|
It's the worst of both worlds, amazing. They completely rewrote fireball as doing the exact same thing but now you can't attrit (or counterspell!) it, but you also still have to look up what fly and mirror image and if you do it makes the fight more challenging. Sorcerer's bolt is much better than anything a mage PC can get as a cantrip for no real reason and brings back the 4e problem where everything ran on arbitrarily so knowing that someone was a "warlock" gave you absolutely no idea how to prepare for that fight.
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
PCs and NPCs don't need to follow the same character rules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:14
|
|
|
I can't imagine the intent is to be unable to counterspell enemy casters. Otherwise, what's the point of counterspell?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:22
|
|
|
Luceo posted:I can't imagine the intent is to be unable to counterspell enemy casters. Otherwise, what's the point of counterspell? I would assume that the Witchlight/Mordenkainen stuff was developed under the new 5.5 style and that the core books have been delayed (most likely due to organization at WotC being a dumpster fire) and that when 5.5 drops, we'll have rules for counterspell/dispel on NPC spell abilities. We're just in limbo now waiting for the other shoe to drop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:PCs and NPCs don't need to follow the same character rules. The idea that players should have to memorize the corebook (and more besides) in order to be effective against enemies is absolutely awful from an accessibility/fun angle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:35
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:This. It also leads into that weird "rules as physics" situation where the mechanics for spellcasting are no longer treated as an abstraction to represent the narrative action of using magic that can be reflavored as necessary to suit the game and instead become hard-coded rules of the universe. Like, there's nothing about the mechanics of how casters are currently represented as NPCs that really reinforces the narrative differences between a Wizard, Sorcerer or Warlock like TheGreatEvilKing is suggesting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 18:41
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:It's the worst of both worlds, amazing. They completely rewrote fireball as doing the exact same thing but now you can't attrit (or counterspell!) it, but you also still have to look up what fly and mirror image and if you do it makes the fight more challenging. Sorcerer's bolt is much better than anything a mage PC can get as a cantrip for no real reason and brings back the 4e problem where everything ran on arbitrarily so knowing that someone was a "warlock" gave you absolutely no idea how to prepare for that fight. Clearly the intent is to decouple the damage-dealing magics from the rest of the spellcaster package, because the way 5E determines the challenge of a monster is based upon its damage output across the monster's lifespan in combat. Elimination of spell slots accomplishes two things: it removes the need to track a resource for a monster that will almost certainly die before it meaningfully expends all its spellslots, and it avoids the problem of rating a monster by the amount of damage it is expected to deal before dying when a GM might just have it recast Mirror Image three times instead of using that Scorching Ray spell. Additionally, if a monster's threat level is based upon its damage output, allowing a PC to use Counterspell to cancel its damage-dealing creates a real balancing problem. You end up playing weird Counterspell-related meta games: cast only when invisible, out of sight, 65+ feet away, or give all spellcasting monsters Counterspell allowing them to use those slots to protect their own damage or to block PC spellcasters from taking their actions. I've defended this meta in the past, but the big problem with it is that where a spell that prevents a melee-range monster from dealing damage is going to offer a saving throw, Counterspell either just works, or it encourages overcasting. Yes, a spell like Wall of Force can accomplish the same thing, and that's a problem: being able to shut down a monster's ability to deal damage completely without the monster having a saving throw or check to avoid it is a bad design decision. Giving a monster with magic the ability to deal more damage across its brief lifespan is similarly not a problem if the purpose is to bring it in line with the other monster designs. I agree that you could make different decisions: I'd probably retain damaging cantrips as-is and just list them in the ACTIONS block with the bonus and damage, although that gets complicated because monsters don't actually have "levels" to determine when they get the extra damage dice or attacks. But the big change is in allowing a caster enemy to perform a multiattack that includes casting a spell as part of a larger attack action. A few archetypes have this ability on the PC side of things, but not many. The logic of "now you don't have to look up spells" doesn't obtain, though they've cited that, apparently. But there is a rationale for the changes. And I do like that Counterspell can occupy its best utility in doing things like halting escape spells. The game already supports monsters whose abilities can't be counterspelled, and it isn't making Counterspell useless, just less useful. I do see how players used to the present system aren't going to like the change. But imagine the alternate approach of making all monster abilities "spells:" would allowing someone to Counterspell dragon breath or medusa petrification make the game better, or worse? Using the old stats is an option; allowing certain abilities or powers to be counterspelled is another. Frankly, I'd be just as happy if they removed Counterspell from the game, but I'm fine with making it a PC-only thing coupled with mechanics that make it less universally effective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
