|
AlphaDog posted:This sounds like an exact description of someone I used to work with in like 2006-2007 or so. You're not Australian, right? Nope! We are many.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Apartheid and Toshimo have the right idea. Why exactly is the comparison considered a bad thing, to the people defending/that enjoyed that edition? Given what I devoted 11 years of my life to playing, I WISH I'd stumbled into playing D&D with 4th Edition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Thing is Fighters are garbage at their role unless the DM is shoring them up with magic items or easy encounters against enemies following the gentleman's agreement to go after the guy at the front first. Yeah I said Paladins are better. I just don't agree with you that they are garbage at their role Enemies tend to go after the guy in front anyway. Cause the guy in front is normally the guy in their face beating them to death. Like the only time I am really going to make the argument for a enemy to ignore the guy in their face is if they are mindless undead or bound fiends and were ordered to ignore them. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Dec 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Ok going to explain it better now that I am no longer burdened. OK allow me to present my rebuttal now that I am not beset by bees. If you compare them on a paladness scale instead of a fightyness scale, (this one goes from 1 to 10000000000) then paladins are 9999999947 to 10000000000 but fighters are only 8447 to 9062. This is obviously very far from the ideal equality situation, therefore fighters need both optimisation and better design. There is a problem and it is very very large indeed!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:OK allow me to present my rebuttal now that I am not beset by bees. Thanks for this super poor faith argument.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:50
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:OK allow me to present my rebuttal now that I am not beset by bees. Wait, hold on. No. Are you okay? Bees?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Thanks for this super poor faith argument. Making up some numbers and declaring victory is exactly what you tried to pull.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
"4e is a videogame!" is a point people will fight because it was repeatedly wheeled out as a) hyperbole and b) as proof that 4e wasn't 'real D&D' because something something attention spans something something shallow gameplay. Like I got no dog in that race but if you can't understand why people still growl when somebody starts talking about how 4e is an MMO than you weren't paying attention in the intervening years. Like yes, 4e absolutely took inspiration from MMOs but it was still very much its own thing. Mearls is like the least reliable source because he wanted to take 4e in a more 'traditional' direction, which got us Essentials, which kind of sucked. He already believed 4e was 'too much of a videogame' when he took over its direction. Basically people have been having the same stupid gatekeeping argument about 4e since before 4e was even officially released. It has never been about what inspired 4e; it has been about the 3e/PF community finding fault with the way 4e was different from prior editions and how the game was initially advertised. If you want to say 4e included MMO inspirations that's cool but MMOs didn't really invent the idea of abilities refreshing on a time table. Ironically the primary resistance to 5e has been the same 3e/PF people wheeling out the same stupid arguments and saying, 'see, see, we were right all along!' which just makes the community vomit harder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
Paladins have more interesting abilities than Fighters at the end of the day. All of their improvements are their divine flavored nonsense. Why on earth is anyone surprised by the fact that the paladins extra set of talents are better and more interesting? It's like if I asked you whether you would like a milkshake or a milkshake with a cherry on top. Plain milkshakes are just loving boring. Maybe if their subclasses had some cherries rather than being "oh hey it's a Two Handed Milkshake with Hits Things!!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Yeah I said Paladins are better. I just don't agree with you that they are garbage at their role I dunno if I really buy this reasoning. If a trained combatant has fought with or against magic-users before, then shouldn't they know the importance of protecting your magicians and attacking the enemy's? If someone has experience fighting with or against archers, then shouldn't they know that archers have a hard time doing their job when big fighty dudes get in their face? And while everyone should be aware of the dangers of turning their back to the enemy, it's reasonable they'd also know that one enemy can't react to everything if the entire force rushes past at the same time. I'm not arguing for the DM to metagame every combat encounter, but I still expect intelligent humanoid enemies to act like intelligent humanoids, and given that they should know their own capabilities I'd imagine they'd assume the same applies to the enemy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:05
