|
Cephas posted:What sort of visuals do most people use for GMing? My group and I are starting to get sick of my really spartan use of Map Tools ("this stone tile represents a building. This long dirt tile with grass on top is a tree!") but I don't know what else I can do. For Roll20/Maptools I use this really old Wacom tablet that I have from school. I wouldn't ask it to do much in terms of detail these days but I love just being able to drag and drop a stylus for things like moving tokens. eBay says you can get something comparable for like 30 bucks+shipping. If you're looking to get your group into a less digital interface most people I play with either go with some variation of the Chessex wet erase map(be really good about separating your wet/dry erase markers!), grids with map details printed on paper, or the maps that come with modules. Having a bunch of terrain and detail stuff is awesome in theory but our campaigns change venue enough that it get unreasonable to have to pause the game for 15 minutes while the DM replaces all the trees with mushrooms and cave walls. But I love proppy stuff so to fulfill that collector/hoarder impulse I'll pick up some 4 dollar piece of jewelry from Goodwill or a stupid little box I see in a craft store. Something about saying "And in the chest you find 4000 gp in Blood Rubies and a weird brass rod that matches Jimbo the Wizard's description of the wand of Gettin' Paid" and producing a little box of glass stones and a funky curtain rod.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 10:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:20 |
|
|
I'm running a D&D game. It's high fantasy, high magic, they're superjerk adventurers and all the good and bad that comes with those things. My problem is that my group tends to gloss over the details their appearance. I mean, the basic traits are all there, but they always whine when I try to get them to describe what they're wearing. I don't really get it. Character design is one of the best parts! I want them to have the freedom to look like however they want. Besides loot that's dropped, I have given them every chance to design their cosmetics. I get the feeling like I'm being too loose about it. Should I drop this? Should I just tell them what they're wearing? Is there a happy medium between describing their look and letting them choose whatever they want?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
Why does it matter? When i'm playing a character i care about their personality and motivations, but i don't give two shits what he's wearing. Beyond the actual armour rules there's no reason to pester people about what they're wearing outside of specific situations (fancy dress party, classy establishment etc....) My group has been working its way through the Pathfinder campaign Rise of the Runelords and we've been talking about what our characters are going to do after we've saved the world, and the general consensus is that they're going to attempt to conquer Tien (fantasy-China). Does anybody know a good system for abstracting out running a kingdom and large scale combat for something like that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:15
|
|
|
They might just not care for it? For many players it's not exactly a core aspect of the game. They might also each have a good picture in their head of what their character and the rest of the party look like and not want anyone to dictate aspects of their own imagination, or something. I wouldn't harp on it too much, although a social adventure where clothing is important can be interesting. That way clothes would be a means to an end and not just frivolous playing around. If they had to, say, infiltrate an evening party in high society, maybe someone would reveal a surprising amount of knowledge in tailoring and high fashion, someone would resent having to wear posh clothes and deliberately accessorize inappropriately, and someone might have to get over their insecurities in pulling off the bluff. Lots of character details can be worked out through this sort of thing but again, it really only has a chance of working if the players are even slightly interested in that aspect of it. e: equally or more likely they might also just say "okay, we hide in this alley and mug the first group of noblemen who are about our height and weight" and consider themselves appropriately outfitted. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 13:25 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
Ok cool thanks?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
