|
Froghammer posted:Idk man, based on your posting history in this thread I don't think you're a person worth engaging with That seems a bit harsh towards them. Also while refluffed Dragonborn is probably the Playable Draconians we will have, if one of the new settings is Dragonlance I could see them being made playable.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:06 |
|
|
Froghammer posted:Idk man, based on your posting history in this thread I don't think you're a person worth engaging with I don't really know where this is coming from.  Yusin posted:At the very least you are not getting playable Draconians in this book. The five primary Draconians are part of the bestiary in the ToC. However it’s pretty easy to refluff a Dragonborn as a Draconian. I figured, I'll pick up the supplement soon and see what it says and as you note Dragonborn are basically mainstream Draconians and yeah easy enough to refluff, there was I think either 4e or 3.5e dragonborn who were humans or whatever who got turned into scalies and then in 5e they become regular people so it seems like the trendline is there so my hope is if one of the new 5e settings is Dragonlance that they show up there as playable because they seem to be such an important part of the actual setting in the books. e: (even if they're mainly just reskinned/refluffed Dragonborn, like maybe playable Draconians in Krynn are basically like playable Kenku) Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I absolutely must know more. The setup was that the group defeated a bandit lord who had a bank key in his pocket. One of my players had been away for several sessions for IRL commitments, a Thief archetype Rogue, so I had planned with him to rejoin the game by having joined up with the bandits ambushing the party, switching sides when he realized they were attacking his old friends. The Rogue knew that the bandit leader, Olmog the Ogre, kept talking about compound interest and a bank in Neverwinter. The joke is that Olmog had no idea what compound interest means, and his vault in the bank is largely full of various low grade highway robbery loot that most definitely doesn't accrue interest. I already have a big heist planned for later in the main campaign, so this was always just a single session optional side quest. My plan is to introduce the bank with floor plans, detailed descriptions of guards and their patterns, and six counters with six queues with six different bank tellers. I'm gonna set up the bank so tightly guarded that the players will try to talk their way in. And that's when they realize that each queue is for a different purpose in the bank, and withdrawals from accounts other than your own also require a permit from the office of approved stewardships* across town. Then they get back to the bank, get back in line and eventually learn that they now need a separate, longer line. Meanwhile the boat taking them to the next step of the main campaign has a set departure time, so there's a ticking clock hanging above their heads at all time. *My current idea is this: To withdraw from an account other than your own, you need a key and a proof of stewardship. The latter you get by going to the office of magic disarmament. They give you a wooden bracer made of several small, dry vines that instantly breaks and falls off if any magic affects you. A chosen player must lose all buffs and magic items, get the bracelet and go to the office of stewardships. There, a person wearing the bracelet can testify in a Zone of Truth (that breaks the bracelet when cast, but proving that no other magic is in play), that they have the legal right of stewardship over the account in question. I plan to give the players a way to learn the three ZoT questions in advance, so they can prepare their non-lie answers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
bagrada posted:I vaguely remember them from the 2/3/3.5 era. Were they from Dragon magazine or one of the monster manuals? Maybe one of the later Monster Manuals? They’re not in the Draconomicon. I’m excited for Fizhan’s since I loved the 3.5 Draconomicon so much. Shame it got delayed until the 26th.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
Speaking of the Draconomicon, and other 3.5e supplements like the Spell Compendium, are there any resources for converting 3.5e stuff into 5e? I imagine somethings can be eyeballed, like instead of +Whatever it gives advantage instead; look at the differences between 3.5e and 5e versions of spells for an idea but I wonder if anyone has put together a more comprehensive guide.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
I'm not familiar with Dragonlance, could someone explain to me why playable Draconians wouldn't be just Dragonborn customized according to Tasha's? The whole mechanic centered around having a special effect when they die seems like something that could be a flavored version of what Barbarians already get, just substituted in as a racial for the breath weapon. Not sure if that's OP or not though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:I'm not familiar with Dragonlance, could someone explain to me why playable Draconians wouldn't be just Dragonborn customized according to Tasha's? The PHB actully even mentions them as customized Dragonborn. PHB posted:DRACONIANS For the most part a playable version would be weaker then the Dragonborn, as the Death Throes only come into play when they die. The Baaz Death Throes seems to have been upgraded (their original was they turn to stone when they die and crumble away after a bit. But this could trap weapons used to kill them). Here is the whole statblock sorry the picture is not better, but it's from a video. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
