|
As others have said the way to rule this is not to allow one particular ability to have infinity range because that's asinine and you'd have to be consciously making a bad decision to prove a stupid point about the book being a little vague.
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
What are some of the best unofficial alternative systems for racial bonus/penalties? I want to see how other designers have tackled this issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
clockworkjoe posted:What are some of the best unofficial alternative systems for racial bonus/penalties? I want to see how other designers have tackled this issue. Replace the stat modifiers with a +2 and a +1 that you can assign to two different stats of your choice. That's an official alternate rule as of Tasha's, I believe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 05:13
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Replace the stat modifiers with a +2 and a +1 that you can assign to two different stats of your choice. That's an official alternate rule as of Tasha's, I believe. Close. You can replace the racial stat modifiers but it doesn’t limit it to +2 +1. Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything posted:Here’s how to do it: take any ability score increase you gain in your race or subrace and apply it to an ability score of your choice. If you gain more than one increase, you can’t apply those increases to the same ability score, and you can’t increase a score above 20.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
lol does that Break the Changling from Ebberon's +3 to cha?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 06:36
|
|
|
Dexo posted:lol does that Break the Changling from Ebberon's +3 to cha? Changelings don't get +3 CHA.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 06:46
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Changelings don't get +3 CHA. oh they errata'd it last month https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/ERftLW-Errata.pdf quote:Changeling Traits (p. 18). In Ability Score Increase, “one ability score of your choice” has been changed to “one other ability score of your choice.” They used to very much get 3 cha(if they wanted it).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 06:49
|
|
|
We find a werewolf that was a result of magical torture, we manage to talk it down and befriend it, it helps us fight the boss of the dungeon, it literally licks my face out of friendliness, and the party tries to kill it the second the fight is over in cold blood, "because it's an evil werewolf!" and people get really loving mad at me out of character for helping it get away, and one of them even attempts to attack/pvp my character for "aiding and abetting an evil creature", luckily the GM wasn't at all interested in DM'ing any kind of pvp and shut it down, tried to explain that the elf it used to be is long gone but it isn't an evil creature. The person who tried to attack the werewolf was even insisting now that they'd need to hunt down the werewolf, despite us being in the deep wilderness far away from civilization (the closest are the literal army of invading orcs invading our country!), despite us having a major city literally under siege by a foreign empire, despite that our boat ride back home we need to get back to before it leaves us behind. He insists that this is something he has to do in character 100%. I think we're probably going to ignore it, but it's really just stupid. This happened more or less at the end of the session so we got a week for everyone to cool down and just move on hopefully and focus instead on dividing up the loot from the dungeon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 07:59
|
|
|
My dude. What the gently caress is up with your play group. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 08:37
|
|
|
Leave your group and join the wolf and start a pack
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 09:04
|
|
|
Have the DM turn everyone into werewolves to teach them a lesson in empathy
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 09:14
|
|
|
Some of them are my friends and I play different games on different days where we don't have these problems so its not a decision that's really easy to make and we had the last several weeks that were without serious incident. But we had this issue early on where like, we were trying to interrupt a demon summoning ritual and the demon kitsune got summoned and so, in an attempt to like, try to get the party not wiped if it got angry, I had my character bow to it and talk in like very respectful language (the setting is fantasy kitchen sink asia), as I had gleaned from the DM that demons in this homebrew setting aren't necessarily "kill on sight" evil, but more akin to like fey from folklore or yokai from Japanese mythology where they can be assholes but if you pay your respects and don't mess with them they'll leave you alone. The analogy I used is, the mafia are pretty evil, mob bosses are also pretty evil, but if you find yourself face to face meeting a mob boss on the street and you know its the local mob boss, you kiss that loving ring. I figured, since we were all level 2's at this time, that we weren't going to survive fighting whatever this was. After the fact, the same player who tried to attack me in the previous post, who had because he was closest to the exit had run away at the very first sign of the demon, accused me of "consorting with demons" and claimed "The party was never under any threat of dying there" (love the metagaming), taking like a very "traditional" d&d view on demons/devils which I don't think is really what the DM has in mind for his not!asia fantasy setting, and again it's a big out of character fight where they don't even try to see it from my perspective where I'm looking at it from the perspective of the DM trying to flesh out his campaign more along the lines of east asian folklore vs traditional dungeons and dragons cosmology. So we got this source of conflict where a bunch of us just have very different out of character interpretations of the setting and as a result our in character actions always just seem to result in maximized intraparty conflict in ways that just results in a lot of stressful arguing whenever it happens. Which is what happened today, the werewolf was clearly coded to me as mentally unwell, not evil. The response of course leapt to, "Of course its evil and your evil for thinking its not evil!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
