|
ritorix posted:So the EK turns out to have a gimmick or two, and the F/W multi is more versatile and pretty much better. This gets crazier if you add polearm feats and whatnot, but I'll keep it simple and leave it at that. I was going to ask about fireball and other area attacks but the half-caster progression is so weak that I don't have to bother.
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2014 14:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
I wonder what the design rationale behind putting Basic's Weapon Mastery and 4th's Warlord into the same subclass was? I'm sure no one will ever tell us.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:3e was lovely so we stayed in old grog land. (Although I did end up with some of the 3e FR books for easy infodumps.) In the basic pdf, rather than sort spells in a sane way like Class->Level->Alphabetical, Next chooses to sort all spells alphabetically. In the starter set, enemies in a room don't appear in-line with the room description. Both of these are things that are formatted better in the very earliest of D&D editions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:What's needed is a a) simple, b) EXTREMELY lightweight, c) internet/tumblr/livejournal/facebook friendly conflict resolution system. That d) uses as little math as humanly possible. That means no minmaxing. Hell, no character creation period. There is no character creation involving numbers, it's all involving fiction. One difficulty with this would be that you would probably have to offer an integrated application to do this. If you just make up super light rules no one will ever buy them, because they'll think they can do better even if you put years of research into your rules. seebs posted:For years I thought the "doesn't feel like D&D" complaint was incoherent, finally I found someone who could frame it in terms of resource management; the at-will/encounter/daily thing meant that you didn't have resource management the same way you did in previous editions (and do again in 5th), and for a lot of people, that was a big part of the "feel" of D&D. I would love to know what size the group of people whose actual complaint was "They shifted a lot of the resource management from tactical to strategic level." In my experience with 3rd edition, a lot of people just hate resource management and drop as much of it as possible, so maybe some of it was actually "I don't want to make these sorts of decisions when I'm 'telling a story' but 4th edition pushes me to"?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Yeah, the marketing before the playtest seemed to indicate it would be BECMI + GURPS. Pretty disappointed this isn't what's happening. Don't remind me. Just thinking about the possibility that it could have been that is depressing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:The Battle Master's level 15 feature, Relentless, has been heavily nerfed. 15th level is the level where the transmuter feature includes "you now have an infinite amount of gold" right?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
Chaltab posted:Wait... when you roll initiative--? So you only get them at the start of an encounter and are SOL for the rest of the fight? The default timing to get your dice back is 'after a short rest'. But yes, if you have used them all up than you only get one an encounter until you rest. The thread already discussed the duration of short rests being bizarre at length.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Here are a bunch more pages including the Rogue, Gnome, Half-Orc, Sailor, Charlatan and Gods. I see they did the alphabetized only spell list in the printed book, so they are in fact, terrible at formatting, rather than very devious marketers.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
eth0.n posted:It's, naturally, somewhat ambiguous, but precedent is that ambiguity is resolved by DM whim, so we're back to surprise being DM-may-I. Well, that's the entire point. Ritorix is a DM, and he willfully misinterpreted the way the surprise rules work. So, now his players get to experience a better rule set than the one initially intended by WotC. That's how Next works.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
ritorix posted:lol  I mean the way you said it is obviously a better rule, and it's probably what they meant. It's just astonishing that they went hog wild with natural language being incapable of writing unambiguous sentences. How many editions of D&D have had stealth errata? Will this make it all of them?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
ritorix posted:(or burn the whole thing Surprise/Stealth has always been a, erm, bugbear, for D&D, especially in editions where it was of key importance because you could be laid out in one round. I think the Next rules for that are pretty good aside from the ambiguity. MonsterEnvy posted:It also still just bugs me about how little to no one knows that the game is not called D&D next that was the name of the playtest. The actual game is just D&D or D&D 5e. This is down to my dislike of marketing rather than my dislike of this game. The day I heard that they were calling it Next I knew they would eventually change the name and vowed to call it Next forever.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 02:57
|
|
)
|
Rosalind posted:Codename: Morningstar has posted their beta version of a character sheet: The reason this post is concerning isn't because of the bad UI. That's fixable. The problem is that they thought it was okay to show bad UI to potential customers, which suggests that they don't have anyone on the team that understands User Experience, so they won't be able to fix it. Morningstar posted:Ideals Applause and apprecia... Seriously, who signed off on this? Also, congratulations/condolences on getting second place Ritorix.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:
