|
I run Out of the Abyss currently and decided to throw in the optional Tomb of Khaem Dungeon which would reward the players with the Dawnbringer, a +2 sword that deals radiant damage, bonus damage to the undead and some other stuff. The group is currently lvl 4 and I feel the sword might be a bit too powerful. On the other hand I kind of want to just throw the sword at them and have them eviscerate some scary underdark poo poo.
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Reveilled posted:The errata for Wizards' "seperating culture and race" efforts have been released: On some level I appreciate what they're trying to accomplish; cultural/racial monoliths are a fantasy Thing that is real dumb and should probably be replaced with regional cultures, or ideological subcultures. I could even see a world where the DMG has a helpful list of cultures to choose from, some of which are just the existing excised cultures, only "Drow" is replaced with "Evil Underground Spider Worship Culture". But lol at just cutting all mention of culture and replacing it with nothing. EDIT: I missed this gem. quote:Is a spell attack a spell? Lol. Like whatever I get it, "spell attack" is the only nomenclature they have for 'attack that is purely supernatural in nature' but it's just more hilarious stupid word bungling. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 15:54
|
|
|
player(raising hand): dm, was that spell attack a spell spell attack or just a spell attack
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:18
|
|
|
Rubberduke posted:I run Out of the Abyss currently and decided to throw in the optional Tomb of Khaem Dungeon which would reward the players with the Dawnbringer, a +2 sword that deals radiant damage, bonus damage to the undead and some other stuff. The group is currently lvl 4 and I feel the sword might be a bit too powerful. On the other hand I kind of want to just throw the sword at them and have them eviscerate some scary underdark poo poo. Prepare for the paladin to run over encounters, that's way too strong for them and could leave the other players feeling relatively powerless
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:25
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:player(raising hand): dm, was that spell attack a spell spell attack or just a spell attack It's especially funny when you consider not all spells that inflict damage are spell attacks either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:27
|
|
|
The sword also refuses to stop shedding sunlight everywhere, so it will have plenty of opportunity to challenge the players as they sneak through the Underdark. It’s really powerful, but in our party it proved to be a mixed blessing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
I gave one of my players a +2 axe in my most recent campaign at level 5 and that felt too early to me. In the future, I'm going to wait until around level 7 for that I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:32
|
|
|
+1 by level 4, +2 by around level 9 or 10, +3 by 15 or 16 is a good rule of thumb. you want to slightly anticipate the rise of tier(5, 11, and 17) so that the rise of tier becomes felt more as a spike.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:35
|
|
|
Nemo posted:The sword also refuses to stop shedding sunlight everywhere, so it will have plenty of opportunity to challenge the players as they sneak through the Underdark. Well the characters who would get the most out of it are a gloomstalker and a shadow monk which could make for some fun interactions with the sword. I thought about having it as a +1 weaon that deals radiant damage and have it "level up" to its true form once it sees the sunlight again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:It's especially funny when you consider not all spells that inflict damage are spell attacks either. Wouldn't be surprised if there was something that is a spell attack while also being neither a spell nor an attack.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
Rubberduke posted:Well the characters who would get the most out of it are a gloomstalker and a shadow monk which could make for some fun interactions with the sword. I thought about having it as a +1 weaon that deals radiant damage and have it "level up" to its true form once it sees the sunlight again. This seems like a flavorful way to handle the mechanical boost, and way safer than handing a low level party a +2 sword. Some cool loot is absolutely warranted
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
Getting rid of inherent alignments for player character races and ditching racial ASIs were good moves, but striking lore for stuff like mind flayers and beholders feels like some petulant child just wiping out everything in response. If they just left alignment intact for creatures of the outer planes for whom alignment is a literal cosmic force and then said "but it's muddled and complicated on the inner planes," they could get around a lot of these problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 17:24
|
|
|
I blame Eberron for starting this with good liches 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
Hierophants were a thing in 2E I’m sorry to say
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:02
|
|
|
I don't think 2E hierophants were good liches. But 2E Baelnorns were.Arivia posted:WotC I think it was okay to say the flying eyeball monsters were evil hate orbs It's especially funny because the whole "beholders are incredibly bigoted towards other beholders who look slightly different" was an explicitly anti-racist bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:09
|
|
|
wotc wiping the details on monsters from volos guide to monsters is especially bad because they missed an opportunity to instead errata these things by saying "we do not endorse the views of volo regarding the monsters but present them unedited. his writing uses unfortunate stereotypes on these creatures and can not be said to be one hundred percent factual" and gotten their idea across while making the book better
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:15