Does anyone have recommendations for where to get premade, generic maps? In particular I'm looking for maps to use on Mount Celestia, so holy temples, royal fountains, cloudy peaks, perfectly tended garden type stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 20:31
|
|
|
Pinterest, Reddit, and plain old Google search are your friend.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 20:33
|
|
|
NotNut posted:Does anyone have recommendations for where to get premade, generic maps? In particular I'm looking for maps to use on Mount Celestia, so holy temples, royal fountains, cloudy peaks, perfectly tended garden type stuff. Seconding Pinterest, if you click through enough they'll just start emailing you cool ones. Their suggestions are typically very good
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
"How does counterspell work" is such a silly question because it already has an answer - one from a previous edition, even! You just tag the monster's ability as 'Spell'. Just like how in 3.x both monster abilities and class features were tagged as either (Sp)ell-like, in which case they followed all the rules of the same spell, (Su)pernatural, which were not spells but were subject to magic detection and antimagic fields, and (Ex)traordinary, which were not supernatural - though as grognards liked to ignore, were explicitly called out as being able to defy the laws of physics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 03:08
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Like, there's nothing about the mechanics of how casters are currently represented as NPCs that really reinforces the narrative differences between a Wizard, Sorcerer or Warlock like TheGreatEvilKing is suggesting. You mean besides archmage NPCs being locked into the wizard list and that sort of thing? Or the warlocks in Volo's getting things like Dark Lord's Own luck? I don't think it's bad for players to go "ok, that guy's an evil wizard, so we should expect him to use fireballs" and it's not like 5e is hard enough that you can't get away with just autoattacking people to death. I think it's funny that the sorcerer statblock just reinvents the wheel and rewrites Shield and Fireball to screw over players trying to counterspell it, but they're pretty clearly trying to make him seem like a plausible sorcerer NPC as part of the narrative. It's certainly better than 4e's cyclops who had 3 different abilities called Evil Eye where they all did various random bullshit, and it's not like even new players will start slinging around fire spells when the DM announces the next adventure is in the Ice Cave. Narsham posted:Good stuff I think they could have achieved this by making Counterspell non-automatic and forcing a caster level check, but I guess this is what they went with. Granted, I have no idea how a level 5 party is supposed to fight this guy, because he comes into combat with fly and mirror image up if they don't get the jump on them and one-shots the party mage with 35 damage fireballs. I guess you pray for initiative and try to rocket tag him to death?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 03:15
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:
He has 45 HP and an AC of 12.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:"How does counterspell work" is such a silly question because it already has an answer - one from a previous edition, even! You'd still need to indicate the equivalent spell level, as well, but yes this sort of tagging would be a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 03:28
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:I think it's funny that the sorcerer statblock just reinvents the wheel and rewrites Shield and Fireball to screw over players trying to counterspell They 'reinvent the wheel' so you you don't have to flip open to another book to know how the monster works, and if you were the sort of GM to show monster stats to players (blasphemy, I am sure  ) its all right there for them as well. As multiple people have stated there are some incredibly easy solutions to make sure counterspell still can be used.I don't understand the impulse people have where PCs and NPCs need to all use the same rules. An NPC does not need to do the same thing as a player Sorcerer for me to 'buy' them as a sorcerer since "Sorcerer" is already a pretty nebulous concept, like all classes are. a Divine Soul sorcerer would be a whole different class in another edition, and if we have all these different subclasses of it, who is to say an NPC might not be of a different subclass entirely or better yet, what the word "sorcerer" means in the living, breathing world of the fiction might not line up 1-to-1 with the rigid mechanics of the rulebook.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 03:52
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:You mean besides archmage NPCs being locked into the wizard list and that sort of thing? Or the warlocks in Volo's getting things like Dark Lord's Own luck? I don't think it's bad for players to go "ok, that guy's an evil wizard, so we should expect him to use fireballs" and it's not like 5e is hard enough that you can't get away with just autoattacking people to death. But how does a mage having Fireball on their spell list reinforce the narrative of "guy who learned magic through dedicated study" vs. "guy who learned magic by making a pact with a magical entity"? And that's getting into the larger thing that a lot of the class mechanics that spellcasters gain access to, especially those that are typically translated into things NPCs use, don't really have any connection to the class's fluff. Like, Dark One's Own Luck just lets the user add a d10 to one of their rolls once per short rest; it doesn't really have any narrative connection to the concept of a Warlock that serves an infernal patron besides the fluff text saying "uh, cause a devil did it".
