|
imagine dungeons posted:Just roleplay your character tripping around and banging around poo poo all the time walking around with your arms out like Frankenstein trying to feel your surroundings. A session or two of that and I bet a solution from the DM falls right into your lap. We never played with light as a functioning rule in my group, but I did play with a different group on a tabletop sim that built it into your character. My character was found mid quest, so I didn't equip myself well to roleplay up being rescued mid combat. What I actually played was staring at a blacked out grid while everyone else had fun. It's a stupid mechanic. I don't want to think about torches, rations, or toilet paper. I want to huck arrows at a slimy cave monster.
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
Much like other forms of “classic adventuring” mechanics, I think that they often do best when featured for a single session rather than all of them. Have a scenario where the dungeon (or part of it) is particularly dark, and otherwise fill the spaces with convenient torches. Similarly, have an episode where traveling mechanics are explored, or carrying capacity, or ammo management - but then go back to handwaving it in 5e. A lot of players don’t really consider things like that when they’re building their characters, and don’t enjoy fiddling with them consistently. Personally I grew up playing with a lot of that stuff, and find it fun to work with, but I can generally engage with them myself during my character build process and accept that not everyone feels the same way. It’s a good example of how the gameplay that attracts DMs is often different from the gameplay that attracts players.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:15
|
|
|
light is a very cool mechanic if you adjudicate it meticulously, have a dungeon or other scenario that is geared towards its use (and ideally tuned around it to at least some extent), and everyone is on board to keep track of it and understands the rules so I would say light is mostly a very bad mechanic, particularly since I do not think a single shred of thought went into who gets darkvision and who doesn't besides "what did old editions do" and it doesn't really help to be like "well actually most dms don't run it correctly" because disadvantage on perception checks is Not Rockin but 90% of the time it doesn't matter and 9.9% of the time it matters because the players are sneaking. Valentin fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Apr 3, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:20
|
|
|
The number of races that get darkvision is the problem. It should be far more limited. Of the regular races limit it to those that evolved underground, gnomes and dwarves imo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:27
|
|
|
Nah they should just all get it. Gnome and Dwarves = underground. Elves = Corellon's super special babies that are just slightly better at everything including seeing. Tieflings = slightly from Hell, where it is often dark. Half-orcs = orcish blood and everyone knows orcs hate sun and prefer nighttime. Dragonborn are dragons and dragons have nightvision. Warforged are robots, why would they bother having one crappy kind of vision when others are available. Halflings = they don't have darkvision, they're just super lucky and the effect is the same. Humans are the most adaptable, so they rapidly adapt to darkness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:38
|
|
|
yeah imo the problem with darkvision is precisely in how it is basically randomly split across characters, which will naturally result in split parties and encourage everyone to centralize towards an approach that favors one side for reasons of efficiency (dm doesn't wanna track torches) or tactics (it makes us the players stealthier). give it to everyone or to no one, though restricting it to dwarves and gnomes does admittedly get you a decent chunk of the way to banning it outright at a lot of tables. you can see this problem throughout 5e elsewhere too. short/long rests is a very obvious pain point with the exact same issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:41
|
|
|
I think WotC was expecting every party to be 3/4rs human or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 03:07
|
|
|
Sometimes I prefer parties of mostly humans with mostly boring classes in a low fantasy game. You don't need a dragon/dwarf warlock/cleric/monk to make a character interesting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 03:14
|
|
|
My favorite fantasy touchstone is Final Fantasy Tactics so I am a fan of the all human party where the most outré character is a normal-rear end human cleric.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 05:46
|
|
|
I almost always play humans. I think I played a dwarf 20-25 years ago?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 08:34
|
|
|
I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
We've been playing more one-shots and shorter things lately as a group, and I love it, because we usually don't coordinate much for those up front in terms of characters, and it's always an absolute freakshow, in the best possible sense. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 21:22
|
|
|
Zurreco posted:I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ9Kr4yu1Pk
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 21:29
|
|
|
Zurreco posted:I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary. The fantasy is being someone who isn't me who doesn't have my life for a few hours. I don't need a different species for that. E: I'm a magic dwarf/dragon born into a life of high adventure who deep down yearns to cast it all aside for the soul crushing duties of an office manager. Outrail fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Apr 3, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 21:44
|
|
|
Zurreco posted:I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary. If you play a dwarf you'll always be contextualized as either "just another dwarf" or "not like other dwarves." If you play a human, then you're not only free but also obligated to be the most unhinged human imaginable. If your elf is a weirdo then people will assume it's a cultural quirk of elves, but if your human is a one-man insane asylum, then you personally get to own all the crazy. I also like characters that are good at Doing A Thing and at least in D&D, humans have consistently had a huge edge at Doing One Thing as a result of the free feat. Of course, Custom Lineage not only does that exact thing too, but also better, and even breaks a core gameplay assumption of "no +4 mods at level 1 with point buy," but that just puts humans back in their traditional position of Second Best At Literally Everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 21:46
|
|
|
lightrook posted:If you play a dwarf you'll always be contextualized as either "just another dwarf" or "not like other dwarves." If you play a human, then you're not only free but also obligated to be the most unhinged human imaginable. If your elf is a weirdo then people will assume it's a cultural quirk of elves, but if your human is a one-man insane asylum, then you personally get to own all the crazy. On the other hand, the fantasy race being either "just another blank" or "not like the other blanks" lets a player in some clumsy way inform the world they're in, either by example or contrast. It's an avenue for shared worldbuilding, whereas a human is "just some jackass not representative of humanity either in their normalcy or deviancy."