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:wotc wiping the details on monsters from volos guide to monsters is especially bad because they missed an opportunity to instead errata these things by saying "we do not endorse the views of volo regarding the monsters but present them unedited. his writing uses unfortunate stereotypes on these creatures and can not be said to be one hundred percent factual" and gotten their idea across while making the book better The weird thing is the errata actually includes an edit to the intro that specifically emphasizes that it’s Volo’s views and he’s frequently wrong instead of it being an objective guide to the FR/D&D
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
Arivia posted:The weird thing is the errata actually includes an edit to the intro that specifically emphasizes that it’s Volo’s views and he’s frequently wrong instead of it being an objective guide to the FR/D&D yeah, i honestly have no idea who this is for, honestly. i have problems with the way half orcs and drow are written in dnd campaigns but never once did i think "and you know what else? the hive mind illithid are clearly deeply offensive too"
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:The errata for Wizards' "seperating culture and race" efforts have been released: They only dumped a few paragraphs of roleplaying suggestions prior to their "roll on these tables for ideas" for RP traits. Given that the tables are all about differentiating between individual members of a group, while the "suggestions" are overwhelmingly about how all members of the group are pretty much the same, it'd be a good cut regardless. I don't see what they could, or should, add prior to the tables that doesn't undermine their purpose. Two paragraphs about how "all beholders have distinct personalities" doesn't seem like it will add much, and that assumes that whatever they wrote wouldn't be problematic. The edits to the Drow entry in the PHB are handled better, no doubt in part because it's a core sourcebook. I am also dubious that most of what was cut qualifies as "culture:" Beholders are aggressive in dealing with perceived threats? How is that a cultural trait? For that matter, given how most beholders perceive other beholders, it's unclear how beholder "culture" would be a meaningful term. But information about culture would be information about how two beholders might greet each other under circumstances where they don't immediately want to fight, for example, or whether they have expectations of hospitality, not that they're greedy or angry or fearful or aggressive. AD&D's ability score minimums and maximums (including gender minimums and maximums) really set the stage for how awful D&D could be at reflecting race and gender prejudices. If I'm going to be outraged about any of this, it's that the game hasn't done more, sooner, not that these late attempts aren't being carried off with panache. Nothing meaningful has been lost. And honestly, any heightened awareness about racial stereotyping in D&D is going to lead to better things in the long run. If 6E focuses more on PCs being goblins resisting tribal displacement at the hands of an evil empire, that expands the range of stories that can be told within the system and that the system documents encourage, and that's great. Building adventures or campaign settings that put players into a different mindset would be fantastic, and D&D's record at doing so has been largely undistinguished. As an example, Council of Wyrms had some good ideas but was too timid. I want a dragon-centered campaign where a small council of ancient dragons (as PCs) meets periodically to pursue their hobby of meddling in politics. From time to time, the short-lived humanoids they support may need to go on adventures. Even less frequently, one or more of the dragons are forced to intervene directly. I love the idea of playing "conventional" PCs only a few times, as dragon henchmen, before they die from old age and get replaced by another generation. And I like the thought of a TPK being followed by four testy ancient PC dragons showing up at the dungeon to recover the bodies and take out their frustrations on the inhabitants. Cool stories, but also an invitation to think differently about how politics and cultures develop and change over time, and a great way to have players contribute to a setting which can also be used to tell more conventional adventuring stories. Nehru the Damaja posted:Getting rid of inherent alignments for player character races and ditching racial ASIs were good moves, but striking lore for stuff like mind flayers and beholders feels like some petulant child just wiping out everything in response. Two paragraphs about behaviors isn't the same as "lore." There's pages and pages of untouched lore on each covered species in Volo's Guide. And I think forcing outer planar beings to always be the same alignment misses the point of most stories about such beings. Fallen angels, potentially-redeemable devils, and malfunctioning modrons all have long and vivid histories (moreso the first two), so insisting that even these beings possess uniform characters or attributes is needlessly prescriptive. These edits may have been lazy, but building stories off of stereotypes is lazier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
There's a neat paid content thingy at drivethrurpg that looked interesting; it replaces race with ancestry/culture that I want to take a look at.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:yeah, i honestly have no idea who this is for, honestly. i have problems with the way half orcs and drow are written in dnd campaigns but never once did i think "and you know what else? the hive mind illithid are clearly deeply offensive too"
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