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:Paladins have more interesting abilities than Fighters at the end of the day. All of their improvements are their divine flavored nonsense. I don't think anybody is surprised, they just wanted Fighters to be better than they are. 'Paladins are just Fighters with divine powers!' is an accurate assessment of the current game but not the only way it could have been.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:"4e is a videogame!" is a point people will fight because it was repeatedly wheeled out as a) hyperbole and b) as proof that 4e wasn't 'real D&D' because something something attention spans something something shallow gameplay. yeah, it's a dogwhistle. Nobody who characterizes 4e as "polarizing" then says 5e was some kind of return to form makes the comparison to World of Warcraft as a compliment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
lightrook posted:I dunno if I really buy this reasoning. If a trained combatant has fought with or against magic-users before, then shouldn't they know the importance of protecting your magicians and attacking the enemy's? If someone has experience fighting with or against archers, then shouldn't they know that archers have a hard time doing their job when big fighty dudes get in their face? And while everyone should be aware of the dangers of turning their back to the enemy, it's reasonable they'd also know that one enemy can't react to everything if the entire force rushes past at the same time. I'm not arguing for the DM to metagame every combat encounter, but I still expect intelligent humanoid enemies to act like intelligent humanoids, and given that they should know their own capabilities I'd imagine they'd assume the same applies to the enemy. Mechanically, he concept of frontliners and backliners isn't supported well in 5e. By default, characters don't suffer from being surrounded, and there are very few options for a frontliner to actually try to impede enemies from getting by. Outside of sentinel and the ability to ready an action to grapple a single enemy as they run by, I don't know of any. As long as there's room to slip by frontliners, enemies aren't punished for rushing past them and stabbing at the softer PCs in the back ranks. Elysiume fucked around with this message at 06:30 on Dec 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
I'm gonna get roasted for not liking 4E here, but my grog complaint isn't about abilities and refresh or MMO combat mechanics. The combat in 4E was polished and innovative, but not perfect. It's that mechanics for exploration and social and combat pillars were pretty much completely separated, and "high power" abilities for social and exploration challenges were basically removed from the game entirely. And blurring the lines where abilities for one pillar got used in another was also clamped down on. The best part (in my opinion) of tabletop RPGs that you can't get anywhere else is the human across the table who can judge what happens when you do something weird. Computers and video games can't do that, and strategy games can't do that. Using illusions and mind-altering enchantments and divinations and exploration magic (or equally powerful nonmagical abilities) is cool and good, too. It's cool that abilities that make an enemy stab his friend for you could also used to make a king arrest your enemy for you. It's not cool that only half the characters might have those choices, that's the worst I can say about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Really I don't understand why Mearls is stupid enough to get into this fight, as he was the guy responsible for throwing out Orcus (also known as Tome of Battle) to ensure we had crap like daily abilities to half-rear end attrition. The man designed enough of 4e that turning around and presenting himself as the guardian of real D&D is extremely disingenuous (some of us remember the many failed skill challenge erratas, Mike!) while also explaining that 4th edition had trouble because it was a perfectly balanced game. This is the same guy who is basically writing "rulings not rules" as by his own admission it's just too hard to balance classes. The man has nothing worthwhile to say, so don't bring him up. Simple.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 06:31
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:I'm gonna get roasted for not liking 4E here, but my grog complaint isn't about abilities and refresh or MMO combat mechanics. The combat in 4E was polished and innovative, but not perfect. I do admit exclaiming "I can't roleplay in this system!" every time we in fact, roleplayed, was a group in joke with my friends when we were playing 4th ed. But the flaw isn't 4th ed, so much as modules and GMs for DnD as a whole if social intricacies seem lacking. Though my luck has run that systems tailored towards "building a narrative" like FATE or Edge of the Empire has always ended up with GMs strangling us with rules interpretations instead of the advertised "No guys, play THIS system if you want to a ruleset that supports roleplay!", so that has certainly colored my views. 5th ed sure as hell doesn't have any meaningful social mechanics for it's core ruleset above and beyond 4th, unless one thinks "Bypass the social challenge entirely with a charm spell" = social challenge. That's not praise for 4th, so much as ""The edition wasn't the problem" if one finds social interactions or "Not accounted for by a chart" options lacking. Both 4th and 5th ed could stand to have had better guidelines. Section Z fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Dec 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 07:00