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:03
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:They 'reinvent the wheel' so you you don't have to flip open to another book to know how the monster works, and if you were the sort of GM to show monster stats to players (blasphemy, I am sure But you do, because he has a spell list that references the PHB right there! If you need his fly, web, or mirror image you're cracking the PHB anyway! Either go all the way and reprint all his abilities, don't half-rear end it like this! it's the worst of both words - now I need to recheck that the not-fireball and not-shield work like the fireball and shield I know, but also if I didn't know what web did I'd have to look it up. KingKalamari posted:But how does a mage having Fireball on their spell list reinforce the narrative of "guy who learned magic through dedicated study" vs. "guy who learned magic by making a pact with a magical entity"? And that's getting into the larger thing that a lot of the class mechanics that spellcasters gain access to, especially those that are typically translated into things NPCs use, don't really have any connection to the class's fluff. Like, Dark One's Own Luck just lets the user add a d10 to one of their rolls once per short rest; it doesn't really have any narrative connection to the concept of a Warlock that serves an infernal patron besides the fluff text saying "uh, cause a devil did it". Why is the fluff text separate from the narrative? The Dark One's own luck is, by virtue of being attached to the fiendlock, a signifier of tracking with dark powers. I don't see it as being any different than describing how the Bad Man's Guild all have tattoos of a frowny face on their foreheads or whatever, or how the guy throwing Sacred Flame is probably some kind of divine caster.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:13
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:But you do, because he has a spell list that references the PHB right there! If you need his fly, web, or mirror image you're cracking the PHB anyway! Either go all the way and reprint all his abilities, don't half-rear end it like this! it's the worst of both words - now I need to recheck that the not-fireball and not-shield work like the fireball and shield I know, but also if I didn't know what web did I'd have to look it up. My mistake, what I meant is the point of going fully in that direction is the end-goal of not having to do that, I will fully admit it is wonky to go half-way like that example.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:18
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:
But if you're going by that logic you can just as easily justify the new power rewrites by adding "Also this works because a devil did it" to the end of all of them (At least for the Warlock, obviously). Like other people have said: Classes and the mechanical progression associated with them don't need to exist in-universe, and if they don't exist in-universe there's no reason NPCs need to emulate their mechanics if it would be detrimental to the game experience. Again, Dark One's Own Luck is a pretty good example of a power since it recharges on a short or long rest, which is completely pointless for an enemy NPC as they're probably not going to survive past a single encounter. It working the same as the PC class feature doesn't add any sort of mechanical benefit to the experience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:21
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Like other people have said: Classes and the mechanical progression associated with them don't need to exist in-universe, and if they don't exist in-universe there's no reason NPCs need to emulate their mechanics if it would be detrimental to the game experience. Again, Dark One's Own Luck is a pretty good example of a power since it recharges on a short or long rest, which is completely pointless for an enemy NPC as they're probably not going to survive past a single encounter. It working the same as the PC class feature doesn't add any sort of mechanical benefit to the experience. Maybe not necessarily a class feature, but I do think it's cool when you can go "hey, that dude did X, we know from our past experiences playing the game to be ready for Y and Z". I agree you don't need to match the class features 1:1 (though that's the easiest way to do it for my brain), I just hate monsters being a collection of random incoherent abilities where everyone goes "well I have no idea what the hell this thing can do so I attack it with my crossbow again". Should it be mandatory to have perfect knowledge of the core books? No, but I think it's a nifty benefit that adds some player skill to the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:28
|
|
|
They have 3 years to figure it out, that dude's stat block is wonky if you're an abjuration/control-focused wizard, whatever. Has anyone played a good-aligned fiend pact warlock before? I was thinking of rolling a character who was going to die after a raid but sold her soul to whoever would help her, now she's struggling to do good within what her patron wants