Narsham posted:And I think forcing outer planar beings to always be the same alignment misses the point of most stories about such beings. Fallen angels, potentially-redeemable devils, and malfunctioning modrons all have long and vivid histories (moreso the first two), so insisting that even these beings possess uniform characters or attributes is needlessly prescriptive. Those stories gain their power from how the characters in question deviate from one's expectations. They are precisely stories built off stereotypes. They just contradict rather than reinforce the stereotype in question. Also, I'd note that Nordom is explicitly no longer a Modron. His entire story is about how being touched by Limbo permanently altered him into something that is unique and new. Siivola posted:It's not that it's offensive, it's just that it's not consistent. If not all "always Chaotic Evil" races are not always CE, why are these ones in particular? Presumably all mind flayers would possess the same alignment (LE) because they are members of a hive mind and not individuals. The lore and actual stories rarely follow that, though, and distinctly individual mind flayers appear pretty regularly. But another significant difference between orcs and drow on one hand and mind flayers on the other is that the former do not require gurgling the brains of intelligent and free-willed individuals for sustenance. The obvious corrective to all of this would be to remove alignment altogether--the Great Wheel wouldn't even suffer from this much because the distinctions between orderly Mechanus and Chaotic Limbo, for example, are already clear enough without an explicit mechanical distinction--but doing so would entail killing a cow almost as sacred as the six ability scores or the concept of levels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 19:31
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Presumably all mind flayers would possess the same alignment (LE) because they are members of a hive mind and not individuals. The lore and actual stories rarely follow that, though, and distinctly individual mind flayers appear pretty regularly. PeterWeller posted:But another significant difference between orcs and drow on one hand and mind flayers on the other is that the former do not require gurgling the brains of intelligent and free-willed individuals for sustenance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
They’re, very lazily, trying to future-proof. Opinions and views on these matters change over time and they’re just trying to not get caught in the same argument 5 years down the road. The orc of today’s argument could very easily be the mind flayer of tomorrow’s argument. And, as I’m sure this thread will display, there are people that would agree with that principle. As noted, the proper solution is to remove alignment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
Siivola posted:So they're carnivores, big deal. So would a "good" mindflayer be a person who only eats ethically sourced brains? I.E. they only devour the minds of people who have committed horrible and unspeakable acts? PeterWeller posted:The obvious corrective to all of this would be to remove alignment altogether--the Great Wheel wouldn't even suffer from this much because the distinctions between orderly Mechanus and Chaotic Limbo, for example, are already clear enough without an explicit mechanical distinction--but doing so would entail killing a cow almost as sacred as the six ability scores or the concept of levels. You're right about this. 4e tried to do this (or at least simplify alignments) and there were a ton of people who weren't happy about them doing that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
Naturally there was a 3.5 splat that could have you play as an individual illithid (with something like a +7 or +9 ECL) and iirc you could be an ascetic in exchange for reduced powers, but idk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
imagine dungeons posted:They’re, very lazily, trying to future-proof. Opinions and views on these matters change over time and they’re just trying to not get caught in the same argument 5 years down the road. The orc of today’s argument could very easily be the mind flayer of tomorrow’s argument. And, as I’m sure this thread will display, there are people that would agree with that principle. Well yeah. The proper choice is to remove all cultural monoliths, which includes alignment, but also stuff like, "all elves use bows" or whatever. That's going to require going back to the drawing board for a lot of stuff because races are balanced (lol) around the idea that some races get cultural benefits as part of their starting package. I sort of wonder if in a few years we'll look askance at certain races getting dark vision as part of their starting package. I could certainly make an argument for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I sincerely don't see the distinction between this and "Lolth/Gruumsh cursed the entire race because they're that much of a divine wiener". I get that. It's all just made up nonsense anyway to justify why certain things can be killed on sight and others should be maybe talked to first. The distinction I see here is the difference between individuals being able to question and/or resist that curse and there being no individuals at all. Or in other words, the difference between being cursed by Gruumsh and maybe having some feelings about it as opposed to being just another extension of Gruumsh and his will. quote:So they're carnivores, big deal. Fair point. Thinking about it some more: being a creature incapable of survival except by eating the brains of others is less evil and more just sad. But this also takes us back to the problem with making concepts of good and evil cosmic forces instead of matters of perspective. As a human being who could presumably fall prey to these brain eating monsters, I'm gonna think they're quite evil, but in the grand scheme of things, that's not so different from the mouse's thoughts on the cat. Arrrthritis posted:You're right about this. 4e tried to do this (or at least simplify alignments) and there were a ton of people who weren't happy about them doing that. 4E's attempt to "fix" alignment is one of the places where I think the grognards and critics had good points. Removing most of alignment's mechanical effects was a good idea, as was adding the "none of the above" unaligned option. But reducing the grid to a spectrum was a poor decision that removed what little nuance there