekeeper of some dangerous bee variant and his hat and whole outfit is magical to protect him, with the hidden effect of disguise. Give all the staff magical items suitable to their jobs to throw off the scent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
vlad3217 posted:The first time I played, my friend and I intended to cause a distraction by him casting grease and then me casting some fire spell to set it ablaze. We did this and the DM informed us how VSM stuff works and that now all the guards in the room are looking at us and the grease fire they know we started, roll initiative. The more you know. also the spell needs giant bold text that says "the grease created by this spell is not flammable" because grease has never been flammable. i think the name grease is just really unfortunately named because for decades people keep going "ah, grease fire. perfect combo"
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:50
|
|
|
Agreed except it should be flammable
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:54
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:also the spell needs giant bold text that says "the grease created by this spell is not flammable" because grease has never been flammable. i think the name grease is just really unfortunately named because for decades people keep going "ah, grease fire. perfect combo" https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/739200837809934340
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
God I hate that ruling so much because it implies d&d spell text is well written Because grease is understood by many people as irl flammable, deviating from that understanding warrants spell text gently caress off Jeremy you fuckhead Orange DeviI fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:59
|
|
|
please knock Mom! posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:07
|
|
|
yeah but new players and dms arent about to go look up jeremy crawford tweets for insight... if they are clever they can see that the spell web explicitly says it is flammable and has actual rules for fire spreading and damage and intuit this means that grease is not flammable but learning dnd from the ground up is hard and the spell does say grease....
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:13
|
|
|
The sheer amount of quora posts asking whether 5e grease is flammable shows that the spell text failed
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:19
|
|
|
please knock Mom! posted:quora posts
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
I remember in one pick up game I played in at a FLGS I had cast grease on a chokepoint and the cleric than whispered into the dms ears and cast Sacred Flame on it...lighting up my grease puddle and turning it into a fire pit. Needless to say I didn't join in that pick up group again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:32
|
|
|
I thought the entire point of grease was to do a combo and make a big fire. WOTC is failing at controlling that narrative big time
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 15:07
|
|
|
GruntyThrst posted:I thought the entire point of grease was to do a combo and make a big fire. WOTC is failing at controlling that narrative big time I want to say it was flammable in previous editions, but now I don't trust my memory. Hmm... my 3.5 book is the only one I have on hand, and it doesn't explicitly mention the grease being flammable, though that's how I've ruled it for years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 15:22
|
|
|
Grease fire is an explicit combo spell in Dragon Age Origins, that might be what you're thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
The point of grease is to cast it on enemies that you know have bad dex saves, so that they slip and miss a turn, right? I never rated it because it wasn't direct damage, but then I played a bard in a Neverwinter Nights based MMO mod and the guy running us through it said to try it, and holy poo poo is it a great control spell for it's level. Bobby Deluxe fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
They should just rename grease to Lube. no one would make the mistake any more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
I just checked and while grease in 2E does describe it as creating a surface of a "fatty, greasy nature" but no rules for it igniting, so yeah it's never caused fire unless someone wanted to houserule that it did. It's already an extremely good disabling spell so I don't know why you'd want to ruin it by burning off the grease when you could just murder the ogre that's constantly pratfalling all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
GreenMetalSun posted:I want to say it was flammable in previous editions, but now I don't trust my memory. There's a higher-level version of Grease in a 3.5E splatbook which is explicitly flammable and has actual rules for being set on fire, making it one edition where you can actually definitively say from rules text that the original spell wasn't intended to be flammable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
It doesn't help that it is flammable in BG3; you can totally knock people over and then set fire to their downed bodiesHeffer posted:Give all the staff magical items suitable to their jobs to throw off the scent. I like this one, maybe his groundskeeping outfit can change at will to denote what he's working on (and would thus mask all other illusion magic)
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
Unfortunately, "Spell Combos" are just too complicated for tabletop, somehow, despite being included in every major hit CRPG franchise in the past twenty years. Wizards should just put an optional rule for it in the next edition (equivalent to upcasting the second spell in the combo by a level, maybe?) but it'd require too much subjectivity probably. "If the DM thinks your combo is a combo, it's a combo. The first spell's duration ends, and the second one is upcast by the cast level of the first spell" maybe?) So casting Fireball on top of Grease would wipe the Grease effect but add a d6 to the damage. Not the worst trade, especially if someone else cast the Grease, but not the best either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
Obviously the solution is to include various grease, oil, and water barrels which when destroyed, cause massive areas of the related effect -- allowing a wizard to create fields of slipperiness/fire/electricity/smoke in a battle! Put them everywhere with no adherence to them actually having a reason to be present in setting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
TheAardvark posted:They should just rename grease to Lube. no one would make the mistake any more. "I cast lube on the dragon!" "It's an AOE, you have to cast it on an area." "Of the dragon?" "Oh no."
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
Bag of (Barrel) Holding
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:55
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Bag of (Barrel) Holding What if there were some way to weaponize this, too...
