|
Arivia posted:does this mean 21 is actually the best D&D movie Hmm yeah you might be onto something there! 
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 07:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:I guess my question is why is everyone assuming the actual act of gambling is an ability check? What ability check would it even be? Because that's the only way Bardic Inspiration would actually work in this scenario. I mean, it'd be one thing to inspire a Dexterity Sleight of Hand check, or maybe help with a Deception check to bluff, but that's just helping out with regular ways of playing the game (or cheating), which is kind of different from what we're talking about here. More like being more likely to pull out the hidden ace up your sleeve without being noticed than changing fate itself. It's not like Bardic Inspiration can affect rolls that aren't Ability Checks, Saving Throws, Attack Rolls and Healing or Damage rolls with Tasha's. Skill checks are a subset of ability checks. Ability checks are simply any d20+stat roll. You could just call for a Wisdom or Intelligence check, which are bothe pretty self-explanatory. And, no, you don't need a specific codified thing already because the rules of ability checks already tell you when and how to use them: 5E SRD posted:An ability check tests a character’s or monster’s innate talent and training in an effort to overcome a challenge. The GM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results. I would certainly qualify gambling as "an action that has a chance of failure".
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 11:53
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Skill checks are a subset of ability checks. Ability checks are simply any d20+stat roll. You could just call for a Wisdom or Intelligence check, which are bothe pretty self-explanatory. I mean, again, if you're using an ability/skill to do something like bluff, tell a bluff, cheat, catch someone cheating, basic Wisdom to Know When to Hold Them and Known When to Fold Them, etc., that's not affecting the actual probability of the game itself, that's just helping a buddy with a skill check, and at a table I'd play at or run, that's how I'd expect the skill challenge to be framed. That might help you be a better gambler, know when you're being played or whatever, but it's not really anything to do with the actual game in and of itself. I wouldn't expect a DM to pull out a deck of cards or make us shoot craps with our d6's, but I don't see how gambling *itself*, i.e. affecting the actual probability of the gambling game being played is an ability check. Otherwise we're kind of making it sound like Bardic Inspiration would be applied to the craps roll itself. theironjef posted:Yeah, this is exactly why I sort of hate what 3e did to folks and D&D in general, in this case wrapped up in the notion that bardic inspiration is a discrete thing that has like a visible tell and a start point and end point. It's just a story beat, it's basically "You remember that time a cool guy gave you some advice or sung a rad song you like" and then you do that thing you're trying to do but better. It's a common narrative tool in stories. It's Obi-Wan's voice saying "Use the force, Luke" and no one else is like "Well obviously Luke cheated at shooting the Death Star because a ghost bard whispered a magic trick in his ear." A bard doesn't even need to be around for his inspiration to go off, so there's literally nothing for any amount of trained bouncers to spot. It's not magic, so if right before you sit down at the poker table some bard hits you with the chorus to The Gambler and disappears into the crowd, you can sit down and at some point in the next ten minutes be like "He was right. I DO know when to hold 'em!" What's gonna happen then, some pit boss is gonna be all "That guy looks inspired! Break his thumbs, boys!"? And this is the other issue, Bardic Inspiration is a narrative tool, not a discreet power that Bards have and people immediately go, "That's Bardic Inspiration!" like they would seeing a Wizard cast Fireball. It's just a buddy giving encouragement. The magic a pitboss would actually have to lookout for in fantasy casino would be telekinetics and arcane trickster rogues with invisible mage hands, ala Qui Gon Jinn in Phantom Menace. Mecha Gojira fucked around with this message at 12:29 on May 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 12:12
|
|
|
On games of chance that have a moderate skill component, you could easily work out some ability checks to use, probably int and cha. For games of pure chance the only possible checks would be int or wis where success tells you not to play.  There's no way bardic inspiration could apply to a game of roulette or craps: its just pure luck. But for something like poker, sure. I don't see why you couldn't, and I don't think it would be a problem. I also think poo poo like bardic inspiration is way, way more flexible and allowed than something like Augury, which would and should have the various societal changes and protections as above. I hate when magic exists in a setting and people make no effort to include it in their world building or make people aware of basic and ostensibly common magical effects.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 12:30
