|
Its right in the name! e; what a terrible, terrible snipe
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 06:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
Base Emitter posted:Its right in the name! Correction: a perfect out of context snipe 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 06:34
|
|
|
Re: VTT and importing stuff in Foundry there are  options that let you basically import all the official stuff and also homebrew resources easily. If you feel iffy about it you could theoretically only use it for stuff you actually own elsewhere.I won't go into more detail than that but for me it is a real timesaver when preparing sessions in foundry. Edit: also giffyglyphs monstermaker is a great module to create your own stuff quickly. Rubberduke fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 13:10
|
|
|
The best Bards I've run into have been an Ancient Greek-inspired orator/epic poet who spreads word of the party's deeds to audiences wherever they travel (with the player expanding the poem after each session) and a jester, who mostly did his bardic feats through acrobatics (giving ample opportunity to steal things off particularly rich audience members) and jokes (giving ample opportunities to insult disliked audience members). That said in the next campaign I'm playing in one of the other players is playing a Bard who gained their abilities through finding a lyre haunted by the spirit of its previous owner - I'm playing the spirit of the previous owner, a legendary king of old who has been revived as a ghost and isn't sure if he's supposed to be haunting the fool who stole his favourite lyre or mentoring him as the one who will revive the fallen empire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
Before I started the campaign with my terrible spy/snake out of water/snaker in strange land character, I thought of playing a bad that was basically a twitch streamer. I wonder how I could do that mechanically? Maybe chat is the spirits of the dead trying to help/hurt the character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 15:43
|
|
|
Drewjitsu posted:Before I started the campaign with my terrible spy/snake out of water/snaker in strange land character, I thought of playing a bad that was basically a twitch streamer. You are litteraly a magical Twitch streamer and there is a society of deranged wizards on another continent that are watching you on their crystal balls at all times (or at least you think this is the case)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:01
|
|
|
If you’re playing a college of spirits bard, your focus can be how they’re watching you and every time you roll to use one of the tales, you’re actually just reading and responding to someone’s comment in chat
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Hell yeah! I didn't know about this spell until you mentioned it. drat, now I need a L5 wizard with levels in bard, to pull this off You don't need the wizard levels. The lore bard subclass gets Additional Magical Secrets that lets you pick 2 spells from any class at level 6 (plus all bard additionally get to do this at level 10, 14, and 18). A wizard/bard could be cool though. There don't seem to be many characters that have both high int and high cha. High int plus Jack of All Trades would make you pretty good at all the book learning skills (Arcana, History, Nature, Religion) that smartypants wizard nerds ought to be good at, but realistically aren't because they only have 2 skill proficiencies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
https://gizmodo.com/d-ds-epic-new-monsters-of-the-multiverse-makes-creating-1848373573 Looks like 5.5e is probably in the cards for 2024 according to Crawford
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:You are litteraly a magical Twitch streamer and there is a society of deranged wizards on another continent that are watching you on their crystal balls at all times (or at least you think this is the case) Twitch plays bard? "Thanks for the 50 giftee electrum, scryer, time for another poggers fireball."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:47
|
|
|
change my name posted:https://gizmodo.com/d-ds-epic-new-monsters-of-the-multiverse-makes-creating-1848373573 I really like this: quote:We’ve now made it so that each of the monsters has multiple choice sequences that lead to the same CR. And so what that’s going to do is give groups who never fought the optimal version of the monster [a challenge that feels] way more powerful... We also did protect their non-combat options, so it is possible for a monster to not be as threatening as its CR may suggest, but we made it clearer to the DM when they are taking that path. The DM will be able to make a more informed choice.” Honestly, all I really want out of 5.5 or the 50th anniversary or whatever it will be called is a useful challenge rating. Making casters easier to run is really nice too. Been dealing with that a lot more lately and even with a VTT tracking stuff, it's annoying as hell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:I really like this: All I want out of 5.5 is for every non-caster martial, Monk included, to receive a bump in power so that they are on even footing with Wizard. Even at level 20.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
Personally I feel it isn't that they should be on even footing but more that they should feel equally fun to play. And the problem is people who like the options a caster has but wants to play a Martial doesn't have a lot of options.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
change my name posted:https://gizmodo.com/d-ds-epic-new-monsters-of-the-multiverse-makes-creating-1848373573 yes, a new set of core rules had already been announced for the 50th anniversary