That they can be any alignment seems like a nod to the books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
bagrada posted:I vaguely remember them from the 2/3/3.5 era. Were they from Dragon magazine or one of the monster manuals? A variety of places. Brown and yellow dragons are different in the FR and in Dragon magazine: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Yellow_dragon Cobalt and Mithril dragons are from 4e’s Draconomicon II.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:18
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:That they can be any alignment seems like a nod to the books. It could also be a part of their whole "no evil races" thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:It could also be a part of their whole "no evil races" thing. Well evil races are still a thing they have it written out here. WotC posted:Both books are clear about the player and the DM having the final say on alignment, but both books also plant a seed of doubt. The Player’s Handbook suggests alignments for various folk in the D&D multiverse, and the stat blocks in the Monster Manual include alignments without reminding the DM that those alignments are merely suggestions. Also they are getting more restrictive about the Humanoid creature type. quote:We’ve also gotten strict about which monsters get the Humanoid creature type. This type is now reserved for creatures who are humanlike in their moral and cultural range. As we update older books, we’ll reassign some Humanoids to other creature types. When Monsters of the Multiverse is released, you’ll see that some former Humanoids are now Monstrosities, Fey, and other types. Dracoian's are Monstrosities meaning they are not humanlike in their moral and cultural range, but as their statblock says they are still capable of having any alignment as they are not innately predisposed towards evil.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
Ah my bad, I missed the reclassification
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:Ah my bad, I missed the reclassification Nothing to apologize over. You don't know what you don't know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
megane posted:“Blue dragon press-gangs the PCs into a fashion show” is Yeah, haha it's a pretty good hook!  If I was to run a campaign segment on this, I'd do it so that the dragon announces that the winner(s) get a huge hoard of treasure.So it all starts out innocently enough for the people there, with most thoughts of escape replaced by the temptation of the treasure...but then the dead body of a "contestant" appears not long after. When confronted in its inner sanctum about it, the dragon then basically shrugs and confirms that if everyone else dies, whoever is left is essentially the winner by default. Then this sets off several tense days trapped in this fortress/Cluedo murderhouse where people are offed here and there, and the PCs need to try to either survive to the deadline and win honestly, find and kill the murderer(s), or just wipe everyone out themselves. Or just something different! Kinda gives me that TES Oblivion murderparty quest vibes, in a way. And that really tempts me! Since boy was that Dark Brotherhood quest fun, haha
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
Bahamut and Tiamat.  Will try and get Draconians as well later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:05
|
|
|
Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
Wish they'd just called it Council of Wyrms instead of namedropping the second most annoying NPC in Dragonlance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? It's up to the DM. Hide the rolls and you can fudge things for the narrative, show them openly if you want to play cleanly and let the dice fall where they may
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? Well a lot of times you need to compare against a number on a character’s sheet like an AC or a spell save DC, and I feel like it’s more natural to just tell the player the number and they tell you if it met the check. For something else where I’m like rolling a bunch of dex saves to see how many of my monsters fell down in a landslide I’d probably just tell the players the final outcome. Edit: To be clear I’m talking about the final number after modifiers. Most DMs never say what the dice roll was unless it’s a nat 1 or nat 20.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:14
|
|
|
Warthur posted:Wish they'd just called it Council of Wyrms instead of namedropping the second most annoying NPC in Dragonlance. Council of Wyrms is mentioned at the very least.  Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? Whatever the DM decides is the right answer is the right answer here. Other then informing people when a crit happens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:19
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? D&D, as a game, is not tightly mathematically bound. So if you have no freedom to fudge numbers some of the following can occur: * Accidentally murdering the party * Creating a dull encounter where nothing happens for several rounds * Failing to account for suboptimal strategies on the part of your players If you can narrate around these problems without fudging - and you definately can - there's no harm in being forthcoming with the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:27
|
|
|
The Draconian's as promised. This is the end of the previews I can get for now.   