|
|
|
My home game finally hit level 20.  We are playing through a pathfinder campaign (way of the wicked) - after running it for like 2 years I could probably write a guide to converting adventure paths to 5e on the fly. That seemed like a pain at first but turned out to be one of the easier things to deal with. Things are wild and crazy at the level cap but not unmanageable. Some stuff I've learned about high-level 5e: 1) Throw all the loot at the group that you want, loot is fun, who cares, just enforce the atunement limit. 2) Hurl Through Hell is the coolest ability in 5e. 3) Releasing an imprisoned demilich in the vicinity of an angry dragon, hoping they will occupy each other while you steal the loot, will never end well. 4) High-level groups are a well-oiled machine. Assume your players will do all the things. Yep they will legend lore everything, have perma-heroic feast, a >30 stealth score, easy access to flight, they'll scout obstacles via the ethereal plane, ask their planar buddies for help, all that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 07:38
|
|
|
ritorix posted:3) Releasing an imprisoned demilich in the vicinity of an angry dragon, hoping they will occupy each other while you steal the loot, will never end well. Tell us what happened!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
Don't skimp out on the stories.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 08:31
|
|
|
Ah sure, it's more 'best experiences thread' but anything to derail the edition wars. Gather 'round. This tale has spoilers from the back half of the Way of the Wicked pathfinder campaign, so skip if you're going to play that. The group had to steal from a dragon. In its hoard is a mcguffin they need, buried under a ton of other random objects and coins. Curled around the hoard is the dragon. "Asleep". A classic situation. But it's not just any dragon. This group has murdered a great wyrm before, no problem, but this thing is a death dragon. It's breath attack is acid, but the bite and breath both drain away hit points like a wraith's attack, making its damage basically unhealable. It's immune to most status effects, death magic and necrotic damage. It regenerates. Its favorite food is corporeal undead, which isn't a problem for most groups, but mine has a vampire death cleric PC. He's extra-tasty, and he wont be able to easily hurt the dragon. Oh yeah, one more thing, it's a cursed dragon. Whoever slays the dragon will be instantly, unrecoverably slain by the curse. The group has done their research and knows all about this critter and how many parties it devoured over a long lifespan. The curse is a known issue. Now, right outside the lair after battling through various minions, they have cold feet about going in. The vamp is worried about getting focused down, and he needs to be invited into a home anyway, that can be awkward. Is a lair really a home? "Please invite me in to eat me?" "Invite me in, I've got treasure for you?" So they are standing outside arguing over what to do. Of course the dragon hears all this. The rogue decides to sneak in Hobbit-style and just steal the mcguffin. No fight means you don't have to deal with a curse! Amazingly, with absurd levels of luck and skill, he succeeds. But of course the dragon was awake the whole time and knows when he is missing "even a single coin" - and yeah, the party knew that tidbit beforehand also. Now the mcguffin is officially in ~another dimension~ - a bag of holding - so it qualifies as missing. Dragon goes ballistic at the unseen theft. The rogue panics. With one hand still in that bag of holding, he fishes out something the party has been keeping in storage. They didn't quite know what to do with it. It's a small glass box. With a demilich inside, locked in stasis forever. Said demilich is the defeated BBEG of someone else's campaign. The PCs found it in another dragon's lair, and didn't know what to do with something so absurd and dangerous, so it went into the bag. Until now. The rogue opens it up and tosses it at the dragon. A lichbomb. Then he runs like hell. This floating skull wakes up, is faced with a rather nasty dragon and has no idea WTF is going on. Last it knew, it was fighting some other party of adventurers and lost, a century ago. A few rounds of combat go by, but amusingly neither dragon nor demilich can really hurt one another. They are each immune to their opponent's various attacks. The only thing that does get through is the acid breath of the dragon - that one really hurts the lich. So it, uh, it runs away! The party is also running away. The dragon chases the now half-melted skull like a cat after a fly. They barrel into the party and our PCs' 3-round head-start evaporates. What does an injured demilich do? Why, it drains all life in the area, healing