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Personally I feel it isn't that they should be on even footing but more that they should feel equally fun to play. And the problem is people who like the options a caster has but wants to play a Martial doesn't have a lot of options. This has always been my struggle with D&D, and for all my bluster is the actual real reason I like 4e the best. It just feels like such a missed opportunity that 5e didn't really use the subclass system to give martials options to address this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
Drewjitsu posted:Before I started the campaign with my terrible spy/snake out of water/snaker in strange land character, I thought of playing a bad that was basically a twitch streamer. change my name posted:If you’re playing a college of spirits bard, your focus can be how they’re watching you and every time you roll to use one of the tales, you’re actually just reading and responding to someone’s comment in chat As you get stronger you gain more followers and each level-up is a patreon subscriber goal. On NADDPOD Emily did something sort of (but not really) similar to this in Trinyvale after stealing a villain's Speaking Stone and deciding to become an influencer on Trinstagram.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:This has always been my struggle with D&D, and for all my bluster is the actual real reason I like 4e the best. It just feels like such a missed opportunity that 5e didn't really use the subclass system to give martials options to address this. Subclasses are very limited compared to spell casting ability. To expand the options for a caster, a spell just needs to be added and *bam* instant option. For martials, while you can make more sub classes, they are an all or nothing choice. If you change subclasses you give up everything your previous subclass had. Not to mention changing subclasses is a major RP decision that might be incompatible with the story. It’s not as simple as memorizing a different spell at dawn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 18:18
|
|
|
Ash Rose posted:This has always been my struggle with D&D, and for all my bluster is the actual real reason I like 4e the best. It just feels like such a missed opportunity that 5e didn't really use the subclass system to give martials options to address this. When faced with the dilemma over whether to make martials complex to play but a better match with the wizards, or make them simple for new players at the cost of having fewer options and choices, 5E went for simple. Given that the goal remains of making it easy to start playing 5E, coupled with the likelihood that no new players are going to start out with a third or four-tier character, the best party balance will remain within the first tier of play, and there will still be a divergence between complexity of play between different classes as they ascend through the tiers. Arguably, 4E simplified PC play generally and located the complexity on the book-keeping side of things (with lots of conditions that ended at different times), although I'd argue that its eventual evolution into a game system that got overhauled every six months or so through constant errata made it harder to play than it should have been if you weren't subscribed to their online system and using the e-rules. 3E was worse: by late 3.5, you either needed to find a campaign that was PHB only, or you needed to parse dozens of splatbooks and options as the price of entry. For all its flaws, 5E has done pretty well at keeping the core rules you need to start playing simple enough that the price of admission (in money and time) remains low. More experienced players can use multiclassing to get around the restrictions of the class system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
Maybe they could have something like Final Fantasy's job system where instead of picking a subclass you train into a "Job" and you can choose to stay simple or gain complexity as you go. Like the idea being is they aren't fixed and are something you affirmative select between adventure arcs. "Brawler", "Duelist", "Defender", "Beserker", "Trickster", etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 18:33
|
|
|
I honestly think boring fighters is a feature not a bug. The people I play with are rarely casters, they don't want so many options. If you have a lot of complex tactical options that kind of puts pressure on you to use them intelligently, and not everyone is into d&d to play xcom. Some people want to play make believe table theatre, and the complex combat options turn them off. The classes shouldn't be balanced. Anyone who wants to be a complex fighter can just say "I want to be a muscle wizard and my spells are rethemed into combat manuvers" and I'd be perfectly fine with that. 5e is not shy about giving out spellcasting to players that want it, it doesn't need a heavy hand balancing the classes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I honestly think boring fighters is a feature not a bug. The people I play with are rarely casters, they don't want so many options. If you have a lot of complex tactical options that kind of puts pressure on you to use them intelligently, and not everyone is into d&d to play xcom. Some people want to play make believe table theatre, and the complex combat options turn them off. I agree a little bit... but I think there's a middle ground here. Right now, mechanics aren't just not supporting role playing, they feel like they're actively opposing it. Like, we have a barbarian, and she likes the role playing part - but all the mechanics seem to be working counter to that. For example, she's able to just sort of "be raging" way too much of the time. And because rages are so plentifully available and so strong, she feels like she "should" be raging all the time, which in turn means raging doesn't feel interesting to her character or the scene. It's just kind of "ACTIVATE.. NORMAL MODE! Like I do every fight all the time". What should be a big part of how her character interacts with the world and how the fight "feels" is instead just a "usually on" buff, that mostly feels like a character weakness (ie. after I run out of rages, I kind of suck). quote:We’ve now made it so that each of the monsters has multiple choice sequences that lead to the same CR. And so what that’s going to do is give groups who never fought the optimal version of the monster [a challenge that feels] way more powerful... We also did protect their non-combat options, so it is possible for a monster to not be as threatening as its CR may suggest, but we made it clearer to the DM when they are taking that path. The DM will be able to make a more informed choice.” This sounds really good. One of my biggest complaints with the material I have is that (most) monsters don't give me good, easy hooks to make their encounters feel different/interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