In my first d&d group, the good aligned Druid killed two goblins in cold blood because they were throwing rocks at the house of a farmer who they believed stole their idols. “Because they’re evil, so killing them is good”
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 10:34
|
|
|
there are players who have different expectations on how these games are ran that are not inherently wrong; the monsters have statblocks to code them as enemy combatants and are written as "evil" so a common mode of running the game is presenting these enemies as binary combat challenges. two things that helps a lot in breaking that, from a dm perspective, is to throw morale from older editions of dnd back in - now this random bandit is going to run for their life at about 30% hp. this makes combat faster as well. the second is to let players do whatever nonlethally without penalty. i have only once gotten the smug rebuttal "how do you non lethally burn someone with a fireball???" to which i simply replied: they are using magic to do this
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 13:35
|
|
|
Okay my first ever campaign is moving forward with 5 PCs instead of 8 PCs! Yay! I'm trying to prep but I don't know how long things take. We play for about 3 hours once a week. I have two quests set up for the session: 1. a jock kidnaps a rival jock and that jock's girlfriend (who is the ex-girlfriend of the jock doing the kidnapping), he bounds them up and takes them to a secluded location to be beaten/tortured. The PCs will be doing some investigating to learn about the kidnapping plot and the final location. On their way to the kidnapping site they will fight a mud mephit and four stirges. They can fight the jock if they want.** 2. Blacksmithing class field trip! The PCs will go up a mountainside to a river bend somewhere near the top of the lower cliffs where there is an electrum vein. But oh no! There's a harpy there. Right by the electrum. They fight the harpy. Yay! The PCs will do some investigation to learn why the gently caress anyone is interested in electrum: witherite is mounted in it for protection from necrotic damage. So it foreshadows something the school is not forthcoming with or just isn't bothering to explain to Level 1 students - some undead horde or invasion? Or maybe it's just research or a contingency in case some undead show up? I haven't decided but it's a little hook for later and keeps the quest a little more interesting than go here, kill monster, bring back item. Two fights and some lightish RP. Should I have more prepped? Also any clue on quick-building NPCs that also have the typical class features/racial features? That jock is a centaur ranger and if they want to fight him they should be able to. I can figure out most of it I guess but rolling the NPC jock's ability scores is throwing me some cause I don't know what that statblock would look like to make a decently challenging encounter for 5 PCs who all have Heroic stats (they rolled 2d6+6 for stats and if they still rolled bunk I let them make another array so they're all pretty fat with ability modifiers).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Okay my first ever campaign is moving forward with 5 PCs instead of 8 PCs! Yay! I'm trying to prep but I don't know how long things take. We play for about 3 hours once a week. I have two quests set up for the session: 1. a jock kidnaps a rival jock and that jock's girlfriend (who is the ex-girlfriend of the jock doing the kidnapping), he bounds them up and takes them to a secluded location to be beaten/tortured. The PCs will be doing some investigating to learn about the kidnapping plot and the final location. On their way to the kidnapping site they will fight a mud mephit and four stirges. They can fight the jock if they want.** 2. Blacksmithing class field trip! The PCs will go up a mountainside to a river bend somewhere near the top of the lower cliffs where there is an electrum vein. But oh no! There's a harpy there. Right by the electrum. They fight the harpy. Yay! The PCs will do some investigation to learn why the gently caress anyone is interested in electrum: witherite is mounted in it for protection from necrotic damage. So it foreshadows something the school is not forthcoming with or just isn't bothering to explain to Level 1 students - some undead horde or invasion? Or maybe it's just research or a contingency in case some undead show up? I haven't decided but it's a little hook for later and keeps the quest a little more interesting than go here, kill monster, bring back item. 2) just throw random crap on monsters. who cares. if i wanted a centaur ranger enemy i would give it bonus action hunters mark. giffyglyphs monster maker is a good tool for this 2.5) the way to make encounters deadly is not just by making the monsters in them stronger, it is also by making the environment and circumstances complicated