I played a Vodacce noble in 7th Sea a while back, and clothing was incredibly important. I wouldn't be caught dead wearing ratty clothing or something out of fashion. Every time we would get into a serious fight I would ultimately end up with a need for a new outfit. So I would put on one of my slightly less frivolous backup outfits and head to the nearest town to have something made. It was rather difficult making sure that I was wearing the cuts and colors that were in style at the time. A good GM could even try to tie a session into something like that. The local tailor has been robbed. His shipment of fine silks from Cathay and his purse. If you're able to get them back he will make you a suit of clothes the likes of which the King himself would be proud to own. vvv Well said. Lallander fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Clothing is as important as your gaming group decides it should be, no more, no less. If your group truly and genuinely doesn't give a poo poo about what kind of dress-up Barbie clothing their pretend elves are wearing, then trying to force them to focus on that aspect will only irritate them - both because they're being told "care about this thing you are uninclined to care about," and because time spent describing clothes is time not spent doing the things they presumably do care about, whatever those things might be. Honestly, there's no hard-and-fast solution here save for a more general bit of advice - make your game be about poo poo the players are interested in. That's not to say that clothing choices for PCs can't be integral to a game, as Lallander describes - just that some players are into that kind of thing and some aren't, and it sounds like you, krebbed, got ones that aren't. So don't focus on what they don't care about, focus on what they do care about, and everyone will have more fun that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Clothing is only important when it needs to be important. I mean, in general, I'd say have check boxes for "Soldier", "Hobo", or "Noble" if it's really important how NPCs respond to the PCs. Beyond that? Unless they're wearing their gang colors, nobody cares. I mean it's like this: It doesn't actually matter if a character has red hair unless having red hair means something in the campaign world. If everybody with red hair is cursed, then that is important and you should discuss that with the player. If it isn't important, it shouldn't come up. I guess give me an example of when this behavior arises and why it bothers you. "I attack the Goblin." "Okay, but what are you wearing?" is very different from, "I talk to the king's adviser." "Okay, but what are you wearing?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:"I attack the Goblin." "Okay, but what are you wearing?" Right but you see you forget the motivation for attacking the goblin in the first place: his clothes are hideous and those shoes simply do not match that overcoat. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
I put on my robe and wizard hat. Generally, the only time I've known a player to really mention what their character is wearing beyond 'battered armour/fashionable clothes/whatever' is when it's a big part of the scene, the soldier dressing up super-fancy to impress the king, etc. I think to focus on it much in general play would detract from when it is important. e: Lallander posted:If you're able to get them back he will make you a suit of clothes the likes of which the King himself would be proud to own. petrol blue fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
I think it kinda goes like this: When people are learning how to write fiction they have a tendency to want to expound on the physical description of the character in great detail. Most commonly you get an ethnic type, eyes, hair, gender, shape, and if you want to get a little creepy, comeliness. The more you write the more you realize that these details get rapidly brushed aside by the average reader because nobody can remember or care about that sort of stuff in fiction. We care about it in real life because our eyes form physical recognition points. There's nothing bad about keeping track of those details, because this is a game and you should have fun. But it's not required. I think more useful than a bunch of minor physical characteristics are broad strokes. "My character is basically a hobo" is way more powerful than, "I have ragged brown hair and I have dirt encrusted nails and I wear dirty cloths and..." And in the absence of great detail, "Is a dwarf" is pretty much just as useful as "is a hobo." Mendrian fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Oh man, and here I thought coming up with a way to help my players figure out cool outfits would be fun!