I think the biggest problem with 5e (and a lot of ttrpgs) is tying combat stats and classes to out of combat capabilities as well. It’s dumb that any cha caster gets to automatically be a great face just because so much of the game design falls back on those 6 stats. A lot of classes are penalized for making interesting characters over mechanically viable choices, on top of the martial vs magic stuff. The GM can do a lot of legwork to get around this, but it’s a flaw from the core design philosophy of attribute score + skill based systems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:08
|
|
|
Bring back THAC0 for 5.5
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I honestly think boring fighters is a feature not a bug. The people I play with are rarely casters, they don't want so many options. If you have a lot of complex tactical options that kind of puts pressure on you to use them intelligently, and not everyone is into d&d to play xcom. Some people want to play make believe table theatre, and the complex combat options turn them off. Not many DMs will be willing to really go along with that though, its better to have the option officially supported; or through unofficial channels that have an air of legitimacy like UA. e: As an example of this, I flavoured my Sorcerer as a Psion and picked mainly RP centric spells, like detect thoughts, charm person, suggestion, etc. And without fail every encounter I get some amount of beef for not picking Counterspell or Fireball. e2: To be clear its mainly just jokes like "Don't worry, they got this with their fireball *crickets*" but it comes up. And its better to not subject someone to those expectations. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
I don't think that the balance issue is really with casters so much as it is with Wizards and their ever-growing spellbook of vaguely-worded abilities. Creating some Fighter or Rogue subclasses with plentiful advanced combat maneuvers is very possible, but as long as the bar is "Improved Doctor Strange" then it's going to be really difficult to meet. A level 9 Wizard is likely going to have 14 prepared spells, including narrative-bending Level 5 spells, four cantrips, and likely some additional rituals that have been picked up adventuring. And that's before considering any other features. A level 9 sorcerer will have 9 spells, four cantrips, and two metamagic abilities. A level 9 Fighter has action surge, an extra attack and a saving throw reroll, plus whatever sub-class features they have. The classes are just on different planets in terms of power and flexibility.
Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
One thing that would be helpful is interactive environments. Chandoliers to swing from, barrels to kick over, barricades; have most AoE spells do less damage if you're in cover, etc. If you main choices for your action is just to hit someone make it so with their action they can interact with enemies in ways somewhat mechanically comperable to a spell; and the more prep the closer it is. Like flinging 18th century grenades, flour dust explosions, etc. A Wizard might have 14 spells but a fighter should have *gestures to the whole world* infinite possibility of just using their skills.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
I saw this on EN World an example change from Old book to the new book. Not too much has been changed for this monster, but it's clearly more dangerous. I am looking forward to seeing all the changes. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:One thing that would be helpful is interactive environments. Chandoliers to swing from, barrels to kick over, barricades; have most AoE spells do less damage if you're in cover, etc. If you main choices for your action is just to hit someone make it so with their action they can interact with enemies in ways somewhat mechanically comperable to a spell; and the more prep the closer it is. Like flinging 18th century grenades, flour dust explosions, etc. What's stopping the wizard from having the same infinite possibilities of just using their skills, plus their 14 spells? Besides the fact that 14 spells are probably more useful than a whole world of infinite possibilities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
Also, the fighter has to:
Oh, and if the chandelier is magic, the fighter has no chance. v: It's not complexity that martials are in dire need of so much as narrative control. Having a ton of options is one way of getting narrative control, but it's not the only way; imagine if fighters could just automatically crush weaker opponents or break magical effects with pure willpower or something. megane fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
I usually play as a bard or druid, and when I finally went a fighter in a oneshot I absolutely adored it. My brain was so freed up from magic and overthinking every single spell I could possibly use at each turn (flicking through my spells constantly) I could instead roleplay easily during my turns and enjoy fighting stuff in the face. If you want more depth in fighters sure make archetypes and homebrew things to facilitate those wants, but I really appreciated the simplicity because it freed up my brain to concentrate on the other things! Fishbus fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:03
|
|
|