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 13:54
|
|
|
Fresh Shesh Besh posted:As others have said the way to rule this is not to allow one particular ability to have infinity range because that's asinine and you'd have to be consciously making a bad decision to prove a stupid point about the book being a little vague. As for the RAW, unless they've changed the online version from the published book, it says "It has a normal range of 60 feet and no long range" in the rules, so it'd be hard to argue that it has infinite long range when the rules state no long range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:1) not really, depending on how you prep for fights. most of dnd is improvised and while i have prep to fall back on, at the end of the day my players will put me out of prep. Perfect! Very useful, thank you. Here's what I got: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 14:19
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:. So we got this source of conflict where a bunch of us just have very different out of character interpretations of the setting and as a result our in character actions always just seem to result in maximized intraparty conflict in ways that just results in a lot of stressful arguing whenever it happens. Buy this guy a copy of Jim Hines' Jig the Goblin series for Christmas. It has a goblin protagonist, but . . .good? It'll blow his feeblemind.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 15:16
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:The missus made a good point last night in that abilities and spells generally don't list short/long range, just range. It's more like a spell than a weapon - you're not throwing an actual knife, you're using a psychic ability to throw energy which is shaped like a knife, as evidenced by it leaving no mark or trace. quote:This magic blade is a simple melee weapon with the finesse and thrown properties. Also, it does list short/long range, even if it didn't say it was a weapon. And to reiterate the argument for the infinite range: PHB posted:When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. You can't attack a target beyond the weapon's long range. You can't attack a target beyond the weapon's long range, but there is no long range, so you can attack a target at any distance. This is functionally the same as having infinite long range. If you treated "no long range" as the same as zero long range, you could only attack yourself with the weapon, no matter what the short range of the weapon is. RAI is probably that it has a long range of 60 too, but who the hell knows, RAI is sometimes bizarre (e.g. twinned spell).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 15:31
|
|
|
Staltran posted:Also, it does list short/long range, even if it didn't say it was a weapon. And to reiterate the argument for the infinite range: This is the most hypertechnical reading of d&d rules I have ever seen. Quite obviously the RAI is that you cannot attack beyond a weapons listed ranges. If you want a technical reading to support that, thee specific short range text listed for the weapon weapon overrules the general "cannot attack beyond listed long range" rule.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 15:42
|
|
|
I think my Frostmaiden group is hosed. Spoilers for chapter 2: We decided to venture to the upside-down spire after Dezzan's execution but were ambushed by a tribe of three arrow orcs on the way there. It was a really tough fight, people went down multiple times, and I blew all of my second level spell slots (we're level 4). After a short rest, since we didn't anticipate too much trouble in the spire, we got there, managed to wrangle the basilisk at the bottom into the chamber with the simulacrum Dezzan to bring him to life, and... our DM rolled the worst possible outcome. So, the fake Dezzan has had a Fly moment and is now a horrible black pudding that's trying to kill us. We start running and find a floating magic orb... must be one of those magical Netherese crystals that kept their cities aloft, right? Nope, as we found out while trying to wrangle it into a bag, it's a will o' wisp that started shocking us. Cue running back up through the spire to the top as the slime starts climbing through the holes behind us, and enter the bugbears who have us pinned at the entrance. We also didn't bring or lay down any climbing gear so we can't just make a quick escape out of the entrance tunnel. End of session.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:there are players who have different expectations on how these games are ran that are not inherently wrong; the monsters have statblocks to code them as enemy combatants and are written as "evil" so a common mode of running the game is presenting these enemies as binary combat challenges. Yeah, I always just go with, 'You are a professional wizard, and you're good at what you do, you know how to non-fatally take this guy down if you want to'. It makes the player feel good and gives them the non-lethal option. It helps that I try to reinforce that hit points are an abstract concept and not literal wounds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is the most hypertechnical reading of d&d rules I have ever seen. Quite obviously the RAI is that you cannot attack beyond a weapons listed ranges. If you want a technical reading to support that, thee specific short range text listed for the weapon weapon overrules the general "cannot attack beyond listed long range" rule. What do you mean by the last sentence? That if a weapon has no long range, it actually has the same long range as its normal range? And tbh I would not be shocked if the infinite range was actually RAI. It's very likely that it's intended as 60/60, but sometimes RAI is very weird.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