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 01:33
|
|
|
If you're DMing a homebrew, what's your favorite method of organizing monster statblocks when you're using a mix of sources? Especially if you have third-party sources so things like the Tools site don't include it all?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:Idk man, based on your posting history in this thread I don't think you're a person worth engaging with You don't need to announce that you're not engaging with another poster. Nehru the Damaja posted:If you're DMing a homebrew, what's your favorite method of organizing monster statblocks when you're using a mix of sources? Especially if you have third-party sources so things like the Tools site don't include it all? I use a version of this PDF because I am an old man who likes to print out all my notes: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/09bcee_0c657daf3141406787265387a1e13976.pdf
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 02:36
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? it depends on the group, but i think the answer is you say what the result is because otherwise abilities like shield or parry become a guessing game for the player in a way that feels really unsatisfying. players being able to determine AC is comparatively less negative
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 03:44
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:it depends on the group, but i think the answer is you say what the result is because otherwise abilities like shield or parry become a guessing game for the player in a way that feels really unsatisfying. players being able to determine AC is comparatively less negative Yeah, there's a few abilities which have an "after the attack is rolled but before the DM declares if it succeeds or fails" mechanic and I quickly concluded this was a stupid rear end mechanic shortly after it showed up for the first time in my 5e games. I'd say the primary drawback of D&D as an RPG system is how goddamn long everything takes in combat, and the absolute last thing I need in my game is a mandatory pause between roll and result just in case someone has an ability like this to make each turn even longer. I also don't think players find the mental math guessing games fun. My preferred style is a "battleship" type back and forth, where as the DM I announce attacks as "does a 17 hit?" and the player responds yes or no (and vice versa for player rolls). This gives me time to do things like total up damage dice, gives the players the opportunity to decide if they want to do something like casting Shield. If this gives the players an unintended advantage by letting them allocate resources without waste, it will get naturally balanced out as I gradually ramp content difficulty to give them a challenge anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 10:43
|
|
|
Yeah a lot of abilities where I have to decide before I know if the attack succeeded and potentially waste a limited resource isn't very fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:11
|
|
|
Honestly, I tend to leave campaigns where the DM isn't open about the die rolls...and when I have DM'd I don't use a screen. As a player I like feeling like I have agency and that the world has consequences.....when I know the DM is open to fudging the numbers it really messes me up. If I get crit and killed, so be it, but I want to see that's what happens. Open rolls also, for me, makes me feel less like I am just re-enacting the DMs script and am instead interacting in a shared world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:21
|
|
|
I think its fine to do secret rolls for a bunch of things, like plot things, or environment things or for things like if an NPC is doing an insight check to see if the party is lying to them and stuff like that. Like rolling if a monster took notice of the party and is now stalking them, these things I think work great to do secretly because the onus is on the party to take precautions. Not that you couldn't do it openly, in the Roosterteeth ongoing D&D podcast Tales from the Stinky Dragon they in the last episode I listened to had a sort of card game for handling dungeon exploration (as its a audio friendly D&D adventure) and the party had an inclination of when an encounter would happen based on how many "Monster points" got accumulated and how many Monster cards were added to the Deck. But I'm fine with the former approach; do some things secret for suspense; do other things openly where you'd like to be more transparent and to make combat little more fair. In my group the DM rolls pretty much all combat related rolls openly on d20. And has special real life dice for secret rolls & checks that are out of combat. Although this does mean losing that moment of pure fear you get when the DM rolls a natural 1 and you have no idea what the roll is for but only that it means something really bad is going to happen.  Akin to the "Hrm interesting" 'behind the screen rolls' of IRL D&D.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:30