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
change my name posted:Has anyone played a good-aligned fiend pact warlock before? I was thinking of rolling a character who was going to die after a raid but sold her soul to whoever would help her, now she's struggling to do good within what her patron wants I was thinking about how this would work and the only thing I could come up with is Ghost Rider. Go collect souls for the fiend, especially those that try to cheat death, like liches.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 04:36
|
|
|
change my name posted:They have 3 years to figure it out, that dude's stat block is wonky if you're an abjuration/control-focused wizard, whatever. patrons dont necessarily have to be involved. play as a warlock who stole power from a fiend and is constantly hunted down for their crime. play a warlock who was born into a cultist family and left of her own volition. play as a warlock who made a deal with a sealed devil in exchange for the power to save her family from bandits
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 05:03
|
|
|
change my name posted:They have 3 years to figure it out, that dude's stat block is wonky if you're an abjuration/control-focused wizard, whatever. I eventually switched her over to Hexblade for mechanical reasons, but my first Warlock was a character whose fiend patron unwillingly possessed her body after she died and the two's souls had become intertwined. So she had this demon who was hitching a ride in her body and giving her spooky powers but she couldn't get rid of him because she'd die without his influence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 05:07
|
|
|
Just have a patron who doesn't give a poo poo about most of your petty humanoid bullshit. The fiend has his own fiend stuff goals he cares about, and he uses a few warlock pawns to help move the pieces around on the prime material plane. Random orphanage? Probably doesn't care if you save it or burn it to the ground. Burning it down is funny, but it doesn't matter. Burning it down might even conflict with his interests if it means you get arrested or chased by bounty hunters, things which could make you unable to do his tasks. Help some paladins take down an evil cult? Great, as long as it wasn't his cult that's just fine. The cult was either irrelevant or potentially serving a rival so its destruction is meaningless, and having paladins owe you a favour could be useful later. Evil isn't a team, he has no reason to care if you weaken other evil entities. A patron should have a reason they are handing out powers. Since the fiends aren't actually christian style demons he probably isn't doing it merely to corrupt your soul. Your patron isn't some random imp, he is A Pretty Big Deal to have enough power that he can afford to bleed some off to mortal plane warlocks. He has wide-ranging long-term plans. He doesn't care if you stay Chaotic Good or whatever. He might even be picking Good (or non-Evil) people to be his warlocks because you'll have an easier time getting into some places or doing some things than an Evil entity. He has plenty of Evil servants, if he thinks having a Good warlock is valuable then he's not going to interfere with your ongoing meaningless good deeds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Just have a patron who doesn't give a poo poo about most of your petty humanoid bullshit. The fiend has his own fiend stuff goals he cares about, and he uses a few warlock pawns to help move the pieces around on the prime material plane. Yeah this is how I had planned on playing it, freedom to do most things as long as it didn’t interfere with the patron’s grand plan that’s inscrutable to mortals
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 05:58
|
|
|
A Fiend Pact Warlock is not necessarily bound to do whatever their Patron asks, nor have they necessarily sold their soul. There can be tons of weird agreements.Ash Rose posted:My mistake, what I meant is the point of going fully in that direction is the end-goal of not having to do that, I will fully admit it is wonky to go half-way like that example. The actual spells he has are purely utility or support spells, their thing is that they won't have any effect on his CR, which assumes he spams his big attacks as much as possible. So they are there to give him some versatility, but can be ignored in favor of just blasting. Yusin fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Sep 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 06:02
|
|
|
I honestly hope they go all the way and put all the info the DM needs in the stat block. The half-measure we see in the examples is just awkward. I'd prefer to see them all rewritten as Powers to streamline things. It'd be cool to have a Goblin Chef-Sorceror's version of Web be radically different from an Elf Wizard's. "Tendrils of leftover sinew coated in sticky vegetable starch fill a 20 foot cube" or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 06:22