Staltran posted:What do you mean by the last sentence? That if a weapon has no long range, it actually has the same long range as its normal range? The rule is that a specific rule overwrites a general rule. The general rule is that "a weapon cannot attack beyond its long range." By the reading above, that.would.mean the weapon cannot attack at all, as it has no long range, so all distance is beyond its long range (of zero). However, the weapon has a specific short range of 60 feet listed. So it can attack up to 60 feet as short range, and that's it. Also this should be obvious because infinite range is simply ludicrous. Any DM I have ever played with would laugh me out of the room if I even tried to pitch something that absurd.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The rule is that a specific rule overwrites a general rule. I like the RAW range zero interpretation. It seems appropriate for anyone trying to argue that "no long range" should be interpreted as "infinite long range". They're fated to punch themselves in the dick forever, because thems the rules. But yes it is very obvious to everyone that the RAI of "no long range" is that the weapon cannot be used at long range, which is anything beyond its normal range of 60 ft. Kaal fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Dec 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
Staltran posted:Also, it does list short/long range, even if it didn't say it was a weapon. Staltran posted:And to reiterate the argument for the infinite range: Staltran posted:If you treated "no long range" as the same as zero long range, you could only attack yourself with the weapon, no matter what the short range of the weapon is. It doesn't mean you can only hit yourself, unless you entirely disregard the clearly stated normal range of 60'. E: Also it says the blade has a range of 60ft, and disappears on a miss, so I would be inclined to rule that you can only manifest the knife up to 60', and beyond that it disappears same as on a miss. Bobby Deluxe fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Dec 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:What? No, you're compartmentalising the two ranges and then entirely discarding normal range. Zero long range, when a normal range has been declared, means you cannot attack at disadvantage beyond normal range. Taciturn Tactician posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:43
|
|
|
Right, and it has no long range. Therefore you can't attack at all at any range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
This conversation is unbelievably stupid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
TheAardvark posted:Right, and it has no long range. Therefore you can't attack at all at any range. TooMuchAbstraction posted:This conversation is unbelievably stupid. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
TheAardvark posted:Right, and it has no long range. Therefore you can't attack at all at any range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
If you throw a psychic dagger 30 feet straight up in the air and have it come back down to kill you and end this conversation, does it travel 30 feet or 60 feet RAW?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
change my name posted:If you throw a psychic dagger 30 feet straight up in the air and have it come back down to kill you and end this conversation, does it travel 30 feet or 60 feet RAW? 60 feet. Do you roll with disadvantage?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
What I'm hearing is, there's a range of interpretations
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:05
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:What I'm hearing is, there's a range of interpretations But not a long range of interpretations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
I find myself missing the old style of coded adventure module - a 16 or 32 page book with a quick setting/hook, and a map. Now all the official products are like 400 page campaign tomes that take a year to run. I'm wanting more stuff like was reprinted in Tales from the Yawning Portal and AD&D days. Anyone have a series of these they like that aren't AL modules?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:I find myself missing the old style of coded adventure module - a 16 or 32 page book with a quick setting/hook, and a map. Now all the official products are like 400 page campaign tomes that take a year to run. I'm wanting more stuff like was reprinted in Tales from the Yawning Portal and AD&D days. Isn't this basically the entirety of Drive-Thru RPG's business model?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Imagine four psychic knives on the edge of a cliff. One psychic knife is thrown 60 feet but because it has no long range listed it just falls off the cliff. The second knife becomes the first, the third the second and the fourth the third and poo poo I forgot how the fourth psychic knife gets there but anyway you're out of uses until a long rest. Yes you are, I kept track! Thanks for the help with my kidnapping question, it looks like I might be able to wrangle up an excuse to pick up gear and I'll see if the DM will let me smuggle in some ether. If not, odds are good that I'll be leveled up enough to use Suggestion, which I like a lot more than Charm Person for flavor. And mechanics. Charm person is kind of boring.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
Toshimo posted:But not a long range of interpretations. That means there's an infinite range of interpretations, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2020 18:24
|
|