|
|
|
I roll openly but have to say that there are times you do want to roll for stuff in secret. And playing online really eliminates all the dread of "oh poo poo why is he rolling right now" when the players can't hear it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:40
|
|
|
change my name posted:I roll openly but have to say that there are times you do want to roll for stuff in secret. And playing online really eliminates all the dread of "oh poo poo why is he rolling right now" when the players can't hear it. While I tend to be in the "play with your cards face-up" style of GMing where I gladly let players see monster stats and know what an enemy's to-hit is, I do think VTTs missed the mark by not having a sound option for hidden rolls where players just hear ominous die rolls happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:45
|
|
|
if i do something in secret later when the secret is irrelevant i tell the players what the rolls were
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 14:52
|
|
|
Rolling dice behind a screen remains one of the best ways to get a party to get a party moving if they're endlessly debating plans. "Huh, interesting", the DM remarks for no reason, as everyone else begins to panic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:While I tend to be in the "play with your cards face-up" style of GMing where I gladly let players see monster stats and know what an enemy's to-hit is, I do think VTTs missed the mark by not having a sound option for hidden rolls where players just hear ominous die rolls happen. I know Foundry at least has a "GM privately rolled some dice prompt that shows up in the chat"
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Dumb general question about DMing. Should a DM reveal ability/attack rolls, as in "He rolls a 17". Or should be merely say if it failed or succeeded? If I think the PC could die from the roll I typically hide it behind my screen. Unless the roll is the climax of a dramatic arc and a PC death would be hella awesome and/or surviving would also be awesome. Usually I throw dice out in the open about half the time for “DM theater” and to mix it up. We’ve talked about it upthread in different gaming systems, but a PC dying to a mook or a bad climbing roll is stupid, so I like to keep my option of fudging a roll available at all times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 16:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1447957741272715266 huh, okay
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
Sure, why not
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 17:48
|
|
|
I imagine some people have minis for everything, but otherwise what are people using for pawns/standees? I got a "Pathfinder Bestiary Pawn Box", because it seemed like the best option at FLGS, but it seemed weird there wasn't a first party option there. Is there one I'm missing? So far I haven't had a problem finding substitute monsters for anything we've hit, though it often involves a little reskin (eg. Grick -> Slurk... with prehensile tongue?). And where mooks need quantity, I fall back on some generic monster/zombie meeples. But overall the product is great, there's great variety, and having something like this makes fights way better/more thematic. Anyway, was curious if there was other good options I'm missing. We've done 4 or 5 sessions of Candlekeep Mysteries now. Tone, length, quality, and style are all over the map. And that's kind of fine? There's a few adventures there I'm not interested in running, a few I'll take elements from and combine, and a few that have been pretty good as written. Spoilers for the Candlekeep Level 8 mission: The kids took "cultists are corrupting the pool of Lurue" as something they needed to stop, and worked like crazy to get there first and stop them. This doesn't really fit with how the adventure is written, but it set us up for the best tactical session we've had. The cultists arrived to find the player defense already in place - and we played kind of "combat meat football" as the cultists tried to get the dead animals to the pool - eventually involving passing as the players de-meated early rushers. Players ended up getting a shut-out, but it required some heroic Air Bud nonsense with the ranger's wolf intercepting a meat field goal right before the endzone/pool. D&D as Gygax intended, I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
Full details of Call of the Netherdeep. https://www.dndbeyond.com/marketplace/adventures/critical-role-call-of-the-netherdeep It's an Adventure 3-12.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:06 |
|
|
jmzero posted:I imagine some people have minis for everything, but otherwise what are people using for pawns/standees? The Pathfinder Pawns are best in class. There are licensed miniatures for 5e, but not any first party cardboard pawns/standees in the range/quality that Paizo does (there's some in one of the starter sets I think).
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2021 20:16
|
|