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic, or what. Are you actually offended that people here have told you that maybe playing Make-Believe Barbie Dressup instead of D&D isn't necessarily what your players want?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
krebbed flam posted:Oh man, and here I thought coming up with a way to help my players figure out cool outfits would be fun! I'm not criticizing you here. It might be fun. It also may just be something they would not enjoy. I mean it's sort of like... if they already knew what they wanted their characters to look like, specifically, maybe it might be fun? It'd probably be even easier if they know something about clothing or if they are good at drawing or any other means of expressing their vision, assuming they have one. It's like tech support. If somebody comes in here and says "my players don't like combat, what do I do?" my first response is going to be, "don't run so much combat." If everything else about the group is fun, except this, then the simplest answer is to not do it. Rather than trying to come up with a gimmick or trick to get them to like it. You could come up with a complex subsystem where NPCs reactions are modified by the appropriateness of what the PCs are wearing. But that sounds like it would be the opposite of fun for them. What is it you want? Mendrian fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Oh jeez.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:Of a cloth so fine that only the most noble of heroes can discern it... It's a good hook (your idea, that is) though I can't imagine using it any time soon. I don't really get what you mean here. My idea was he just had some really good fabric swiped and they get a free suit out of the deal if they recover it. In court what you are wearing is very important, so having top notch clothing gives you a big benefit. krebbed flam posted:Oh jeez. Oh jeez what? You really aren't helping us understand what you are looking for. v  vvvv Oh, I see. Trying to pull a stunt like that on a Vodacce noble is likely to get you a poison dagger in the back if you are just a lowly merchant. Could still be fun. Lallander fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
krebbed flam posted:Oh jeez. A veritable font of information. Lallander posted:I don't really get what you mean here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
krebbed flam posted:Oh man, and here I thought coming up with a way to help my players figure out cool outfits would be fun! Here see if these are any help when you are telling your stories.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Why is it that in a genre of games that's almost entirely based on human interaction, so many participants are completely unwilling to interact with the other humans involved? krebbed flam, let's start with the basic problem: krebbed flam posted:Character design is one of the best parts! FOR YOU Character design is one of the best parts for you. For other people, character design is one of the worst parts, and they don't want to have to think about it! This is a basic tenet of interacting with other human beings: some people will not like the things that you like. That doesn't make them lumbering Philistines and it doesn't mean they have Objectively Inferior Opinions; they just don't share your tastes. That's okay. Please talk to your players. I will give you a sample thing to say: "Guys, I love designing characters and figuring out how they look, and I've been trying to get you to do that. It's one of my favorite parts of gaming. But I understand if you don't enjoy that, and if you want, I'll drop it. If that's the case, though, would you do me the favor of letting me design your characters' appearances for you? It would give me a lot of pleasure and I'm sure we can come up with something that we all agree on, and that way you don't have to worry about it and I can stop fretting that I don't really know what your characters look like." That's all you have to do. If they don't want to have to deal with designing their characters (which is not a bad thing, remember), then they can pass the buck to you and you get to enjoy the one of the parts of the game that you enjoy most. If they think it might be fun, then they can say "No, I'd rather do it myself" and then they're doing the thing you want them to do. Everybody ends up happy (unless what you really want is Mandatory Fun Time With Krebbed Flam, in which case maybe running a game with other human beings is not what you need to be doing).
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Other than Beesoth's response (one I second - I have about as much interest in character fashion as I do real world fashion, but can tell you how all my PCs move and I'm well aware that most people don't either notice or care), I'm going to suggest throwing out the normal encumberance rules and replacing them with the anti-hammerspace item tracker. Making appearance relevant in a way that actively makes the game both easier to play and more fun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 16:46
|
|
|