itself based on the damage done. Everyone except the dragon and our vamp take a hit. The party has basically made a difficult fight way, way harder. They added a boss to a bossfight. With no way to flee (teleports and ethereal travel are options for them, but were blocked in this dungeon thanks to a different mcguffin), they have to turn and fight. A tense battle follows. But these PCs fight like a well-oiled machine. The lich doesn't last too long, melting away in combined fire from the party and the next dragonbreath. A few crazy rounds later and the dragon is near death too. But remember, whoever kills it will die! So they knock it out instead. But it regenerates. So they beat it down while one PC runs outside, summons an elemental (bypassing the planar blockade) and has it kill the dragon for them. Dragon dies, elemental melts away horribly from the curse, and our PCs manage to pull through. Just barely. On to the loot! Just as they limp out of the dungeon and sit down to rest, I said "roll initiative". A portal to hell was opening right in front of them and something big was coming out... It's been a fun campaign.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 14:11
|
|
|
ritorix posted:Awesome demilich/dragon shenanigans I'd be interested in any tips/tricks for converting Pathfinder adventures to 5e on the fly or close to it. Say what you will about PF, but the APs are great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
lightrook posted:I dunno if I really buy this reasoning. If a trained combatant has fought with or against magic-users before, then shouldn't they know the importance of protecting your magicians and attacking the enemy's? If someone has experience fighting with or against archers, then shouldn't they know that archers have a hard time doing their job when big fighty dudes get in their face? And while everyone should be aware of the dangers of turning their back to the enemy, it's reasonable they'd also know that one enemy can't react to everything if the entire force rushes past at the same time. I'm not arguing for the DM to metagame every combat encounter, but I still expect intelligent humanoid enemies to act like intelligent humanoids, and given that they should know their own capabilities I'd imagine they'd assume the same applies to the enemy. Yeah this makes sense. The magic user is a high priority target. However also realistically, the fighter should have a lot of options to prevent you from doing this, like just putting his heavy armored rear end in your way, or constantly hounding you for trying to get past them. But in most editions of D&D hey have no actual meaningful way to do this. They get to take A single swing at you then you're off to the races and they have to chase you down to do anything, and even if they're right behind you they don't meaningfully interfere in your smashing the squishy dude. In 4e they got to penalize you for ignoring them and get even more free swings because you weren't focused on them and this was WoW game for babies so we gotta put a stop to that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
Glagha posted:Yeah this makes sense. The magic user is a high priority target. However also realistically, the fighter should have a lot of options to prevent you from doing this, like just putting his heavy armored rear end in your way, or constantly hounding you for trying to get past them. But in most editions of D&D hey have no actual meaningful way to do this. They get to take A single swing at you then you're off to the races and they have to chase you down to do anything, and even if they're right behind you they don't meaningfully interfere in your smashing the squishy dude. In 4e they got to penalize you for ignoring them and get even more free swings because you weren't focused on them and this was WoW game for babies so we gotta put a stop to that. Xanathar's added some subclasses with features that improve tanking beyond being a sack of high AC/HP (Cavalier, Ancestral Guardian) but yeah these should probably be core fighter abilities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
The fighter's nearly sole method of interacting with encounters is dealing damage, so in order to be as credible a threat as the ranged combatants it needs to either deal a shitton of damage, or broaden its control options through a few specific mixes of archetype abilities and feats. Either avenue requires a certain degree of system mastery that's unrealistic to expect from both newbies and experienced players without the time and talent for analysis. This is how it works out of the box, following the rules. There's also a third way, the one favored if not outright extolled by apologists, where the fighter finagles its way into competence through DM fiat, and while I support that roleplaying games are ultimately a conversation between the DM and the players and each other, with rules serving merely as aids and to which the DM should apply common sense arbitration, pretending certain classes have 'roles' that the game mechanics do not at all support is most certainly not how things should be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 17:52
|
|
|
