|
100YrsofAttitude posted:Ooh that sounds neat. Maybe some sort of claws, like knived knuckles. What're those called? Bagh nakh? 
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
potatocubed posted:Bagh nakh? Use these. Take the Chef feat. Make pulled pork at every opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Crumbletron posted:Re: echo knights from a while back, they're definitely some of the most fun I've had playing a melee in 5e outside of my last bladedancer build. I'm in a party otherwise filled with casters so it's nice to be able to hold my own and do stuff that would traditionally fall into their wheelhouse. We're gonna hit 11 soon and I'm looking forward to extra attack 2 soon Yes quote:
Because you are still taking the attack action on your hasted Action. It also requires resources. So if you want to burn 3 resources and Alpha someone like that then god speed. Dexo fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Aug 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
Re: Monk Weapons I feel like Monk's need all the help they can get, reskinning weapons as someone suggested to have a mace now be brass knuckles is a pretty good idea. Also Re: my issues of feeling useless as a crowd control wizard in my campaign with the heavy hitting archers. In retrospect the solution is having to have the chat with my DM that I am feeling anaemic in combat when we're dealing with the 1-2 enemies trickling in shooting gallery style and see what he can do about that for me, not an issue for me to fix. Still totally going to go for the animated Tiny Servant cogs to poo poo on my goblins insanely oversized stove pipe hat and throw rocks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 03:34
|
|
|
So I'm finally getting around to reading the combat section in the Handbook. I've got some questions and you all have been so good at answering them so here's some more. 1) Regarding flying, do all creatures who fly have hover? And if not does that mean you need to leave some flight speed unused to stay airborne or do you have to land at the end of every turn? 2) You can only do one opportunity attack per round. So say you're engaging two creatures, and they both decide to move away you can only still hit out at once because you use your single reaction. Or can you get more than one opportunity attack, for every creature that decides to move away? 3) Death. So I get all the all the things around being dead, unconscious, saving throws etc. My question is what exactly happens if a character dies? Presumably if you find a high-enough level NPC or have a player at appropriate level they can cast a specific but costly spell. So how hard is it to acquire the money or material for such a thing? I guess my question is, despite death clearly not being permanent permanent, it can and does happen. If you don't have the funds to come back to life, are you out of the game, do you make a whole new lvl 1 character, or join up as someone else at some sort of equivalent level? I figure it depends on the DM and all, but just kind of curious how it's been dealt with before. Thanks again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 15:25
|
|
|
My understanding of flight is that if the creature does not have "hover" in their stat block, then they have to return to ground by the end of the turn. If they do not return to ground, then they fall straight down, potentially taking falling damage depending on how far they fall. Your opportunity attack uses your reaction, correct. So far as I'm aware there's no way to get additional reactions. You can therefore only get 1 opportunity attack per round. Death is one of those things where the DM and the players really need to be on the same page. Generally speaking though, if you're in a game where death is a legit possibility, then it's on the DM to either make sure that there's NPCs around who can rez characters (maybe requiring payment or a quest to be completed first), or to make sure the PCs have the resources to be able to perform rezzes themselves. Or everyone understands that dead is dead, you make a new character because the old one's not around any more. Starting from L1 with a new character used to be a thing in the oldschool days, but so far as I'm aware, it doesn't generally happen any more. The party should always generally be the same level or very close to it. When a new character shows up, it's up to the group as a whole to figure out how that works in-setting. (EDIT: regarding resources to resurrect: the spells involved cost moderately valuable components. Depending on the DM and setting, these may be easier or harder to find, but they're not typically out of reach price-wise for a party with casters who are high enough level to be able to cast the spells)
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 15:35
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Your opportunity attack uses your reaction, correct. So far as I'm aware there's no way to get additional reactions. You can therefore only get 1 opportunity attack per round. I guess that's reasonable in the regard that you can be swarmed. And thanks for the other answers. I'm not playing a flying character or anything but it wasn't said anywhere. And as for death, it's good to know you can keep being part of the game/group, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:My understanding of flight is that if the creature does not have "hover" in their stat block, then they have to return to ground by the end of the turn. If they do not return to ground, then they fall straight down, potentially taking falling damage depending on how far they fall. From the PHB, in Chapter 9: Combat, Movement and Position, Flying Movement says posted:Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell. The 2019 Sage Advice Compendium contains the following paragraph which directly addresses your flying rule fyi:" Can a flying creature without the hover trait stay in one place while airborne, or does it need to move each round? A flyer that lacks the hover trait can stay aloft without moving each round." But yeah, you are not the only one to interpret it that way. Toplowtech fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Aug 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 16:09