was in the system. With the grid, you can suss out qualitative differences between different kinds of Evil--LE is a dictator, CE is a maniac. With 4E's spectrum, you lose that little distinction and CE is just quantitatively different--even more evil than normal evil. There is another option to maintaining alignment and recognizing that moral judgements are often matters of perspective: go back to D&D's roots and just have the LNC spectrum drawn from Moorcock. Then alignment can continue to be cosmic forces--the fundamental concepts of order, change, and balance--and moral judgments can be up to individuals. The "good" person in a fascist state may be drawn to Chaos. The "good" person in a failed state may be drawn to Law. Mendrian posted:Well yeah. The proper choice is to remove all cultural monoliths, which includes alignment, but also stuff like, "all elves use bows" or whatever. That's going to require going back to the drawing board for a lot of stuff because races are balanced (lol) around the idea that some races get cultural benefits as part of their starting package. The proper choice is to remove racial mechanics entirely from the game because the whole concept is rooted in cultural stereotypes and gross pseudoscience. You wanna have pointy ears or have an elephant head, cool, just write it your character description.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Well yeah. The proper choice is to remove all cultural monoliths, which includes alignment, but also stuff like, "all elves use bows" or whatever. That's going to require going back to the drawing board for a lot of stuff because races are balanced (lol) around the idea that some races get cultural benefits as part of their starting package. In 6E, all characters will be featureless, androgynous robots with no special skills and all ability scores will equal 12.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:14
|
|
|
Perfectly round spheres that roll across an infinite plain, with an occasional "bong" noise when they accidentally touch
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
Like many ppl BG3 beta was my first real exposure to 5e and I was a little confused by the Drow subraces' morphological / physiological differences that were attributed in the loretext to geographic region (one specifically from Menzoberranzan or whatever it's called, the other from everywhere else) but named after Lolth and Selune, who presumably transcend region. The main difference appeared to be eye color.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
My DM had a mind flayer who just ate dreams. So I think you can go the dhampir route there; like there's supposed to be extremely rare mind flayers where the process "fails" and the final mind flayer still has their old memories and personality and this strikes the fear of god into them as a whole, Mind Flayers are basically always playing Among Us.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:Perfectly round spheres that roll across an infinite plain, with an occasional "bong" noise when they accidentally touch Excuse me, I make a pleasant “doooooooooooo” mass effect style tone when I am touched.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
Rolling dice is just a reflection of our hyper-capitalistic autocratic society where individuals have no control over their existence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
imagine dungeons posted:Excuse me, I make a pleasant “doooooooooooo” mass effect style tone when I am touched. great another Drizzt clone
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:29
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:So would a "good" mindflayer be a person who only eats ethically sourced brains? I.E. they only devour the minds of people who have committed horrible and unspeakable acts? This is already in official modules and BG3, it's literally WotC canon already
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
the idea that good beholders should never exist is too far in one direction but the idea that lore about them should be scrubbed is also bad. there can be floating eyeball orbs that are primarily paranoid and weird evil creatures, with exceptions. different creatures have different impulses after all -- we dont necessarily have to call illithid evil but we can say they go up on the surface to take slaves and eat their brains, and let the reader make their own decisions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
pog boyfriend posted:the idea that good beholders should never exist is too far in one direction but the idea that lore about them should be scrubbed is also bad. there can be floating eyeball orbs that are primarily paranoid and weird evil creatures, with exceptions. different creatures have different impulses after all -- we dont necessarily have to call illithid evil but we can say they go up on the surface to take slaves and eat their brains, and let the reader make their own decisions. “They live in a... colorful neighborhood.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:51
|
|
|
Look adventurer, brains keep disappearing from villagers heads. We don’t want to point any fingers or ruffle any (metaphorical) feathers, but we were wondering if you could look into it for us. We don’t have any firm leads but, nearby, there is a neighboring village of halflings that spend their time crafting ale and tobacco products and also a coalition of dwarves mining tunnels for precious minerals. We were wondering if you ask if they’ve seen any missing brains lying around. Oh... also try Kevin, the Mind Flayer that lives in a floating orb dripping with viscera. He’s been hanging around for a while and you might ask him if he’s seen anything strange lately.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
imagine dungeons posted:Look adventurer, brains keep disappearing from villagers heads. We don’t want to point any fingers or ruffle any (metaphorical) feathers, but we were wondering if you could look into it for us. this metaphor is racism against aaracokra who are the hardest working members of our immigrant communities
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 22:07
|
|