Can anyone give me tips for some interesting support NPCs? I'm running a Pathfinder campaign that's loosely based on things like Shadowrift, Neon Genesis Evangelion, and Arkham Horror. The players are protecting a town that is periodically attacked by mega-bosses. Even if they can kill the monsters on their own, it wouldn't be safe for themselves or for the townspeople, so they need to recruit help that can permanently fortify the town from attack. The mega-boss might be a gargantuan-sized brute, or it might be a devil that can possess a townsperson and wreak havoc from the inside, or it might be a hive mind swarm of hounds or any other thing. I want the encounters to be unique. I have a few ideas already for interesting NPCs that the party could gain as allies. I figure that a priest for healing and resurrection is obvious, and a bard who could give them buffs makes sense too. They'll also need a mason to build walls around the town, and a mage who can erect magical barriers. One of the things I'm having trouble with, though, is deciding how other warriors could help. Guards aren't too difficult, because I can just have them listen to the party in terms of holding formations, or they could just focus on protecting townspeople for a turn or two before a monster overwhelms them and leaves the townspeople vulnerable. Then the party could hire an experienced captain who might make the guards better at protecting NPCs, or maybe they can get a blacksmith to upgrade the guards' equipment. But the thing that I don't know how to handle is what to do with warriors who are the same strength as the party or stronger. It would probably be a buzzkill to have a legendary knight do most of the heavy lifting in an encounter. I could just make it so that anyone who is that powerful would not be interested in helping, of course, but what if the players find a way to convince them? I have a couple of heroic knights who are wandering the countryside on quests of their own, and all it would take is a Geis or something to get them as allies. Is there a way to give the players a powerful warrior as an ally without having them steal the spotlight in combat? Also, thanks Guesticle! Those resources are a lifesaver.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Can anyone give me tips for some interesting support NPCs? I'm running a Pathfinder campaign that's loosely based on things like Shadowrift, Neon Genesis Evangelion, and Arkham Horror. The players are protecting a town that is periodically attacked by mega-bosses. Even if they can kill the monsters on their own, it wouldn't be safe for themselves or for the townspeople, so they need to recruit help that can permanently fortify the town from attack. The mega-boss might be a gargantuan-sized brute, or it might be a devil that can possess a townsperson and wreak havoc from the inside, or it might be a hive mind swarm of hounds or any other thing. I want the encounters to be unique. NPCs take care of objectives the players can't (because they're doing other stuff). If the party is guarding the gate, the warriors are guarding the house with the whatever in it, or guarding the opposite gate. Narratively, then, you can have the warriors be either sufficient or insufficient for the task in order to keep the plot on track, the PCs still get to order them around, and yet the PCs are never there to interfere with the NPCs' foreordained success/failure, and never there to be outshined by the NPCs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Cephas posted:But the thing that I don't know how to handle is what to do with warriors who are the same strength as the party or stronger. I think it might be too late for your game, but magic-up some reason why only the party can fight these monsters; "We've only got 4 necklaces of monster warding". Maybe the town council will force all of their Monster Defense Force be all the same level of power, so that the monsters can't just possess Capt. Strong and kill everyone. Make high-level help available, but put it out of their price range. Have high-level help available, but that highlevel help comes with its own problems. Maybe they just used a geas to recruit Strongo, the lvl 20 wandering Paladin. But Strongo has a devil who is hell bent (  ) on killing him, but hasn't be able to track him because Strongo was always on the move. Now that Strongo the Wandering Paladin is staying in one place....Heck, give them option of hiring a wandering warrior, but have the discover (perhaps too late?) that their ally is actually an agent of the next megaboss. About maptools, you're welcome. You can ask here or PM me if you have any other Maptools questions. I'm far from an expert but I've learned some tricks using it for the past couple of years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 18:15
|
|
P.S. STILL COMPLETELY DEVOID OF MERIT
|
Honestly, I'd be really wary of that situation - it sounds like a recipe for accidentally making the PCs feel pretty irrelevant. If you really want to include them, I'd go the route of asking the PCs what they're looking for, and make whoever they find completely specialised. If they hire a trap-maker, for example, have her be no use for anything else. If they want to enlist Sir Meatshield, he'll help for a price, but need to be told exactly what they want him to do. One idea might be to give them a budget and a rough map of the town, and ask them how they're spending it - maybe not a concrete amount of cash, but something abstracted, or maybe a budget of time. Let them research the Big Bad, and plan how to organise the town to resist it. "Well, the monster is known to raise the dead, so lets set up a production line of holy water, and build a barricade around the cemetary". If you went full-on with this, you could have each fight be effectively split into two parts - first, they research and set up defenses, almost like an RTS. Then they go into the main fight, with gear/minions/bonuses depending on how well their defenses stand up, and how appropriate they are. e: Also, the players will get a nice feeling of  if you make a big thing out of 'the lich speaks eldritch words, pulling the dead of the town from their rest. And then the buckets of holy water thrown by the townsfolk splash over them, annihilating the zombies in one fell swoop'.