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 22:07
|
|
|
Zurreco posted:I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary. one of my favorite human npcs ive made, who i would absolutely play as if given the chance, is basically just tarzan but instead of being raised by gorillas in the jungle he was raised by myconids in the underdark
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 23:52
|
|
|
I play a regular old Human Barbarian and he is a big strong idiot and I love him. I wrote a short story about how the rest of the party used their dark vision (2 elves and a dwarf) to prank him. That is really the only time being able to see in the dark has come up in 18 months of playing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 00:01
|
|
|
Zurreco posted:I can't imagine having 30+ species to play in a fantasy realm and having your default be the thing that you are in real life. It would be like playing Aquisitions Inc and rolling up a work from home actuary. I dunno. Most of those choices are just "human with a silly face and dark vision" or "human with an animal face and dark vision".
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:29
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:I dunno. Most of those choices are just "human with a silly face and dark vision" or "human with an animal face and dark vision". Has pointy ears/doesn’t have pointy ears
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:34
|
|
|
I'm sorry, too used to a time when I had only 4 playable races available.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:38
|
|
|
You got six variations of elf and all of them get more page space and lore than the cool beefcake dragon boys because dnd is a game for cowards
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:45
|
|
|
It's also hard to give up the bonus that variant human gives. It's especially valuable at low levels before other bonuses come online.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:47
|
|
|
it would be sick if you could play as a quadrapedal five-dimensional crystal entity with twelve senses but it would be harder to stat out
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:50
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:it would be sick if you could play as a quadrapedal five-dimensional crystal entity with twelve senses but it would be harder to stat out that's just a shardmind from 4e, minus two legs and six stats
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 16:57
|
|
|
I picked human but should have picked half elf.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 17:09
|
|
|
Ominous Jazz posted:You got six variations of elf and all of them get more page space and lore than the cool beefcake dragon boys because dnd is a game for cowards
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
Plasmoid all the way, baby.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 18:00
|
|
|
imagine dungeons posted:Plasmoid all the way, baby.   
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 18:10
|
|
|
a hexblade flumph would be badass
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 18:12
|
|
|
Flumphs live in cloisters and are led by abbots so it stands to reason there's a Flumph pope
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 19:57
|
|
|
Jimbone Tallshanks posted:Flumphs live in cloisters and are led by abbots so it stands to reason there's a Flumph pope or perhaps a flumph costello
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 20:03
|
|
|
Flumph antipope
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 20:23
|
|
|
i usually play a human but it's just because i think they're sexy
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 20:27
|
|
|
you think you're too good for goblins?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 20:40
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:or perhaps a flumph costello  as I was posting I was thinking about introducing a Flumph NPC Abbot just so people could yell "HEY ABBOT!" at.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2024 20:54
|
|
|
Ominous Jazz posted:you think you're too good for goblins? Nobody is too good for goblins. Goblin and/or Kobold rogue party would be a great short-lived campaign.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2024 03:22
|
|
|
Monster parties are the best parties because EVERYONE leans in
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2024 06:24
|
|
|
Cthulu Carl posted:Flumph antipope Avignon flumph
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2024 12:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
Literal flying spaghetti monster pope
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2024 13:06
|
|