I can't believe you had an argument with Ritorix. It'j just too beautiful to be true.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
treeboy posted:looking at monster stats, the only creatures getting save proficiencies so far are NPCs (Sildar, Nezznar, Assassin) and dragons. I'm betting the former are based off some kind of class template (since they share saves with their PC class counterparts) and the others are either a dragon template or a "solo" type template Probably a solo type ability because the Vampire has them but it doesn't seem to have class levels. Idk why it doesn't get CON, maybe because it's undead?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:Played absolutely straight that would be hilarious. We bow before you Pelor, and not just because you are literally blinding us.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:Ah excellent thank you for the reply. I'm skipping a decent amount of this thread as I don't personally care if people liked 3/3.5/4th and the pro's/con's of those compared to 5th ed. If you played and enjoyed 2nd ed, 3rd ed, and 4th ed, I think it's safe to say that you are in the target audience for this game.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
LFK posted:So, you wanna see something odd? This is using the legends and lore article CR chart, right? Oh god, what did they do to their website? Are there no longer proper article archives? It took me 10 minutes to find the article, and it's only a month old.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
Sir, you have impugned the integrety of D&D. I challenge you to a duel on the field of honor. The weapon shall be skeletons.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:And that's what they showed at GenCon? Like, the big convention where you show off your best? A ghoul tpk in process where NPCs swoop in to save you? They're rather bad at this. The week character creation came out they used it at gencon which inevitably drained 2/3 of the time allotted for the adventure. At least I had enough time for a combat encounter where everyone got trapped in a net and then the entire encounter was invalidated by the wizard casting pre-nerf sleep.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:e: Bards can also use Bardic Inspiration on their initial attack roll, bringing their chance to succeed up to 98.6%. It seems they may be the ultimate dragon killers. Bard is the way to a kill a dragon? I guess the game really was inspired by Tolkien.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Trollhawke posted:So I've almost finished my first Elder Demon and Wizard city for Noskelhome and this is the checklist I've been running for Wizard king cities: A list of factions in the city, unless the Wizard Kings domination is so complete that the only faction is themselves. (Or unless that's too small a brush stroke) neonchameleon posted:Yup. D&D is roughly 10% the size of Magic: The Gathering. And probably less than that by now. Read this as Mage:The Awakening for some reason and got confused.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Dexters Secret posted:I don't have time to read all these posts, I'm a busy man. Is this game good, yes or no? NO CONTEXT PLEASE. Attorney at Funk posted:- do you currently play and enjoy d&d 3.5 or pathfinder but wish it ran smoother or was less egregiously broken.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
ritorix posted:So it looks like anyone can cast spells from scrolls if you pass an Int check. That is sort of interesting. Seems like this is most useful for restricted arcane caster subclasses like Eldritch Warrior, because it put a real damper on things if you were regularly missing the check. Can you scribe divine spells into a scroll?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
treeboy posted:Given the general opinion on WotC design here, how can this be a bad (or at least worse) thing? Sasquatch Games is Rich Baker and David Noonan. So it's not a sign that it's going to bad (I mean Baker wrote the starter set adventure, right?), it's just a sign that Hasbro is offensively penny pinching when it comes to D&D.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
ritorix posted:What isn't there (yet?) is monster building. The MM has a bit on it but not what their defenses/to hit/damage should be at a given level. Is it possible or likely that they would put this in the DMG? I just don't know anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Kazanir posted:Is this an accurate summary of the game for someone who hasn't comprehensively read the PHB? I'm not looking to edition-war; just give it to me straight. Attorney at Funk posted:- do you currently play and enjoy d&d 3.5 or pathfinder but wish it ran smoother or was less egregiously broken.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Someone else here called it out as "magic is being used as a keyword system." Simply put, magic is everything. I'm glad I was able to contribute. Ederick posted:Why is this not a problem in 4E? Replace the word "spell" with "power" and you have the same thing. Because 'power' doesn't have the broken connotation that 'spell' does. In D&D, 'magic' and 'spells' are anything beyond the natural to the point where monsters in 3rd ed had to be described as having 'spell-like abilities' rather than just doing a thing that they did. (In fact, the problem isn't even that that was happening because the designers probably intended it just as shorthand to keep them from writing powers out over and over.) The ranger is preternaturally good at healing, why is that? She must be able to cast magic, because that's the only thing that can enable power of that level right? It's ludicrous. And conflating divine power with magic made the problem much deeper. Doing that in the real world is heretical or borderline heretical in most religions. But the fact that Clerics cast spells is deeply ingrained in most editions of D&D forcing the word magic into the thought space 'anything that is beyond natural' rather 'one category of thing that is beyond natural'. I think it's clear that 4th edition solved the bad connotation problem of 'magic spells' completely.