petrol blue fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
homullus posted:NPCs take care of objectives the players can't (because they're doing other stuff). If the party is guarding the gate, the warriors are guarding the house with the whatever in it, or guarding the opposite gate. Narratively, then, you can have the warriors be either sufficient or insufficient for the task in order to keep the plot on track, the PCs still get to order them around, and yet the PCs are never there to interfere with the NPCs' foreordained success/failure, and never there to be outshined by the NPCs. Could also treat those high level warriors more as resources to tweak some aspect of the gameplay. That legendary knight roams the countryside, reducing the frequency of the attacks so they have more time to fortify. The super ranger is out there scouting giving the players valuable warning about what they might need to plan for. They're around and helping, but you never really see them after recruitment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:Honestly, there's no hard-and-fast solution here save for a more general bit of advice - make your game be about poo poo the players are interested in. The adjunct to this is if you have players who are uncommunicative about what game they want, feel free to poke them with whatever god-forsaken characterization hooks you want; if nothing else, that way you'll be having fun. The other thing I would add is don't be super mysterious about stuff. If it is literally just to play Barbie dress-up, tell them that. If the clothing might be important to an encounter they will end up in soon, tell them that or at least tease it. poo poo like your character's favourite colour of clothing can be something the DM uses to hook a player into something completely different down the road (colour-coded setting factions, for example). Any little detail can tell you more about that character than just the detail itself, so if that's your goal then make that clear to your players.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
krebbed flam posted:Oh man, and here I thought coming up with a way to help my players figure out cool outfits would be fun! As a more serious answer to this, from your description of the game, it sounds like there's not been much call for the players to consider appearance. Unless it's really relevant to the game, there's no reason for the players to worry about it. Personally, I make use of the inverse of that, basing the game partly off what the players focus on - if they spend a lot of time describing appearances and lineage, they likely want a high-society game about keeping up appearances. If they lovingly describe their flourishes in combat, they probably want a really combat-focused game with an emphasis on technique. Not that that's the only thing that should be in the game, it's good to shake things up once from time to time, but it's a good indicator of what your players enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Is there a way to give the players a powerful warrior as an ally without having them steal the spotlight in combat? I can't think of one, off the top of my head, unless it's something like "Quickly! While I'm holding its mouth open, you guys jump in and fight your way up to the brain!". If they're powerful wizards that's another matter: have them turn out to be specialised in buffing spells, so they can help by transforming the PCs into monsters the size of buildings (but only for a fixed period of time, and they leave themselves vulnerable while they do it. To be honest, the real thing I'd be questioning is Cephas posted:I have a couple of heroic knights who are wandering the countryside on quests of their own, and all it would take is a Geis or something to get them as allies. I don't think this is true. If they're high enough level to make the PCs irrelevant compared to them, they're high enough level to have their own important things to do, things that will go horribly wrong and have major consequences if the PCs drag them away from it. I mean, sure, Bob the Knight can help these guys protect this one village, but Bob knows that if he does, the lich he was supposed to be hunting down will get to the sceptre of power first and raise an unstoppable army of the dead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:Honestly, I'd be really wary of that situation - it sounds like a recipe for accidentally making the PCs feel pretty irrelevant. If you really want to include them, I'd go the route of asking the PCs what they're looking for, and make whoever they find completely specialised. If they hire a trap-maker, for example, have her be no use for anything else. If they want to enlist Sir Meatshield, he'll help for a price, but need to be told exactly what they want him to do. Check out the silverclawshift archive at the Giant in the Playground forums for a great example of this. It's in the first few spoiler blocks (though the whole archive is worth reading, two fantastic campaigns and the start of a third).