|
|
|
The rules for flying aren't worded well, so definitely add in some common sense, such as the distinction between magical and nonmagical flight. For example, an owl familiar flies in the same way that a real world owl flies, and as such does not need to land every six seconds, the approximate temporal length of a combat round. But for the same reason, they cannot remain airborne in any space too small for them to do a tight flying circle, so the ability to remain aloft for multiple turns is not unlimited either. The same principle applies to a lot of creatures that don't have a real world analogue but which are implied to fly aerodynamically. Then there's magical items and spells designed to give limited flight distance. Those I would generally interpret to allow hovering but unless either stated to last multiple turns or if recast during the turn, the character would need to be back on the ground at the end of the turn or suffer fall damage. There's going to be gray areas there, obviously. A dragon, as typically depicted, isn't going to be capable of aerodynamic flight but yet they have wings and are usually depicted flying in that way, so you'll have to decide what the best way to handle them will be. The only really important thing is to be consistent, so your players will know what to expect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 16:40
|
|
|
Oh right, that's what hover means. Mea culpa. I'm pretty sure there's a pseudo-flight ability that requires landing each round, but it may not have a special term. I don't think I've seen it more than once or twice?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Oh right, that's what hover means. Mea culpa. There's some abilities that can pump up jump abilities pretty well, to the point that Monks or other characters basically have limited flight each turn. But yeah the biggest difference between Fly and Hover movement is that the former can crash due to condition attacks that knock them prone or reduce their speed to zero. Magical flight tends to be treated as Hover, whereas natural flight tends to be treated as Fly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
Kaal posted:There's some abilities that can pump up jump abilities pretty well, to the point that Monks or other characters basically have limited flight each turn. But yeah the biggest difference between Fly and Hover movement is that the former can crash due to condition attacks that knock them prone or reduce their speed to zero. Magical flight tends to be treated as Hover, whereas natural flight tends to be treated as Fly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xxOOP2d6Nc&t=1988s
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 17:07
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Oh right, that's what hover means. Mea culpa. Yeah that's a thing for some creatures. E.g. Abyssal chicken has quote:Bad Flier. The abyssal chicken falls at the end of a turn if it's airborne and the only thing holding it aloft is its flying speed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:And as for death, it's good to know you can keep being part of the game/group, somehow. The easiest way is you take over an NPC who then becomes your PC, or you just play a new character who appears relatively out-of-nowhere or the DM can slide you in logically. Typically it is something like if your old character died in an orc warcamp, your new PC will be a prisoner in said warcamp who was taken by the orcs prior to your group arriving. This is one of those "game"~y things where you might think "Would our group really just accept this new person with open arms no questions asked at this point, despite just losing a comrade?" or even "what odd timing that X would die and then Y shows up mere minutes later", but because it is necessary for the player to keep actually... playing the game... it is generally just handwaved and every player should just roll with it. If I have a high level game going and a new PC needs to come on board they usually start a few levels below the party but they catch up after a level or two.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
According to those rules, a flying creature without hover would fall if grappled. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
DressCodeBlue posted:According to those rules, a flying creature without hover would fall if grappled. Yup. And they immediately fall all the way to the ground (PHB) or up to 500 ft per round (XGE). In fact RAW a flying grappler can swoop around binding wings / knocking the wind out / ruining concentration then letting go and causing enemies to go into terminal dives. You might have some DMs prefer that you grapple the target all the way to the ground, but they're supposed to crash as soon as they are restrained / shoved prone / movement reduced to 0. Unless they have a reaction like Feather Fall they'll hit the ground before they have time to recover. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Aug 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
DressCodeBlue posted:According to those rules, a flying creature without hover would fall if grappled. Makes sense when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
