|
high level play is great if you and your whole squad are onboard and your dm is capable of just making up high level threats because if you thought the CR system was bad before level 12 just wait until they also have magical items
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 13:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:08 |
|
|
Rutibex posted:High Level D&D is a political game and that isn't quite articulated in the rules. You can't continue to play like a dungeon crawl or it all falls apart. You need to be managing kingdoms and wizard schools and stuff. It's not, though. That's just what you have to make it in order for everything to hold together. In every conceivable way, the game instructs you that it is a Dungeon Crawl from start to finish. Like, my level 18 Paladin ability isn't "Convince Seneschal", it's an increase to my Aura...a combat ability. 15th level? Combat ability. 20th level? Combat ability.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 13:20
|
|
|
Devorum posted:It's not, though. That's just what you have to make it in order for everything to hold together. A thing from 1e that never ought to have been abandoned was high level Fighters just getting a literal army of followers. FFT posted:Yep, the talisman of Pact of the Talisman doesn't require attunement. The only important thing (mechanically) is keeping track of who's wearing it. The Druid/Bard 7-9th level spell lists have substantially less bullshit, IMO. Though I suppose Magical Secrets is a thing I always forget about, so sure. Also, multi class full casters is fine. Just no double digit level counts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 13:53
|
|
|
Devorum posted:
I forget what edition it was (4th?) but one DMG specifically divides the experience of play into several stages and talks about how things will change as the party levels; it also compares the party to a developing dragon. It's only maybe a page of text, but it's there. Like everything else in every DMG it suffers from comparison to an entire internet's worth of article and forum posts. When I go back and read old DMGs, I mostly find very good advice that I failed to internalize correctly at the time. CaptainPsyko posted:A thing from 1e that never ought to have been abandoned was high level Fighters just getting a literal army of followers. Not just fighters, everyone built some kind of structure and gained followers; I have to agree that the money and power in older editions was designed to turn the players from mercenaries to the heads of established institutions within the game world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 13:55
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:Not just fighters, everyone built some kind of structure and gained followers; I have to agree that the money and power in older editions was designed to turn the players from mercenaries to the heads of established institutions within the game world. Yeah but the level of scaling was clear; Wizards got, like, A Tower and An Apprentice. Fighters got a literal army.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 13:58
|
|
|
I'm seriously tempted, the next game I run years from now since I'll take a break after running this 5e game, is a modest length 2e game. (I'll invert THACO and AC). Another thing problem with the shift from 2e: Warriors had "incomparables" that distinguished then from other classes: extra attacks per level and exceptional physical attributes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 14:07
|
|
|
dnd 5e specifies tiers of play as well, and the game does function very well as a dungeon crawler at higher levels, you just need to be more prepared as a DM. my level 20 campaign ending final boss had 4 pages of notes, 2500 hp, a 9 minute boss battle theme, and took like 6 hours to beat because of how many options high level dnd hasJack B Nimble posted:I'm seriously tempted, the next game I run years from now since I'll take a break after running this 5e game, is a modest length 2e game. (I'll invert THACO and AC). if you want to do this kind of stuff i highly recommend the game "old school essentials", i picked up their rules tome a while back and it is one of the best written things i ever read.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 14:29
|
|
|
Devorum posted:It's not, though. That's just what you have to make it in order for everything to hold together. You are not entirely right, scope out page 36-38 of the 5e DMG: quote:LEVELS 11-16: MASTERS OF THE quote:LEVELS 17-20: MASTERS OF THE Rutibex fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Jun 2, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 14:55
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:my level 20 campaign ending final boss had 4 pages of notes, 2500 hp, a 9 minute boss battle theme, and took like 6 hours to beat 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
When we finally fought The Dragon in DarkSun, at I think level 18 or 19 in 5e, it was shockingly quick; the desert wind attack didn't kill or maim the group (as it had before), we actually hit, and the boss HP was dropping by massive chunks. He was taking down party members at an alarming rate, but he ended up running out of HP before we ran out of standing party members. Edit: Our GM was literally an accountant, so I have no idea if he is just masterful at balancing monsters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
level 20 turns take forever man. im never doing this again lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:You are not entirely right, scope out page 36-38 of the 5e DMG: That tier 4 paragraph singling out a bunch of full casters and following up with "other characters" seems pretty telling of dev priorities.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
Staltran posted:That tier 4 paragraph singling out a bunch of full casters and following up with "other characters" seems pretty telling of dev priorities. Just completely unwilling to have "non magical" classes posses any sense of wonder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:31
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:level 20 turns take forever man. im never doing this again lol Better or worse than level 10 pathfinder turns? *pewpewpew* gotcha Pathfinder running rise of the runelords is driving me slowly to madness
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:Just completely unwilling to have "non magical" classes posses any sense of wonder. I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to say that a person who uses magic, a literal capacity to manipulate the stuff of the world by sheer force of will, is going to be more wondrous than someone who cannot. The choice to play a non-magic user is basically the choice to be something more mundane and worldly. I don't think that's a bad thing per se, but whether or not it's good, it follows logically, I think. I suppose if a game designer really want classes to be balanced in this narrative regard you could say that a high level fighter is in fact overtly supernatural, being capable of strking through the stuff of reality with the force and skill of their weaponmastery. Otherwise, all a level 20 fighter has to their name is being the best at killing people with weapons. There's only so many nails that hammer can strike.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:You are not entirely right, scope out page 36-38 of the 5e DMG: Love the idea of a warlock who hates their patron becoming a patron and handing out power secondhand just like "uhhh yeah I'm the big guy, not just an adventurer, don't kill me when you get to level 20 cus I'm a lich or devil or something"