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
Whybird posted:I don't think this is true. If they're high enough level to make the PCs irrelevant compared to them, they're high enough level to have their own important things to do, things that will go horribly wrong and have major consequences if the PCs drag them away from it. I mean, sure, Bob the Knight can help these guys protect this one village, but Bob knows that if he does, the lich he was supposed to be hunting down will get to the sceptre of power first and raise an unstoppable army of the dead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
For my 4E Neverwinter campaign session coming up on Sunday, I was thinking of having them have to plan an elaborate heist to steal some documents from the city government. I have pretty much everything all planned out in terms of what they will need to do for the heist itself (I have like a gazillion different ways for them to pull it off and it's written pretty flexibly to accommodate player creativity) but I was wondering if people think it should be better to build up to the heist over multiple sessions or whether the heist should happen the same session they start planning it? Specifically I was thinking that they could have to gather certain supplies for a potion they'll need, get some allies, steal uniforms, etc. to get ready. But at the same time I don't know if players would be disappointed if they spend the whole session planning for it without payoff until the next session or even the one after that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
Definately do a planning session and then do the heist in the next, you really don't want to go into a heist in a fantasy RPG thinking you know what the players are going to do, there's so many random magical factors that it's best to have the planning session so you can tailor things to be more exciting for their plan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
How long are your sessions? More than 2 hours of prep is overkill. Give'em rewards for what they do right and introduce complications to make it exciting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 00:48
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:How long are your sessions? More than 2 hours of prep is overkill. Give'em rewards for what they do right and introduce complications to make it exciting. Not for 4e. I made really elaborate colored maps/battlemaps for all encounters alongside a lot of other backup prep, and my weekly prep was about 2-4 hours on average. One of the most memorable 4e sessions was the players defending a town they had built up over 8 or so sessions...the battlemap was 8 feet by 10 feet (filled the whole living room).
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Cephas posted:Like Evangelion in Pathfinder Mundane NPCs could cover things like: Help the street gangs out and convince them that this is a problem for everyone. During monster attacks cutpurses and guttersnipes will run the party through back alleys and sewer shortcuts. They can respond to the monsters faster and plan escape routes. Spreading the word for things like evacuation take a lot of time and five adventurers won't be able to take a break from clobberin' time to get Granny Tennya and her 12 cats out of Dodge. The city guard makes sure that the battles are taking place in relatively empty areas. The Apothecaries Guild has the party's back. Caches of potions, elixirs and other useful alchemic supplies are in various emergency boxes. Nothin' magical about a trebuchet or battery of ballistae. I've heard a lot of praise for Dungeon World on this board so I'm gonna try running it for a group of friends that can meet online. I've checked out the Walking Eye Podcasts(which were fantastic) and it sounds like a map and grid aren't really required for play. I trust my players so will the system stand up if I just play over a Mumble line we already have and not set up a bunch of roll20 or Maptools stuff for it? I'll probably set that stuff up later anyway but since our first meeting will probably be mostly rolling it'd be nice if I could throw an encounter or two at the party so they get a feel for the game right off the bat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
A map definitely isn't required for combat, though it might be handy for other stuff (overworld, etc). But aside from rolling (and you trust them, so not an issue), I don't think there's any reason not to do it over mumble.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
I run Dungeon World over Skype and it works fine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
For 4th Ed D&D, are there any hard-and-fast guidelines for monster skill levels? Specifically, I'm hoping for initiative and perception by role+level I have a party of stealth-happy players but I am using (more or less) completely homebrewed monsters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 07:20
|
|
|
Monster skills work the same as player skills, half level + ability modifier + 5 if "trained" (i.e. if you decide this monster should be good at it). So does initiative, so there's that. However, monster ability scores tend to be higher than players', and monsters don't benefit from feats and items to raise their perception the way players do to raise their stealth. Easiest way is probably to look at existing monsters of the same level as yours, note down the ability scores, give your creatures ability scores from that range and calculate the skill bonus from there; or if you can't be bothered, check the DC-by-level table, pick an easy, medium or hard DC, subtract 10, and that can be your monster's skill bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:20 |
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Monster skills work the same as player skills, half level + ability modifier + 5 if "trained" (i.e. if you decide this monster should be good at it). So does initiative, so there's that. However, monster ability scores tend to be higher than players', and monsters don't benefit from feats and items to raise their perception the way players do to raise their stealth. You can, however, give monsters items, as long as you are ok with players looting those items off their corpses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 14:06
|
|