My DM recently started house ruling that we could use our STR bonus instead of CHA for intimidation checks, if we're flexing muscles or bigass weapons. It really helped our fighter, because he finally got a useful way of interacting with the social npc encounters, even if it's just crude axe threatening. It also stopped our wizard from burning all his spell slots on Suggestion, which in turn stopped him from complaining about only having cantrips in combat. Which then helps our cleric, because he doesn't have waste all his spell slots on healing the wizard in every single fight. Such a small change drastically improved everybodys D&D experience, and I wish it was an official optional rule.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Psychedelicatessen posted:Such a small change drastically improved everybodys D&D experience, and I wish it was an official optional rule. It is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Anyone got good resources on dming overworld exploration? My experience is entirely in one shots and an urban campaign so the idea of spending weeks in the wilds (when the wilds have stuff that matters) is new to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Anyone got good resources on dming overworld exploration? My experience is entirely in one shots and an urban campaign so the idea of spending weeks in the wilds (when the wilds have stuff that matters) is new to me. Are you doing a quest chain, or a sandbox/hexcrawl, and are you gonna map and detail the whole thing, or fake it? If it's quest/detailed then you do it like anything else linear and planned. If not I can do an effortpost for you later today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
I loved 4E but my players quickly grew bored of it. I believe that it kinda forced them to engage tactically during combat while 3.x felt much more free form. Two of my hard-roleplayer friends easily endured 3.x combat because it was a nasty, bruttish affair carried on by the optimizers but they got extremely bored during 4E because every combat played out like a boardgame within a roleplaying game. I think 4E is probably the most elegant and balanced of all the editions of dnd but maybe it's narrower in its appeal compared to 3.x or 5E  Incidentally, I've put together part of my old group -the hard roleplayers- for a Vampire campaign and afterwards I convinced them to try 5E. They are having a blast with unoptimized and ill-suited-for-combat characters
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Are you doing a quest chain, or a sandbox/hexcrawl, and are you gonna map and detail the whole thing, or fake it? Quest chain, but one where the journey should matter. Like the early story goal is they're charged with getting to the Feywild from point A and travel to point B to open a gate back to the prime from their end. It's gritty dangerous work for people who don't have a lot waiting for them back home, other than an interest bearing account. They'll have reasons to stick around later (or they decide mission accomplished and I guess we're done if they wanna leave the Feywild in chaos) but the journey across one continent is more than something you vignette away on a boat ride.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Psychedelicatessen posted:My DM recently started house ruling that we could use our STR bonus instead of CHA for intimidation checks, if we're flexing muscles or bigass weapons. It really helped our fighter, because he finally got a useful way of interacting with the social npc encounters, even if it's just crude axe threatening. It also stopped our wizard from burning all his spell slots on Suggestion, which in turn stopped him from complaining about only having cantrips in combat. Which then helps our cleric, because he doesn't have waste all his spell slots on healing the wizard in every single fight. That isn't even a house rule. It's written in the rules that at a DMs discretion they may call for an ability to be made with a different modifier. Not saying this to be "haha I know this tid-bit fact," and be all smug. Genuinely I want more people to read that section and loosen up their tight rear end ability mod assholes. Problem is you've got armchair grognards that insist that being tired to a chair having a big burly dude crack his knuckles and say "start talking or I start breaking fingers" still rides off charisma instead of pure physical intimidation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:That isn't even a house rule. It's written in the rules that at a DMs discretion they may call for an ability to be made with a different modifier. Not saying this to be "haha I know this tid-bit fact," and be all smug. Genuinely I want more people to read that section and loosen up their tight rear end ability mod assholes. Literally RAW:  PHB p. 175