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Having played as a lvl 15 Psion/Thrallherd with a Druid and Cleric as a Thrall, I am positive that no high level DND turn takes as long as a DND 3.5 turn. (This is a good thing about DND 5e, high level turns are shorter)
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
change my name posted:Love the idea of a warlock who hates their patron becoming a patron and handing out power secondhand just like "uhhh yeah I'm the big guy, not just an adventurer, don't kill me when you get to level 20 cus I'm a lich or devil or something" warlock pyramid schemes ftw
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
Smh the Warlock should move to become a god. Make the people who follow you Clerics of you. So much more power to be gained that way, to eventually overthrow your own patron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
Why do you want to overthrow your patron? Just quit and start your own warlock scheme, with blackjack and hookers. Unless you expect your patron to try to kill you if you quit, of course. Not that becoming a god if you can pull it off wouldn't probably be good, but you don't need to set your sights so high.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
Usually Patron's don't like it when their followers get more powerful than them. Also tying your power to someone else's grace is bad form when you can help it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
Not sure what you mean by "tying your power to some else's grace"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:17
|
|
|
I absolutely plan for my Warlock to end up like the end if Mr. Norrell and Jonathan Strange; that Fey is absolutely not a good person or her friend and she's eventually going to want out. We agreed to this in broad principle ahead of time, so I'm not going to be slowly poisoning a player's idea of how things are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
Staltran posted:Not sure what you mean by "tying your power to some else's grace"? You have to keep them happy to retain your power - hence the phrase "staying in their good graces." As a result you cannot act independently and aren't actually as powerful as you might think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:You have to keep them happy to retain your power - hence the phrase "staying in their good graces." As a result you cannot act independently and aren't actually as powerful as you might think. this is not true of warlocks, it is actually a really common misconception. warlocks are given a seed of power by their patron but their ability is their own and they are not beholden to their patron in any way. you can make the warlocks be that way if you want but it isnt the intent of the class
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:21
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:this is not true of warlocks, it is actually a really common misconception. warlocks are given a seed of power by their patron but their ability is their own and they are not beholden to their patron in any way. you can make the warlocks be that way if you want but it isnt the intent of the class At low levels that makes sense, as a warlock tends to be such a piddly thing compared to whatever power planted the seed that the power in question just plain doesn't care or have time to micromanage what such a player character is doing. Presumably whatever deal led to the power being given has already been made and the terms have already been meted out, whether that's a soul contract or something more esoteric. That said, I think it's reasonable for a DM to put the patron on the board as an entity when a PC gets up there in the levels. An archfey or fiend might start caring about the recipient of their power if they could potentially be working at cross purposes from the patron's interest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:28
|
|
|
Mr. Lobe posted:At low levels that makes sense, as a warlock tends to be such a piddly thing compared to whatever power planted the seed that the power in question just plain doesn't care or have time to micromanage what such a player character is doing. Presumably whatever deal led to the power being given has already been made and the terms have already been meted out, whether that's a soul contract or something more esoteric. i think having the patron in the game is a must. i am just saying the patron doesnt directly provide power with a tap they can turn off to make you a powerless nobody. i think rather than the patron saying "no more eldritch blast actually" they send other warlocks after you, and this is better, but i see and respect the plot line of being depowered also
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
I wasn't even talking about being depowered necessarily. I was mostly talking about general this person you have a deal or made a pact with, Is still likely more powerful than you. And there's only like so much more powerful a player can get.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
Honestly, if there were a class that were dependent on another entity to retain their powers, it'd be clerics. Even then, it wouldn't surprise me if there's some fluff in the PHB somewhere about how clerics derive their power through their personal faith in the ideals they're pursuing or something, instead of being given them by their god. That's basically how paladins work now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Honestly, if there were a class that were dependent on another entity to retain their powers, it'd be clerics. Even then, it wouldn't surprise me if there's some fluff in the PHB somewhere about how clerics derive their power through their personal faith in the ideals they're pursuing or something, instead of being given them by their god. That's basically how paladins work now. That is how clerics work RAW. In settings without gods, or where gods don't really interfere in mortal affairs, it's where you get your power from even if you're worshipping a platonic ideal like "courage" or "fire" etc. Still, if your god came down and told you "hey I'm disowning you and stripping you of your powers for heresy," I'm pretty sure the traditional cleric would lose faith (and hence their spellcasting abilities)
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