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
You could weaponise a bag of holding if you gave the caster a spell that would make the bag suddenly become affected by the weight of it's contents.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
change my name posted:What if there were some way to weaponize this, too... I mean, there is it's called "flight" or if the party is very wealthy, "a second bag of holding" I guess that was the joke? sorry
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Unfortunately, "Spell Combos" are just too complicated for tabletop, somehow, despite being included in every major hit CRPG franchise in the past twenty years. This is one of my biggest complaints about D&D. The’ve got a class based system and one of the strengths of class based systems is it gives the game developers a solid foundation for designing combos between characters. But they don’t take advantage of that. At all. Combos between players is one of the most enjoyable things you can do in a cooperative game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean, there is No it was more a Larian barrel-fu joke, I assumed that’s what the post about throwing random barrels of water/electricity everywhere was referring to
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
nelson posted:This is one of my biggest complaints about D&D. The’ve got a class based system and one of the strengths of class based systems is it gives the game developers a solid foundation for designing combos between characters. But they don’t take advantage of that. At all. How would you design such a system? Thing is there are *so many* classes, and you'd want to make sure every class had combos with every other class, since who knows what's at the table.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
I guess it's nice to know at least that all the spells that create wood and plants and stuff specifically create non-flammable versions of those. Your shillelaghs and walls of thorns and what have you are safe from the flames. Plus it's useful to know that if you create something like a homonculus or golem, while it's certainly not immune to initial fire damage, ongoing fire damage would be difficult to impossible, since they aren't explicitly flammable.
theironjef fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:How would you design such a system? In practical terms given the nature of D&D's development, I think the most sensible choice would be to future-proof it by making them less class specific combos and more keyword combos where certain classes are more likely to have certain keywords. Something like the Dragon Age 2 cross-class combo system, where you get effects like "Brittle" or "Staggered" and then classes that are less likely to inflict that condition can benefit from that condition being inflicted. For a hypothetical D&D example: a rogue might have a way to enhance their attacks to make an enemy "Off Balance", and then a fighter might have an action that does extra damage to Off Balance targets, and some spells might have harder DCs or do more damage to Off Balance targets. So a rogue hits an enemy in the leg with their attack, and then because of that, it's harder for that enemy to avoid slipping on grease. That sort of thing. There's already soft-synergy in that vein by doing something like giving a rogue advantage by restraining a creature, but it's not very codified or varied.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:In practical terms given the nature of D&D's development, I think the most sensible choice would be to future-proof it by making them less class specific combos and more keyword combos where certain classes are more likely to have certain keywords. Something like the Dragon Age 2 cross-class combo system, where you get effects like "Brittle" or "Staggered" and then classes that are less likely to inflict that condition can benefit from that condition being inflicted. For a hypothetical D&D example: a rogue might have a way to enhance their attacks to make an enemy "Off Balance", and then a fighter might have an action that does extra damage to Off Balance targets, and some spells might have harder DCs or do more damage to Off Balance targets. So a rogue hits an enemy in the leg with their attack, and then because of that, it's harder for that enemy to avoid slipping on grease. That sort of thing. There's already soft-synergy in that vein by doing something like giving a rogue advantage by restraining a creature, but it's not very codified or varied. hm. just throwing something out there: maybe some classes could break through the enemy defenses to get them off balance, other classes could then knock people onto their feet, allowing for a third class to send the enemy airborne and a fourth class to then smack the enemy down to the ground ..?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:24
|
|
|
Taciturn Tactician posted:In practical terms given the nature of D&D's development, I think the most sensible choice would be to future-proof it by making them less class specific combos and more keyword combos where certain classes are more likely to have certain keywords. Something like the Dragon Age 2 cross-class combo system, where you get effects like "Brittle" or "Staggered" and then classes that are less likely to inflict that condition can benefit from that condition being inflicted. For a hypothetical D&D example: a rogue might have a way to enhance their attacks to make an enemy "Off Balance", and then a fighter might have an action that does extra damage to Off Balance targets, and some spells might have harder DCs or do more damage to Off Balance targets. So a rogue hits an enemy in the leg with their attack, and then because of that, it's harder for that enemy to avoid slipping on grease. That sort of thing. There's already soft-synergy in that vein by doing something like giving a rogue advantage by restraining a creature, but it's not very codified or varied. sounds like you should be playing pathfinder 2e, which is all about this
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:hm. just throwing something out there: maybe some classes could break through the enemy defenses to get them off balance, other classes could then knock people onto their feet, allowing for a third class to send the enemy airborne and a fourth class to then smack the enemy down to the ground ..? Some classes give the enemy up, some classes let them down. Some classes run around. Some classes desert you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Unfortunately, "Spell Combos" are just too complicated for tabletop, somehow, despite being included in every major hit CRPG franchise in the past twenty years. ... I really should get back to my 4e trifold retroclone. Because spell combos are pretty easy if you're using a 4e keyword/power structure. You just need an extra line on some powers like "Triggered: Fire. Everything in the Grease AoE takes Ongoing 5 (Fire) and the AoE disappears" And if 4e had got the extra year in development it needed (they went back to the drawing board after 10 months because Project Orcus was terrible and it was still out on the two year schedule) they might have realised that controllers and the Arcane power source could lean hard into this. I'm now picturing a Warlock daily that inflicts Trigger: Weapon damage: the target takes a stackable ongoing 3 damage as an effect of a haemophilia spell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
Wizards already makes MTG, I'm sure they've learned how to properly apply, preserve, and retire keywords by now
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
neonchameleon posted:... I really should get back to my 4e trifold retroclone. Because spell combos are pretty easy if you're using a 4e keyword/power structure. You just need an extra line on some powers like "Triggered: Fire. Everything in the Grease AoE takes Ongoing 5 (Fire) and the AoE disappears" the term 4e retroclone is a phrase that has incredible power at making people feel old
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 21:17
|
|