Suppose a friend wanted to do a Barb/Fighter/Druid build. He's already 8 in Barbarian, he's pretty set on doing it. What's the best progression from here?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Suppose a friend wanted to do a Barb/Fighter/Druid build. He's already 8 in Barbarian, he's pretty set on doing it. What's the best progression from here? Probably CotM Druid so he can Rage and then turn into a big beastie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:Probably CotM Druid so he can Rage and then turn into a big beastie. At level 8, a moon druid that can turn into a CR1 beast isn't going to be particularly helpful. They have crappy AC and low HP, so a few monster attacks and you're knocked out of beast form again. Rage will help with that to some extent...but a CR1 beast also doesn't have terribly impressive offensive compared to an L8 PC. You also can't get a beast with a swimming or flying speed for quite some time. Do they want to do this combination for flavor reasons, or are they imagining a particular playstyle that it would enable?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 02:38
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Suppose a friend wanted to do a Barb/Fighter/Druid build. He's already 8 in Barbarian, he's pretty set on doing it. What's the best progression from here? Fighter is easy because a 2 level dip gets you a fighting style and action surge. Hell going to fighter 5 might not be a bad idea to get another extra attack. Making druid fit is harder... If they really insist I guess 2 levels in druid for circle of spores I guess? You can get an extra d6 to all your attacks so 2d6 if you are attacking twice or 3d6 for 3 attacks. Also a d4 from your spore cloud. Barkskin might be nice if your unarmored defense isn't at 16.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 03:22
|
|
|
Kung Food posted:Fighter is easy because a 2 level dip gets you a fighting style and action surge. Hell going to fighter 5 might not be a bad idea to get another extra attack. If he’s 8 in barbarian he already has his second attack. He’d need 11 fighter levels to get a third attack.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 03:45
|
|
|
nelson posted:If he’s 8 in barbarian he already has his second attack. He’d need 11 fighter levels to get a third attack. Is that how extra attack works for multiclassing? I had no idea. I guess that makes the progression easier. Fighter 2 and druid 2 (spores) at the end. Progress with either 2 druid then 2 fighter, or fighter 1> druid 2> fighter 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 04:06
|
|
|
Kung Food posted:Is that how extra attack works for multiclassing? I had no idea. I guess that makes the progression easier. Fighter 2 and druid 2 (spores) at the end. Progress with either 2 druid then 2 fighter, or fighter 1> druid 2> fighter 1. Yeah otherwise you'd get some crazy extra attack stacking shenanigans. There's some really clunk-ily worded thing about "two class features with the same name" somewhere in the multiclassing rules.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 05:53
|
|
|
Mr Welch has grown tired of WotC and waiting 5 years and decided to release: The Mystara Player’s Guide. 5th Ed players guide to the BECI world.  Get it from https://rpgmp3.com/ I've been following his Youtube series for a long time. My first RPG was the red boxed set of D&D. This brings back memories, though I never actually played much in the original Mystara either. He mentions in the youtube video that a print friendly version is coming later. Comstar fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Aug 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 06:41
|
|
|
Saxophone posted:Suppose a friend wanted to do a Barb/Fighter/Druid build. He's already 8 in Barbarian, he's pretty set on doing it. What's the best progression from here? From a raw power perspective, dipping two levels of Fighter to get a Fighting Style and Action Surge seems worthwhile. As for Druid, I'm not seeing anything that would add power at all, just because nothing they do really scales up with total character level, it's all Druid level based. To actually answer your specific question, if they're dead set on dipping both Druid and Fighter, I'd say take a 2 level dip into Fighter (level 10 total), then pick whatever flavor of Druid fits best thematically with what they want to RP for a one level dip (two if they insist on having a circle for character reasons), because none of the combat stuff is gonna be useful so it's just what they're getting out of it narrative-wise. That plops them out at level 13 or 14, having given up getting 2 extra crit damage dice and the ability to possibly keep fighting after being reduced to 0 HP (and path features), having gotten an extra action and some extra HP per short rest as well as the fighting style bonus (and whatever noncombat flavor bonus stuff the Druid levels give. I'll never tell someone they can't sacrifice combat effectiveness for character story reasons, but if one of my players were doing a Frankenstein build like this, I'd want to understand their motivation. There's a solid case to be made that the two level Fighter dip is worth it, that's effectively trading an extra crit damage die and the path feature for an on demand action, some extra HP, and the fighting style bonus. Take that with a grain of salt, as I haven't played a Barbarian at that level or done the math, but I can at least see the argument. That said, this whole thing strikes me as someone misunderstanding some aspect of how the multiclass works and trying to do something broken vs. someone having a cool character idea that isn't optimal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 06:59
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Animate Dead lets you control four skeletons Is that including your internal skeleton???