|
|
|
I’ve been thinking about a Rogue that uses improvised weapons, since all of their damage largely comes from Sneak Attack rather than anything else, and the idea is fun, but I’m running into issues with the rules around rogues and improvised weapons being frustratingly vague. For improvised weapons, it seems natural that you’d want the tavern brawler feat, since it makes you proficient in them. But then, in the equipment section, it says that anything similar to a weapon can just be treated as if it were that weapon. So, in this scenario, if Granny Withers (the kindly old grandma with a sinister secret) uses her knitting needles to seal the deal, as it were, do those: a)“become” daggers, or b) are they treated as if they are daggers in terms of proficiency, but deal improvised weapon damage, or c) are they completely an improvised weapon and Tavern Brawler applies for proficiency in this case? Or is it d) Ask Your DM? The other thing I’m really not clear on is Hide, and given that it’s a core class feature for the Rogue this isn’t great! Hal flings can hide behind creatures a size category larger than them, and Wood Elves can hide when lightly obscured, but after flipping back and forth through the book following a trail of breadcrumbs, I’ve ended up on a sidebar that effectively just says “the DM decides when you can hide”. Is there any actual mechanical system for this anywhere that I’m missing? Lastly, for the purposes of magical resistance, is Sneak Attack damage explicitly typed to the weapon dealing the damage, or is it “type less” and thereby bypasses DR for creatures with resistance or immunity to non-magical attacks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 09:17
|
|
|
Devorum posted:I honestly hope they go all the way and put all the info the DM needs in the stat block. The half-measure we see in the examples is just awkward. You can already pretty much do that last bit with refluffing. Refluffing is always good. I mean I am 100% down with "all stuff an enemy can do should be in its statblock" too, that's also true. When I played and took a warlock through to the end, mechanically they were a Fiend pact that transitioned to Hexblade, but in terms of fluff their pact patron was literally their family name. They just believed in their family and motto so hard they got powers out of it. Noblesse oblige, peasant, let me save the world for you so that you can get back to farming in peace and I can get back to eating suckling pig taxing the poo poo out of you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 13:17
|
|
|
Brain In A Jar posted:I’ve been thinking about a Rogue that uses improvised weapons, since all of their damage largely comes from Sneak Attack rather than anything else, and the idea is fun, but I’m running into issues with the rules around rogues and improvised weapons being frustratingly vague. 5e is a complicated ball of strings that 99 times out of 100 lead back to a line of text in an unrelated paragraph saying "Ask Your DM". I think in this case the answer is probably D), though if I was the DM I'd allow basically whatever the player wanted to do with their character concept since mechanically there's basically zero difference between a dagger (1d4 damage, range 20/60) and a Tavern Brawler improvised weapon (1d4, range 20/60). Hiding does have specific rules, being that you need to be Heavily Obscured, then roll a Stealth check over the thing you're hiding from's passive Perception. Wood elf and Halfling are exceptions to this, allowing for this stealth check in situations where you aren't heavily obscured. quote:Lastly, for the purposes of magical resistance, is Sneak Attack damage explicitly typed to the weapon dealing the damage, or is it “type less” and thereby bypasses DR for creatures with resistance or immunity to non-magical attacks? It's just an extra #d6 of whatever damage your weapon does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:Granted, I have no idea how a level 5 party is supposed to fight this guy, because he comes into combat with fly and mirror image up if they don't get the jump on them and one-shots the party mage with 35 damage fireballs. I guess you pray for initiative and try to rocket tag him to death? My encounter design principles for 5E say you should almost never have an encounter with a single monster (even legendary monsters), so any encounter I'd build with him would be designed for 7th level PCs or higher. But let's assume I run this vs a L5 party, and let's assume he gets the jump on the PCs and has Fly and Mirror Image running. (Speaking from experience, it's just as likely that the PCs surprise him and murder him before he gets to take an action.) Round 1: the PCs get unlucky and he drops his Fireball on them. Average damage drops the d6 caster on a failed save, unless she's packing Absorb Elements. If the d6 caster survived, a return Fireball at 8d6 does on average 28 fire, and at a +0 save Kelek probably fails. He has 17 hp left. If someone else goes first and heals the d6 caster, same thing, though Kelek is more likely to survive the round. Alternately, Kelek gets hit with Hypnotic Pattern with a roughly 50% chance of being affected, which effectively wins the combat. The cleric or druid drops Dispel Magic, which ends both the Fly and the Mirror Image automatically. Kelek doesn't have Counterspell to protect his preps. Kelek takes 2d6 damage from the fall and is prone. 