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Elmo Oxygen posted:Is there any good reason you guys can think of why the Incapacitated status effect still allows movement? Several other conditions which list incapacitated as a subcondition then immediately state "and also you can't move" so you are clearly correct. I think they just chose a really non-intuitive name for the 'can't take actions' condition.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
Sandwich Bender posted:Newbie question! I'm relatively new to D&D and brand spanking new to DMing, though I plan to host my own game in the coming weeks. I'm going to pick up the starter kit and run the adventure that comes with it, but I'd like to throw out the pre-generated characters in favor of letting my players create their own, as I think that's where a lot of the fun lies. Is there any reason I can't do this? There is no reason you can't do that. Your players may have varying levels of desire/comfort with making their own characters, so I would recommend taking the pregens along as 'examples' and let them crib from the pregens as much or as little as they individually choose.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Yeah, it's just because there used to be, and I'm wondering if there still is. In the starter set instances of people being drunk off their rear end where handled by the 'poisoned' condition. Instances with less drunkeness were mechanically ignored.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Again, I don't think it's a bad thing. The adventure is great. And there's nothing obnoxious like "get me 10 bear pelts." It's just funny how every NPC just happens to need help from adventurers and offer them jobs. It's just super obvious shilling/on-ramp for D&D Encounters. So, of course, it's MMOlike because it's for organized play, the closest thing tabletop has to MMOs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:Opening an average lock is significantly more challenging Unlocking the average medieval lock with thieves tools would be as trivial as opening the lock with the actual key.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Vorpal Cat posted:edit: At this point we should have a :5th edition: emote that's just a picture of Mike Mearls and the words "Ask your DM". I assume it would be based on  Huh, there are a lot of those ghost smilies now. Well, regd08.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:The DMG is out. It's better than the other two books but did not magically make the other two books better. Magic items are some groggy poo poo. Encounter math is still hosed, etc. etc. etc. Is there any word on when the basic pdf will be updated to contain DMG content?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules?x=dnd/basicrules You can download and learn the basic rules here. I asked this before and no one responded. Maybe you know. When are they planning on updating the basic rules to include information from the DMG?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:There is the DM`s basic rules right there. I'm pretty sure that the portions of the Dungeon Master's Guide content that I've been waiting to be added to Basic are not in the release that occurred three weeks before the Dungeon Master's Guide came out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:I'm certain that the Basic pdf will be updated in sync with the book releases. Ha ha, look at this idiot. So, in news that only I care about, I have been waiting over a month for the basic rules to be updated to include content from the DMG.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Which content are you expecting? They did do like 1-2 small updates weeks before the release of Rise of Tiamat and the DMG to slightly modify the encounter building rules (to match what they were going to print) and include a couple of new items. I was looking for an update to the exploration and downtime rules. And who knows what else? The DMG probably has a lot of content I don't know anything about that they could put in the basic rules. You know, modules.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Yeah they actually did write rules for those, but they're in the DMG. In fact, the basic rules say, basic rules posted:Part 2 details the rules of how to play the game, beyond the basics described in this introduction. That part covers the kinds of die rolls you make to determine success or failure at the tasks your character attempts, and describes the three broad categories of activity in the game: exploration, interaction, and combat. So, I think that it isn't unreasonable for me to feel that if there are specific rules about exploration then they should be added to the basic rules.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
This character is inappropriate for DnD Next though. old-fashioned Dragonborn Sorcerer from an unpure bloodline who is downright racist towards living skeletons
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2015 01:15
|
|