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:On games of chance that have a moderate skill component, you could easily work out some ability checks to use, probably int and cha. For games of pure chance the only possible checks would be int or wis where success tells you not to play. Right and in the cases we're describing where we play the gamble more like a skill check - since we're actually using skills and abilities so we can trigger Bardic Inspiration in the first place - the counter to those would be the NPC's basic skills as well, but you're getting an advantage over them because that's what Bardic Inspiration is meant to do mechanically. Like I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with me, I'm just trying to clarify what Bardic Inspiration even is in the first place, and it's not some reality-altering magic ability, it's a boost on a skill check mechanically because you had some friendly encouragement narratively.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 12:41
|
|
|
You can have Dice or Playing cards proficiency.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 12:51
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:I wouldn't expect a DM to pull out a deck of cards I've had two DMs do this. One it was pretty fun, the other scared his partner away from the game because she didn't know the rules to poker
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 20:30
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:On games of chance that have a moderate skill component, you could easily work out some ability checks to use, probably int and cha. For games of pure chance the only possible checks would be int or wis where success tells you not to play. But what you would do for gambling as a downtime activity is to make one check per week: Xanatar’s specifies three checks against random DCs every week, Bardic Inspiration helps for 10 minutes per use. That isn’t enough over the course of a week of gambling. Enhance Ability with enough slots to upcast it could cover 8 hours a day for a week, but that boosts only two of the three checks (as two are Charisma checks and one Wisdom). And this illustrates the importance of differentiating between something abstracted (a week of downtime gambling) and something story-vital (a single poker game as part of an adventure, like in a James Bond movie). Even divination spells won’t influence a full week of gambling (beyond something like Foresight, in which case you’re L17 and the main limit will be on how much you can win before they cut you off), but they could play into a high-stakes game of dragon poker with the villain. And that would allow measures to prevent (or allow) magic; if divinations exist, have a cleric of the magic deity present to cast a spell to determine if any magic has been brought to bear which might affect the outcome of the game. In a broader sense, you’d expect gambling to mainly be limited to low-stakes in a world where you can not only use magic but can make a literal deal with the devil in exchange for something. If the majority of your patrons didn’t sell their souls for success at gambling and if your losses are strictly limited, you can absorb the occasional magical “cheat.” High-stakes gambling would be much rarer, especially outside controlled circumstances, and would probably involve the church of the gambling/luck deity and the potential for direct divine intervention to ensure a “fair” game.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
Build question I could do with some advice on. I'm currently a level 4 half elf with 3 levels of bard (college of swords) and one of Warlock (hexblade). Stats are: 8 STR 15 DEX 14 CON 12 INT 10 WIS 17 CHA I'm going to be levelling up within the next couple of sessions and I'm trying to choose between three things I could do at that point: 1) Go up a level in bard, and increase my DEX to 16 and my CHA to 18. This will instantly improve all my magic and all my weapon strikes by a noticeable degree. 2) Go up a level in bard and take the Warcaster feat. This will boost my AC by letting me carry a shield and still cast spells, let me cast spells as attacks of opportunity, and make me less likely to drop concentration on things like Bane 3) Go up a level in warlock and get some eldritch invocations (I'm thinking agonising blast and maybe something interesting like Gaze Of Two Minds), going back to the Bard tree the level after this. The straightforward approach is obviously to just boost stats. Warcaster is situationally amazing from time to time. Leaning more into warlock has story possibilities. Any thoughts on which I should do?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 09:56
|
|
|
Imho getting do to more different things always beats doing the same thing slightly better.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 12:08
|
|
|
BabyFur Denny posted:Imho getting do to more different things always beats doing the same thing slightly better. The Bard level would be an additional known spell and an additional known cantrip anyway. YggdrasilTM fucked around with this message at 13:02 on May 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 12:59
|
|
|
Are you planning on taking that third warlock level or not? If not, stick with bard. If you are, that's your next two levels. You either want to splash warlock once and move on or take it to three and move on. Otherwise you're slowing down bard progression too much long term for no clear purpose.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
YggdrasilTM posted:You can have Dice or Playing cards proficiency. I think the implications is that Cards is essentially counting cards, bluffing, and the various understanding of relative chance and strength of hands. Dice proficiency is essentially proficiency at cheating at Dice, and the ability to trick throw in such a way as to increase your chances of getting what you want. And that's already covered by normal pit bosses doing normal pit boss things.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 13:18