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 08:15
|
|
|
If they want some nature-y flavour, 3+ levels in Ranger, maybe with the Druidic fighting style, fits a lot better mechanically. Not being able to concentrate in a rage makes things a bit awkward but there are some good features which synergise with barb/fighter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 08:15
|
|
|
ElMaligno posted:Is that including your internal skeleton??? Nobody can control their internal skeleton. That's just silly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 08:26
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be good to get 3 levels of fighter to get champion for extra crits? Especially as a barbarian?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 11:16
|
|
|
Circle of Stars so the Barbarian can be in touch with his celestial destiny, and sling some energy bolts at his enemies. Or Circle or the Shepherd to be more in touch with nature, and have some extra utility with the spirit. I’ve never made one, but a Barbarian/Druid just thematically feels right, even if the game mechanics may not exactly agree.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 12:56
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:Circle of Stars so the Barbarian can be in touch with his celestial destiny, and sling some energy bolts at his enemies. Or Circle or the Shepherd to be more in touch with nature, and have some extra utility with the spirit. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 13:07
|
|
|
Mechanically what would be "simpler" to play? In one game I'm going with a monk, and I like the options that presents without being overloaded with possibilities either. I want to try a bit of magic for a 2nd game, so I'm eyeing Rangers since I like their Physical focus with a touch of spell-casting. Horizon Walker looks bad-rear end, and I want to make a halfling melee ranger who "sails" between the dimensions looking for her lost people. Otherwise a more typical Folk Hero Beast Master using the options presented in Tasha's etc. The former opens up the use of quite a few more complicated concepts to me and has more involved magic, while the latter involves controlling more than one piece at a time which may be overwhelming?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 13:16
|
|
|
Drewjitsu posted:Wouldn't it be good to get 3 levels of fighter to get champion for extra crits? Especially as a barbarian? Not if you are delaying barb progression for it
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 14:58
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Yeah otherwise you'd get some crazy extra attack stacking shenanigans. There's some really clunk-ily worded thing about "two class features with the same name" somewhere in the multiclassing rules. I mean going straight fighter does something similar so it didn't seem that OP to me. How does that work with "Ability Score Improvement?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
Champion’s crit range plus reckless attacks from barbarian plus great weapon master is a really powerful combination.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
I think I've managed to talk him into just fighter. He liked the idea of Bearbarian, but I think I managed to finally convince him that's something you roll a druid for and dip Barb levels, not the other way around. He's looking at Champion fighter, but I think we've got access to any of the current official books, so if there's something better, I'm all ears and he seems to be too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:Mechanically what would be "simpler" to play? In one game I'm going with a monk, and I like the options that presents without being overloaded with possibilities either. Having a animal companion isn’t overwhelming. You can keep them by your side for the most part if you don’t want to stretch your focus out much. Horizon Walker can be a lot of fun though. That’s the subclass I chose for my Link knock off. I’d definitely give that one a shot if you’re having misgivings about having an animal buddy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
My (4) kids wanted to play D&D, so I got the Essentials Kit and some extra dice. I had the day off yesterday so over the course of the day we made everyone's character - then we played a first session. I'm DMing. I haven't significant paper role playing games since I was a kid (but I play a lot of computer RPGs and board games). I haven't sought out any D&D "content" or whatever. Short story is that it went OK and my kids want to play more. But I came away with a lot of questions, like... why isn't this better? Here's my review: THE STARTING MISSION/SETUP SEEMS REALLY BAD The opening scenario really sets you up for failure as DM. You start out a quest-hub sort of village, and the players can pick from three quests. OK, immediately... why? I'm new to all the rules, and now I have to read over three quest settings if I'm going to get ready or come up with ideas. I didn't want to do that. But that meant that for our first session, with a very shakey