Fishbus posted:I really appreciated the simplicity because it freed up my brain to concentrate on the other things! Sure, but other than smashing things with a weapon what other things is a str/con character going to be good at? That's my issue. I want a fighter that's also fun and has mechanical depth and capabilities out of combat. We need way more mechanically backed up roleplay feats and features. Magic users being able to use spells to accomplish so much in or out of combat is such an overwhelming imbalance in design, but add to that the fact that their stat line also makes them better OOC and it gets maddening. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:I want a fighter that's also fun and has mechanical depth and capabilities out of combat. Isn't that a Cleric? Or a Paladin, or Ranger?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:17
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Isn't that a Cleric? Or a Paladin, or Ranger? Or taking non-combat feats with the extra ASI levels
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
change my name posted:Or taking non-combat feats with the extra ASI levels Those rely on GM more than mechanics and offer nowhere near the versatility or capabilities of spells + caster stats. I want them to be much better (along with backgrounds, etc). I think fleshing out that side of the game would be the single best change they could make going forward. Rutibex posted:Isn't that a Cleric? Or a Paladin, or Ranger? Yes, the answer to make martial classes better is to play a caster. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:19
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Yes, the answer to make martial classes better is to play a caster. Those are not pure spell casters, they are hybrid classes with a major martial focus. The complexity chain goes Wizard > Sorcerer > Artificer > Bard > Druid > Cleric > Warlock > Ranger > Paladin > Thief > Fighter > Barbarian
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
Fishbus posted:
Sure, but what was stopping you from doing this as a caster? If you wanted to dumb things down, why not just fire a cantrip every turn? You could even limit yourself to weapon-based cantrips too if you really want to capture the feel of a muggle with a sharp stick. The problem is that a caster can always dumb themselves down to the level of a martial, but a martial can never elevate themselves to the level of a caster. If a valor bard wanted to dress up as a PAM/GWM fighter or a CBE/SS ranger for example, how long would it take before anyone noticed a serious difference? Anyways, why does it have to be fighters that are simple and wizards that are complex? Why isn't it martials that are tracking down rare and esoteric arms manuals and learning new, excessively complex fencing maneuvers while wizards content themselves with adding one damage die Bugroth's Brimstone Blast? If there are meant to be a mix of both simple and complex classes in the game, why can't there be both simple and complex martials, the way Warlock is the "simple" caster among the complex full casters? At this point, I don't see a real answer to any of these questions besides "lol tradition."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Those are not pure spell casters, they are hybrid classes with a major martial focus. As usual, you've missed the entire thread of this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:30
|
|
|
So I am not opposed to the existence of the straightforward "simple" martial as an option. Champion is fine in that place, as the training wheels class/subclass of DND (it still needs a power buff though, it is pretty weak). But I love martial characters, and I want them to be both mechanically and narratively interesting. At this point they aren't, and they scale poorly. I want my fighter to force enemies to stay close to me with my whirlwind of blades, I want to dictate the flow of battle, as much with damage, as with my presence on the battlefield. I want to be able to shrug off magic effects by the force of my will and punch through Walls of Force and Forcecages with my fist. Why is it ok for a Wizard to have a spell that can literally do anything at 17th level, and a fighter is still stuck hitting things 3 times. I want to at 17-20 be able to move mountains, and drag rivers behind me, a high level fighter or barbarian, or monk, shouldn't just be a decent combatant, they should be literal folk heroes, whose abilities are the things of myths and legends. Wizards and Sorcerers and Bards, and even Warlocks, already are, but the martial classes just....hit things gooder. There is a progression that we should see with martials, that should mirror things with other casters. Martials should go from, hit things good to hit things really good, to being supernaturally good at combat, to being able to reshape the world through there martial prowess. We already see this with casters, casters start with being ok at casting, to being really good at casting, to being supernatural forces on the battle field, to being able to reshape the world through their arcane might.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:34
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:As usual, you've missed the entire thread of this conversation. I think there is some kind of conflation of theme and complexity going on here. A more complex fighter exists mechanically, it's a Paladin or a Ranger. However those classes have magic and role-playing baggage associated with them. Are people asking specifically for a new non-magical complex martial class like the Warblade, or are people arguing that the Fighter as-is should just not exist? Because I think the simple fighter should exist. I don't mind more options though. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jan 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
megane posted:Also, the fighter has to: I'd love a class that'd have powers to "create" usable features in a room. "On a 15, you suddenly realize there's a very large aquarium full of electric eels behind the boss", but I think GMs would riot at sharing control.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 20:42
|
|