10 hp left. Might not happen this round if healing has to be applied. If the fighting types go next and he was dispelled, he's almost certainly dead if they can get to him. If they already went, they had to use ranged attacks against his images (although in that case, the cleric or druid probably doesn't Dispel). His images are AC 10, and he's AC 17 with the reaction ability. Assuming a rogue and a fighter, he's suffering 3 attacks, although a fighter will certainly Action Surge for 2 more after that initial attack. Even at AC 17, he's getting hit on 10s (or maybe 11s if somebody took a feat at 4th level). His images are destroyed 90% of the time if struck. One hit may or may not kill him. Round 2: Either Kelek died in round 1, or he survived but likely has 10 hp or fewer. On a 50% recharge chance, he repeats the not-Fireball, although now he can't catch the whole party because they spread out. Either he hits the casters, dropping the d6 caster and probably dropping the healer, or he goes after the martials in his face expecting that 70 damage will drop them. (A L5 fighter with Con 16 will have 49 hp, and will fall if either Dex save is failed; a rogue will need a 14 Con not to get dropped by the second blast even with two successful saves.) If he drops the martials, the spellcasters kill him. If he drops the spellcasters, the martials kill him. If he doesn't recharge, he will probably Web and run away. Alternately, three Sorcerer's Bolts, if they all hit, might drop 3 of 4 PCs, although odds are good the 4th will kill him. But he'd need to get lucky. So under the best circumstances, barring a really contrived battlefield that would have to factor into the challenge rating, Kelek lasts two rounds and reduces half the party to 0 hp. That's more dangerous than the CR computation indicates, perhaps, but not TPK territory. Compare briefly to two similar CR scenarios: 1: One dragon. There's no CR 5 dragon. The CR 4 Red Wyrmling has 17 AC for the whole fight, not three rounds of it, 75 hp instead of 45, the same flight ability without being dispellable, and immunity to fire. OTOH, the dragon breath recharges with a lower chance, hits fewer targets at a lower DC, and deals less damage. On rounds the dragon doesn't breathe, the bite does 12 dpr with the same hit chances as Kelek's attacks. Kelek deals 13 per attack with three attacks. Kelek is easier to kill than the dragon but much more dangerous. At CR 6, the Young White has 17 AC again, 133 hp, flies faster than Kelek with the Fly spell, and is immune to cold. The breath weapon does 10 more points of damage on average, with a DC 1 higher (and a Con save), though the AoE is still smaller. On rounds the dragon doesn't breathe, it has a slightly better chance to hit, the same three attacks, and deals 19/11/11 damage on average set against Kelek's 13. The Young White is clearly more dangerous. 2: A current CR 5 spellcaster enemy. Let's say the Transmuter. If you use the prep spells in the stat block, he has AC 15 but lower hp (40). Assuming he's prepared for the fight, he'll have Blink spell running. He can either open a fight with Fireball cast out of a L5 slot with identical results to Kelek, or cast Slow or Polymorph. If he's damage focused, he can cast Fireball again the following round at 100% chance, dealing 9d6 damage, and then do that again if he's still alive. That seems slightly more dangerous than Kelek. If you redo the prepared spells, of course, he's strictly better than Kelek. He's also harder to design, harder to run, and has 14 spell slots despite the fact that he's likely to die in 2-3 rounds at best if he doesn't kill the entire party.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:You can already pretty much do that last bit with refluffing. Refluffing is always good. I'm all for refluffing. I've also had the misfortune of running into a lot of screeching, miserable rules lawyers that fly off the handle if I refluff a spell. Once had a guy at an open table argue for 30 minutes that I "cheated" because I described a Lich's disintegrate as a different color and because of that his Wizard didn't recognize it and would have countered it...when he never asked if his Wizard recognized it. I booted him, but it was exhausting and disruptive even so. Because of that, I like either explicit refluffs (which also helps remove overhead, especially for new GMs) or very vague descriptions with explicit "They look however you want them to" RAW to head off the trolls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