understanding of the rules, I'm only ahead of the players by "whatever sentence I'm currently reading" in the descriptions. Also, having 3 choices (with automatic level-up between) seems to mean the first missions will be impossible to balance. Just the HP difference between level 1 and 3 across the party is going to be huge. I thought surely they would vary setup based on player count and level and... not so much. The first enemies (in the Dwarven Excavations quest) are 2 Ochre Jellies with tons of health, and who are very likely to one-shot my players (they do effectively 3D6+2 of damage, and my players have like 11 HP). Maybe at level 3 they'd be fine, but they are not the right picks for level one enemies. Or, if they are, then they're not the right picks for level 3 characters with way more health and options. Meanwhile, the stat block/description/setting is giving me nothing to work with in terms of prompting my players towards non-combat alternatives (eg. the jellies aren't "drawn towards their torch or something", and I have no help figuring out how Jellies behave or how else we might deal with them). Rather than trying to push players towards running away (effectively abandoning their first quest having done absolutely nothing), I "heavily managed" the fight so they didn't all die. I don't... get it? Like, how did this go in playtesting? There are very few variables here. Were players supposed to know dwarven excavations are prone to strong monsters?. Was this supposed to be a lesson for the players, like "this is a hard game and you might all die with little recourse".. or "run away when you see monsters"? A lesson for the DM, like "nothing we give you has been thought through... so be ready to make stuff up." Meanwhile, the rest of the setting is giving me nothing to work with. The rooms are mostly empty and boring as crap. Oh look, featureless room with rubble. Oh wow this one has some beds. There's trivial theme, no puzzles, no "set pieces with interesting interactions", and no real clear way to convey the (short/bland) story behind the place. The mission gave me nothing to work with in terms of exercising "D&D mechanics". No walls to climb that the athletic rogue could try to explore, but maybe fall off. No mysterious writing that maybe needs an arcana check, but if you can figure out will help with enemies later. No poison gas trap to do a save from. Am I supposed to be "bringing in" all the good/interesting stuff as DM? I mean, that's what I did. While the combat was grinding along I made up some stuff for the temple's end room, and then I made up some rules/mechanics for the Orc fight at the end (I decided to have a ton of orcs show up, but they fought in a choke-point doorway until the orcs' morale broke... none of which I had any mechanical/written-setting support for). Am I expecting too much here to think the book should be giving more help with this? THE SYSTEMS AND WHAT'S IN THE BOOK The overall systems seem like.. poorly thought out, for a very mature game. Like, there's all these systems but they don't seem to do anything. Tons of stuff costs meticulously detailed "time", but there's no time pressure I can find outside of combat. Who the gently caress cares about how long it takes to copy spells into your spellbook or clear rubble or search rooms or get up from prone or short rest vs. long rest when there's no clock anywhere? It seems like the result of some initial game brainstorming that they never figured out how to make relevant. My players want to search forever and long-rest every time they take damage, what do I got to stop them? The book gives me no advice on how to handle what have to be super common play patterns. The book gives no advice on anything - no "helpful hints from 50 years of playtesting" on how to deal with "all the players want to grab the gem", "what information should I be getting/giving as they transition between areas", or deal with endless questions about searching and "can I see anything on the ceiling?". When it comes down to it, what decides whether they find the secret door? Does the person with best perception do all the searching so stuff isn't "lost forever"? Or...like, I could also have used some examples of "running combat in an interesting way without exactly tracking everyone on a grid". Instead, the book is full of stupid poo poo. It's full of weights. Surely I'm not supposed to be weighing all the dumb stuff my people have. "Hey player, are you bringing the 'dark clothes' you got as part of your kit on this mission? Well, if not let's just update your weight spreadsheet." Surely, surely, everyone ignores this (other than, like... no you can't bring a cannon up the ladder I guess), so... how about just don't have it? It's just, like, clogging up the book and making it harder to see what's interesting. If some grog wants it, have an appendix for it, and then don't put that appendix in the essentials kit. ...because there's no mechanics anywhere here to help me or create interesting decisions. There's no mechanics to support me saying, like, "you're going to have to pick between