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Quest chain, but one where the journey should matter. Like the early story goal is they're charged with getting to the Feywild from point A and travel to point B to open a gate back to the prime from their end. It's gritty dangerous work for people who don't have a lot waiting for them back home, other than an interest bearing account. There are two ways I'd think about doing this. As a series of vignettes consisting of single adventuring days, as in actual days where something interesting happens, each of which is a plot-linked mini-adventure that showcases some feywild stuff, followed by "you travel for another two weeks without anything much happening, and then come to a town/river/mountain/forest where adventure happens..." or As an abstracted series of adventuring "days" where you're using short-rests to signal "you camped and it was actually slightly restful for once" and long rests are the rare safe, 100% peaceful night. So encounters are happening every few days, and short rests maybe once a week, with 2 or 3 long rests spread out. That'll make it look and feel like you're playing through every day of the trip. In either case, string your encounters together in a meaningful way, because you're drat right crossing a continent should be a story worth telling.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Is a hex crawl a bad fit for this? I mean, the episodic mini adventures thing is in line with my plans, I just have never done a hex crawl so I know very little about it
Nehru the Damaja fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Dec 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 23:59
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:That isn't even a house rule. It's written in the rules that at a DMs discretion they may call for an ability to be made with a different modifier. Not saying this to be "haha I know this tid-bit fact," and be all smug. Genuinely I want more people to read that section and loosen up their tight rear end ability mod assholes. 'do it the hard way grogs' are a problem. But my bizzare track record has had far less stereotypical antagonistic GMS and players, so much as people with very specific opinions on rules interpretation and fairness. Such as another example involving intimidation. Throwing your voice via 'pack of gum' point cost powers called "being a cheating munchkin without the ventriloquism skill", then the GM suggests you use it as a 5km selective targeting intimidate check when you have supernaturally amped presence that would make batman die of terror. Which is of course, far more fair than being the sound effects guy from police academy. Explicit rules for alternatives are very important. It would be far worse to not have "Oh, maybe use STR for tough guy intimitation" listed at all. But oh lordy lord, gaming would have half the problems it does to day if ONLY crusty grognards who hate you personally were the problem 
Section Z fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Dec 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:I'm gonna get roasted for not liking 4E here, but my grog complaint isn't about abilities and refresh or MMO combat mechanics. The combat in 4E was polished and innovative, but not perfect. I dunno man I loved 4e but you ain't wrong. 4e's non-combat stuff was bolted on using the combat framework, and it showed. It was never fully developed and skill challenges remain a terrible albatross around the whole system. I was really hopeful a new edition might address one problem (noncombat stuff kind of sucking) while retaining lessons learned from another (combat). The tragedy is that they just jettisoned the baby and bathwater both into space. There were real issues with 4e that got lost in all the fake issues and they'll never be addressed. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Dec 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Is a hex crawl a bad fit for this? Probably? Let me think a bit about how my free exploration hexcrawl stuff could work with an a-b journey. I know it wouldn't work as usual, and I suspect it'd feel a bit railroady to have a "get to this hex and you win" and also have them interact with stuff along the way, but I'm sure I can come up with something. Unless you want to make up a map with detailed stuff per hex and let them wander through it trying to get to B and see what stories emerge? But that's frankly a shitload of work and they probably won't see 9/10ths of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
A lot of old school hexcrawl maps probably relied on rolling random encounters by terrain type to flesh them out, too. Edit: That would prevent a lot of GM prep being unused if players didn’t pick specific hexes, but would also disrupt gameplay while everyone waits for the GM to reference charts and find the right pages in the Monster Manual. Instead of that, decide which parts of a hexcraw appeal to you and don’t be afraid to shuffle the order of your setpiece encounters and plot hooks to a different part of the map if the player’s skip something you think matters. BetterWeirdthanDead fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Dec 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
I remember getting into an argument with a DM, because my character was trying to jump a gap. He wanted me to roll Dexterity, I wanted to roll Strength. People get hung up on things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:I remember getting into an argument with a DM, because my character was trying to jump a gap. He wanted me to roll Dexterity, I wanted to roll Strength. By default in the book Strength is the way to go in the book. But either would work depending how you worded it to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 02:53
|
|