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Are you planning on taking that third warlock level or not? If not, stick with bard. If you are, that's your next two levels. On reflection, probably just the one level of warlock. I did consider going to three and getting Pact of the Blade, but my character concept only really needs that first level.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 13:35
|
|
|
Can you cast as many cantrips a day as you want to? Also, does the "known spells" table refer to how many different spells you know in total, and the slots are how many you can memorize for your rest period?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
Tias posted:Can you cast as many cantrips a day as you want to? Yes, cantrips can be cast at will. Known spells are how many you know (not counting cantrips). Spell slots are how many you can cast at that level per rest. "How many you can memorize per rest period" would be prepared spells, but classes either have a set number they can know or they know them all but have a set number they can prepare.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
Tias posted:Can you cast as many cantrips a day as you want to? quote:Also, does the "known spells" table refer to how many different spells you know in total, Yes. quote:and the slots are how many you can memorize for your rest period? for example, a 4th level bard know 3 cantrips and 7 spells (all level 1 or 2). After each long rest they can cast how many cantrip they want, 4 level 1 spells, and 3 level 2 spells. YggdrasilTM fucked around with this message at 15:18 on May 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
My first 5e character was a mark of warding dwarf artificer, and it took me ages to nail down the difference between The spells I knew The spells I had prepared today The slots I had to cast spells The spells I could cast through my Dragonmark The spells I knew because of my dragonmark The spells I knew (and always had prepared) because of my artificer subclass.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 16:10
|
|
|
I always hated the "but which spells have you prepared?" rigmarole, because unless you have a fairly solid idea of what you'll be facing, there's a chance you'll have some that are useless for the adventure at hand. Either that or you just always take your standard offensive/defensive options, so there's a bunch of situational spells that never get used. Surely better to say "you know a bunch of spells including some really weird ones, because you're a brain genius wizard. But you can only cast X spells per day/long rest/adventure, because that's how much wizard juice you have in you." Same with clerics. Why do they have to prepare spells in advance? Why can't they go "yo God, little help here for your loyal servant?" and be granted what they require? Still, could be worse. "I'm a Magic-User with one hit point and one spell. It's... Read Magic. Welp, nice briefly knowing you all."
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
Payndz posted:
I'll just be standing over here throwing darts for the next 3 levels because cantrips don't exist.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Old school wizard wasn't a person, it was a bazooka you carried until it learned to shoot fireballs.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
Payndz posted:
Pathfinder appreciates your support.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:Build question I could do with some advice on. I'm currently a level 4 half elf with 3 levels of bard (college of swords) and one of Warlock (hexblade). Stats are: Have you considered a half-feat from Tasha's like Feytouched or Telekinetic? Telekinetic in particular is a good pick for a Hexblade/Swords Bard since you'll be using your Bardic Inspiration to power your flourishes as opposed to handing them out, freeing up your bonus action to push and pull friends and foes. It'll get your Charisma to that 18, and you don't really need the 16 in dex since Hexblade's weapon attacks key off of Charisma. Plus you're wearing medium armor, which caps the dex mod bonus at +2 anyway. If you DO want to go Warlock your next level (or take another level at any point for any reason), you want Eldritch Mind from Tasha's as an Invocation, since it gives you the best part of Warcaster, the advantage on concentration saves.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:If you DO want to go Warlock your next level (or take another level at any point for any reason), you want Eldritch Mind from Tasha's as an Invocation, since it gives you the best part of Warcaster, the advantage on concentration saves.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Warlocks can also take the Improved Pact Weapon invocation which lets you use your pact weapon as a spellcasting focus, negating the need for the other half of warcaster without needing to use the whole drop weapon / object interaction shenannigans. College of swords also lets me use any weapon I'm proficient with as a focus. I'd still have to have a hand free for somatic components unless I took war caster Jumping up a comment, I'd looked at fey touched. That free cast of Misty Step looks fun. Oddly my only issue is aesthetic. If I'm a fey touched Hexblade college of swords bard that's starting to get into "there's too much poo poo on me" territory.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
If you're a Swords Bard with Hexblade dip, the spell AoO from Warcaster isn't a big sell. However, if you're big in casting while at/near front line combat, that is still your best option. My advice is that 1/1 ASI is almost never better than a half feat. Take something to bump CHA while giving you an additional ability. There are lots of great CHA feats through PHB and Tashas (the SCAG has a great immune to fear one as well).