Gods tend to like powerful clerics. I'm sure another god would show up and starting singing Joe songs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 17:53
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:i think having the patron in the game is a must. i am just saying the patron doesnt directly provide power with a tap they can turn off to make you a powerless nobody. i think rather than the patron saying "no more eldritch blast actually" they send other warlocks after you, and this is better, but i see and respect the plot line of being depowered also High level warlocks seek to renegotiate the terms of the deal; instead of depending on the patron as a benefactor, they seek to subjugate the 'patron' to their own will, tapping into their power for their own ends, and perhaps even coming to dominate or bind the patron entirely. (This obvs works betters for some warlocks than others. It seems like the natural endgame for Fiend/Fey locks for example)
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 18:03
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Gods tend to like powerful clerics. I'm sure another god would show up and starting singing Joe songs. Yeah, my impression of clerics is that they're like especially sensitive radio receivers tuned to the bandwidth gods broadcast on. That makes you a hot commodity among the divine, because you're the most direct vessel for their influence on the material plane. If one god rejects you, some other god who thinks you could be used to further their agenda would be willing to make a covenant with you for clerical powers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:i think having the patron in the game is a must. i am just saying the patron doesnt directly provide power with a tap they can turn off to make you a powerless nobody. i think rather than the patron saying "no more eldritch blast actually" they send other warlocks after you, and this is better, but i see and respect the plot line of being depowered also This is the best way to see Warlocks. We already have a class that gets all their powers directly from an outside source, Clerics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
Yeah I believe the Official Word is that patrons give or teach power to the warlock, and it belongs to the warlock and can't be revoked. But the patron can do other nasty things if you don't do what it wants-- curse you, send agents, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 18:50
|
|
|
5e has shied away from giving, or in the case of paladins outright refused to give, rules for shutting off a class' powers after sufficiently pissing off whatever was giving them magic, be they heretical clerics or disobedient warlocks. If you're at the point where you're at odds with your patron, it should be a conversation between you and your DM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:5e has shied away from giving, or in the case of paladins outright refused to give, rules for shutting off a class' powers after sufficiently pissing off whatever was giving them magic, be they heretical clerics or disobedient warlocks. If you're at the point where you're at odds with your patron, it should be a conversation between you and your DM. Being at Odds with your patron is completely fair for a DM to do. Anything involving the taking of player power/agency away should definitely be a convo with the GM though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 19:39
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:You are not entirely right, scope out page 36-38 of the 5e DMG: This runs smack into the problem that it's all "DM Empowerment" with no real rules that they heroically charged you 50 bucks for. Founding a dynasty or religious order seems like something that should have actual, you know, rules, as those things tend to get into conflicts with other religious orders and states and questions like "how many troops can I field", "how are we feeding those troops", "how can I as an 18th level fighter influence the outcome of a siege", "can I make a treaty of alliance with those necromancers and bring them into the fight," etc. It's pretty telling that the rulebooks talk a lot about the different tiers of play but when you look at the abilities PCs get it's just fighting orcs with bigger numbers. Look at the pit fiend. It's supposed to be a ruler of hell who commands devil legions, and aside from a lovely fireball and paralyzing one guy, it's just an auto attack orc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:I absolutely plan for my Warlock to end up like the end if Mr. Norrell and Jonathan Strange; that Fey is absolutely not a good person or her friend and she's eventually going to want out. We agreed to this in broad principle ahead of time, so I'm not going to be slowly poisoning a player's idea of how things are. I don't really have much of a plan for my Archfey Warlock's long term goals, but he'll definitely be a bit wary of his patron - especially since 15 days in the Feywild turned into 15 years on the mortal plane - giving a 15 year head-start to the people who wronged the Warlock. The Warlock is going to need the patron's help more than he was expecting. All the Warlock really knows is that his patron plucked him out of a life-or-death situation and that they definitely want something in return. In any Session 0, I will talk to the DM about this, because I have no interest in playing this character if the patron isn't going to be communicating and giving information or orders to the Warlock.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:08 |
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:This runs smack into the problem that it's all "DM Empowerment" with no real rules that they heroically charged you 50 bucks for. Founding a dynasty or religious order seems like something that should have actual, you know, rules, as those things tend to get into conflicts with other religious orders and states and questions like "how many troops can I field", "how are we feeding those troops", "how can I as an 18th level fighter influence the outcome of a siege", "can I make a treaty of alliance with those necromancers and bring them into the fight," etc. This is why I love the Rules Cyclopedia. One compact book but they still manage to include a kingdom building and a mass combat system. I think the design philosophy for 5e is just different than other print editions. Wizards of the Coast is taking a lot more "hands off" approach and encouraging home brew material with DMs guild. I think this is better to be honest. Back in the 3.5 edition day there was an official book for everything, but only one. So you could get rules for opening a shop, but maybe they suck? Then what do you do? With DMs guild there are 4 different ways to do epic levels, 6 different types of Witch class, 4 interpretations of a playable Beholder, etc. The rules for kingdom building you are after exist for 5e: https://www.dmsguild.com/product/317722/Player-Kingdom-Management--Player-Owned-Kingdom-Rules
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2021 21:13
|
|