bringing a rope or a lamp into this dungeon", because mechanics wise both those things are cheap and light. And even if they weren't light, it seems like they could hire a donkey for nobody cares CP and run back out to the donkey for the cost of 0-to-forever time, which doesn't matter because I don't see how to make any of these things matter. Why not... like, "at level 1, you can pick 2 miscellaneous items off this list to bring"? And then now that there's an actual choice, you can say "If you want to take more than 10 arrows with you, that'll cost a slot". Oh, you levelled up your strong fighter and took the "ready for everything" perk, now you get 3 item slots. Do people just kind of force these kinds of decisions in ad-hoc? The game can't seem to pick a lane here. Like, these decisions need to matter or be interesting somehow, or they should be gone. Or there shouldn't be any rules and it should be up to thematic-role-playing-story to decide how it matters. But the crap is every where I don't know where to find the fun in it. My DM screen - like, the absolute core heads up information you need to play - is full of dumb poo poo. A meat chunk is worth who cares CP and mediocre lodging costs eye-roll SP, and who cares about travel time. The only thing worse than it being irrelevant is if it was relevant somehow. And if a scenario cares about tracking a large animal in 3.4 inches of snow maybe that mission could just tell me what difficulty that check is? Or, again, put it in some ranger's grog-book. Surely there's something else that could be on my DMs screen, because I'm eternally fumbling through the manual to find poo poo. Meanwhile, we're just coming to level 2 and tons of the economy considerations and tables are irrelevant. On their first mission, my players found 150GP worth of gems and a 50GP amulet, which the book tells me they can sell for something like full price. So, yeah, after one mission, 90% of the stuff at the store (and the meat chunks) are effectively free forever, and whatever "dungeoneer's pack" or "explorer's pack" thing they spent time picking during their character creation (and used nothing from) are also irrelevantly cheap. It feels like lots of those decisions were a waste, other than vague story theme. And they can afford most of weapons, except they don't care about buying new weapons because they're totally uninteresting. Like, we were talking about it after the mission - and there's just so little basis to make these decisions. How can a greataxe and a greatsword be, like, the same weapon? Why? Why can't an axe do a special cleave move, or swords be better at blocking swords.. or something? Am I supposed to be fudging things as DM so that there's some kind of difference, or is all just pointless decoration? It feels like a lot of the game is going to be combat, but the combat seems prone to a lot of repetition - and I have no guidance how to integrate any kind of variety. Can the rogue do an acrobatic flip off a table to get advantage? Can they hide behind a pillar and spring out? If they can, how do I prevent them from now just doing that same kind of poo poo all the time in every remotely applicable scenario? Even with minis it doesn't seem like there's enough here to make a tactical game that is interesting to play. If combat is going to take up lots of the time, how do I make it fun and not just "I shoot my crossbow again" every turn? Or is it supposed to be repetitive and you just kind of power through "resolving combat" to get back to exploring? WHAT IS GOING ON? I'm OK with running a role-playing story telling thing, but the game doesn't seem to be giving me much to work with for that. I'm OK with running a step-by-step rules simulation tactics sort of game, but the one here seems kind of bland - and I have no idea how to integrate it that with the "role-playing" side. Am I supposed to be making one or the other of those work better somehow? Did I buy the wrong stuff or not enough stuff? Is "all the above" just kind of what the game is, and I should take it or leave it? Should I be watching someone play some early levels to see what it's supposed to look like? I understand that's a long scattered rant... Overall, I guess I just feel like I'm really missing something. Thoughts? jmzero fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Aug 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 18:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
Horizon Walker doesn't look that complicated unless your DM is throwing in a lot of planar portals. You can do some extra damage, you just have to, like, declare it a turn ahead of time. You get a free cast of Etherealness at level 7. None of it looks like it's complicated at all tbh. Animal companions are cool, but it is a whole other set of stats to track and if you go with Tasha's version you can switch it between three different sets and IME it's easy to forget what the pros and cons of each set are. So if your goal is simplicity I would 100% recommend Horizon Walker over Beast Master.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2021 18:35
|
|