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
half feat is definitely starting to sound like the most appealing option. Thanks for the advice, everyone. EDIT: think I spotted my feat: http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/feat:elven-accuracy Lamuella fucked around with this message at 18:48 on May 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:College of swords also lets me use any weapon I'm proficient with as a focus.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Just for the bard spells technically, though I can't imagine most DMs being big enough of a poo poo to enforce it. D&D Beyond might get weird though. Ah, true, hadn't noticed that.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Surely better to say "you know a bunch of spells including some really weird ones, because you're a brain genius wizard. But you can only cast X spells per day/long rest/adventure, because that's how much wizard juice you have in you." You just re-invented the sorcerer class.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
I'm shocked by how hard it has been to figure out basic information about how mounted combat is supposed to work. If you're a medium character you take up one 5 ft. space, so your mount must be Large or bigger and takes up a 2x2 space. Where can the mounted character reach with a standard melee attack? If you "attach" the rider on the center of the space that the mount occupies, how can they ever reach something within 5 feet unless the mount and enemy are allowed to overlap somewhat? I don't see any way to make sense of this if you play on a grid. If you allow off-axis placement of either the rider or the mount, then it creates all kinds of problems for determining what counts as adjacent. Scoss fucked around with this message at 09:40 on May 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 09:35
|
|
|
Seems to me that your reach would logically extend from the boundaries of the 10ft square the same way it does from your usual 5ft square to represent the fact you’re on a mount which makes you more manoeuvrable so your character can get there, and on the flip side of it you’re vulnerable from all sides of your 10ft square because you’re a much bigger target on a mount.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 09:44
|
|
|
Jeremy Crawford's opinion on it is, you and the horse are taking separate turns, either the horse rolls its own initiative if it's acting independently or shares your initiative count if it's under your control. You are, on one of the 4 squares of the horse and are able to move around them with your move action and normal range applies from whichever corner of the horse you're sitting on. This is, insane so personally I just do this:History Comes Inside! posted:Seems to me that your reach would logically extend from the boundaries of the 10ft square the same way it does from your usual 5ft square to represent the fact you’re on a mount which makes you more manoeuvrable so your character can get there, and on the flip side of it you’re vulnerable from all sides of your 10ft square because you’re a much bigger target on a mount.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 09:51
|
|
|
I didn't want to mention the idea of crawling around on top of your mount to different corners of the 2x2 space because it is too stupid to even entertain. Effectively treating the rider as also being Large is definitely a mechanically simple solution, but it is so bizarre that you are forced to immediately make a pretty significant house-rule in order for riding a horse to work at all.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 10:11
|
|
|
If you wanted to needlessly complicate it again but make it feel a bit more like you were doing something novel with house rules you could say attacks by or aimed at the rider with melee weapons that don’t have reach are at disadvantage, because the rider would probably have to lean over to take their swing so they’re going to have to divide their focus to also make sure they don’t fall off the mount, and everybody would have to make sure their attack got past the mount in either direction if they wanted to hit the intended target. Remove the penalty for the rider if they have the mounted combatant feat just so it doesn’t interfere with the advantage they gain for being a dedicated mounted combatant, and I guess remove the disadvantage for an attacker if the rider redirects the attack using that feat (you could imagine that they forced the attack to them instead of the mount by physically getting in the way, so the attacking enemy has an easier time of hitting them now) and you’ve probably covered everything. Feels kind of mean and un-fun for the character that just wants to charge around on a horsey in the moment though. History Comes Inside! fucked around with this message at 11:00 on May 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
A D&D horse is basically an animated table that you're running around on.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 11:36
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Just for the bard spells technically, though I can't imagine most DMs being big enough of a poo poo to enforce it. D&D Beyond might get weird though. Casters have it easy enough already without letting people multiclass them at no cost.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 12:24
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Casters have it easy enough already without letting people multiclass them at no cost. Sure, but also an item worth 100gp lets any caster use any weapon as a spell focus. quote:Ruby of the War Mage I guess the real cost is that it takes up one of your attunement slots.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Considering it is considered acceptable to allow Clerics and Paladins to treat their shields or weapons as their arcane focus for the purpose of casting, it seems like the whole casting with shield limitation should be reworked. Most DMs I know ignore it on the condition that Wizards and Sorcerers rarely have access to shield proficiencies.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
Zurreco posted:Considering it is considered acceptable to allow Clerics and Paladins to treat their shields or weapons as their arcane focus for the purpose of casting, it seems like the whole casting with shield limitation should be reworked. Most DMs I know ignore it on the condition that Wizards and Sorcerers rarely have access to shield proficiencies. ? what has using shield as focus anything to do with the "shield limitation"? YggdrasilTM fucked around with this message at 22:09 on May 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2023 22:02
|
|