Narsham posted:So under the best circumstances, barring a really contrived battlefield that would have to factor into the challenge rating, Kelek lasts two rounds and reduces half the party to 0 hp. That's more dangerous than the CR computation indicates, perhaps, but not TPK territory. As a new DM (maybe 10 or 15 sessions in) with a persistent feeling like "I'm missing something", I appreciated this post. All of the stuff you're saying makes sense, and matches my experience/expectation of how this enemy would play out. Specifically, it seems like dude here could work in a deathmatch-math sense, but also that the encounter would be very short. Either the party knocks him out of the sky and Roshambo's him, or things go bad and you get wiped. Either way it's over in a couple rounds, and the encounter was not great. You could make him part of some Team Rocket evil party I guess (for a higher level player party) - but it seems like that would still be a very swingy fight as you exchange haymakers. He (like too many of the monsters I find) just seems very hard to use in a good encounter, and the design problems feel pretty obvious. First, evil wizard here has low HP (which by itself is good/thematic), so they need some way to stick around for a while to do something interesting. I'm thinking horcruxes. Illusions he shifts between. A magic shield that needs to be strained or broken or outlasted in some interesting way. Or something bigger: you have to fight out of his nightmare fantasy world (and out of a too-good-to-be-true illusory victory scene) - and once that's gone he's just an old man offering you Tronya. His actual defense plan here (an AC boosting reaction) is the exact opposite of what we need - it's just going to make an already swingy fight even more volatile, more sensitive to small differences in stats, and generally impossible to design. Second, he needs a way to put pressure on the party that doesn't insta-gib people. Giving him a Fireball is like Michael Scott always having a gun at improv club. Your "potential story tree" is cut off very near the ground when you give monsters crap like that. It pulls the encounter towards terrible resolution states (dead party) and leaves little room for an interesting non-victory. Overall, the monster design feels way too cautious mechanically (eg. introducing special rules) while also being absolutely reckless with volatility, randomness, and potential degeneracy. Like, we just concluded Dragon of Icespire Peak and it was a fun close fight... and I used about zero of the material as printed. Same problems as dude here: the dragon-as-written is just generally incompatible with a varied, extended battle. Anyway, sorry to rant more/again; I just don't get how lots of these monsters/setups were ever supposed to work "right".
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
I have a balance question. I have a player who is running a hexblade, but whose patron is lawful good and kind-of paladin flavored (they kind of mind-melded with a sentient holy avenger). The level 6 feature which forces souls into servitude doesn't seem to fit the flavor well (feeling kind of creepy and evil). Would it be balanced, with their consent, if I just replaced this with the Eldritch Smite invocation (without the option to remove it)? It feels like it fits the flavor of the character better and my intuition is that an extra invocation is a downgrade if anything from the normal ability (but I wanted to check because I've never seen a level 6 hexblade in action before).
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
You could also say maybe the blade is granting those souls the possibility of some degree of redemption, and they universally agree because Hell is real, nasty, and comes in several flavors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 21:40
|
|
|
Mr. Lobe posted:You could also say maybe the blade is granting those souls the possibility of some degree of redemption, and they universally agree because Hell is real, nasty, and comes in several flavors. Yeah I think that's what we are going to go with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
Propane C3H8 posted:I have a balance question. Since you noted the paladin and holy avenger thing, what if they were more like retainers rather than unwilling servants? There's a bit more of an honourable connotation there, I think. You can also tie in the redemption angle mentioned above.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
yeah, could just do like a soul redemption or purification thing. Absolution of Sins vis the creature's soul fighting for your "righteous" cause
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
This is kind of funny, Wild Beyond the Witchlight has DLC: https://www.polygon.com/22698999/dungeons-dragons-domains-of-delight-spider-accessory-download-price
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2021 22:30
|
|