ActusRhesus posted:

That's not particularly helpful.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Within the last couple of pages we've had discussions about a West Marches campaign, grappling rules, experience/leveling rates, and fighting a black dragon with an underleveled party so I don't really know where you get off saying all we ever do in this thread is bitch about 5th Edition.

Because yeah, you're right, we technically don't need a separate thread, but the one that we didn't need was the advice thread, because there's never been an instance in this thread where someone has come in with a question that didn't get a straight answer, except over there we can't call you out on your ridiculous DMing practice of layering ability checks on top of ability checks, including DC 5 to just begin to intimidate someone.

Oh wait, I'm sorry - DC 5 WITH ADVANTAGE, because more dice = better than

Kitchner posted:

There's a difference between being constructive and just being plain negative though.

30.5 Days posted:

I could see adding a third but the problem is that any more than 3 and this guy has a weird number of martial combat options compared to everything else in the game. Open Hand monks get 3 combat options before 17, Shadow monks arguably get one option every every upgrade (silence is the only level 3 option worth a drat, "okay guys hold on, I'm gonna cast darkvision on everyone and then 5 rounds I'll cast darkness!"). Fighter gets two combat options at level 3, etc. etc. etc.

So I guess I'd be nervous about having this totally incongruous buffet.

For the upgrade path, it definitely sucks. It'd probably be better to have 3 levels of the initial options given at 3, 6, and 11, and then have the 17 options be an entirely new set that adds a new option.

Trast posted:

I picked up the Fell's Five collections and they are great. Also I'm seconding Rat Queens it's in the same spirit and very entertaining. Demon Knights was pretty fun too so of course DC shitcanned it.

Littlefinger posted:

Please never stop posting.

Dick Burglar posted:

Cleric is likely to drop his flail holding it like that (gently caress I JUST SMASHED MY FOOT), and bowwoman is not going to be doing her arm or wrist any favors by holding the bow like that. Not to mention you can't draw the bow back nearly as far as you could if you were holding it normally.

Master Twig posted:

Please talk to my friends. They claim all the spellcasters have limitations that bring them down to the same level and that you can be effective with any class you want. They all also think that 4e is a terrible system. I swear it's like I'm playing different games than all of them.

Splicer posted:

thespaceinvader posted:

At that point, why roll at all?

Kai Tave posted:

I have literally never heard anyone talk about any sort of Living/Organized League roleplaying in a way that didn't make it sound like the most miserable way to spend one's time in existence. All the fun of joyless, petty bureaucracies managed by nerds combined with the typical high standards of quality found in most prewritten adventures, sign me the gently caress up.

FMguru posted:

It does comport with my suspicion that Hasbro's plan is to keep D&D around in maintenance mode. A backwards looking retrograde edition with just a trickle of ongoing support plus reprints of core books from previous editions, combined with zero effort to reach new audiences or market or promote or evolve or develop the property means doing the bare minimum for keeping the game in print and alive in hopes of cashing on its retro-nostalgic nerd brand name somewhere down the line.

wallawallawingwang posted:

I'm not sure the only way to 'fix' D&D is by reinventing 4e. If the problem is balancing a Linear Fighter with a Quadratic Wizard, you can go 4e's route and make everything linear. Alternatively, you can try and make everything quadratic. Which, roughly speaking, was what I was trying to do (I'm not sure how successfully) with my fighter brainstorming. It also seems to be the path taken by Exemplars and Eidolons, though that's a pretty niche product. I feel like there are a lot of possible ways to approach the issue. But none of them will be explored until the D&D design team understands the what the problem actually is. If you really break it down into the most basic, most practical terms, D&D and most other GMed systems are closer to complicated verbosely written games of mother-may-I than anything else.

In this version of the game, however, players are much more likely, but not guaranteed, to get a yes if there are specific rules which say they can do something. The DM's ability to say yes and no is only mitigated by largely unwritten social conventions. When a player says "Mother, may I make this scene about how everything is on fire now (because I cast fireball)," the DM can actually say no. "Whoops! There is an anti-magic field here suddenly," or, " Nope. Nothing in this room is flammable, just like the last 87 rooms." But the unwritten conventions say that a DM only gets to deny a spell caster those sorts of ways a little bit before players call bullshit and leave. Or subvert the game. Or just hunch miserably at the table passively sucking the joy out of the room.

Now if a player instead says "Mother, may I make this scene about how everything is on fire now (because my tactical genius fighter obviously would have told the town militia to bring a shitload of flaming arrows that they, just now, are shooting down at us)," social convention gives the DM a lot more leeway to say no. EG: "Well, you didn't SAY that you were bringing the town militia, so no." Or even: "Sure. You give the order to fire, but its really windy. Go ahead and roll perception for the militia to see if they hear you." Even though the effect (eveything is now on fire) is identical. This remains true even in a system like 4e, where the page 42 guidelines would let you say yes in consistent and balanced way.

In this model, maintaining intra-party balance, that is stuff like everyone doing a useful amount of damage, isn't exactly the issue. The issue is making sure every player get the same number and strength of 'becauses" and then explicitly setting those unwritten social expectations that determine when the DM can get away with saying no to a cool idea.

To make all that theory a little more concrete, someone mentioned that if the level 20 capstone for a fighter was do infinite damage and have infinite HP, they'd still be weaker than a level 20 wizard. After all, the level 20 wizard can just say "I cast planar bullshit and slip between dimensions," and have it work 99% of the time. Whereas if the infinite fighter tried to slice the fabric of space time the DM would tell Jeff to knock it off with his animeforbabieswowtalk.

FRINGE posted:

The discussion is more fun when people are talking about adjusting it to work better for different groups than fantasizing about moral superiority based on not playing a thing.

gradenko_2000 posted:

So what's an efreet? Heroes of Might and Magic depicted them as evil, fiery versions of genies, but I'm sure that's not totally accurate, if at all.

Selachian posted:

It's not far off, really. Efreets (ifrits, afrits, whatever) are also a type of jinn, but they're nasty, demonic troublemakers rather than obedient servants like Aladdin's genies.

Really Pants posted:

How often does any damage source deal 50% of anything's max HP, and how often is that not enough to just drop the target outright?

kingcom posted:

There's no gradual buildup or risk when participating in it, theres no narrative going on, some classes straight out ignore it or have saves that just let me pass it (im going to assume the DCs are going to be all over the place). Theres also no ability to ignore or avoid this stuff as a player since you're specifically going to be facing it without any alternative. Reducing it is dependent on having the right spellcasting classes to just fix the issue too. None of this sounds remotely appealing.

AlphaDog posted:

You're really this dense, aren't you?

MonsterEnvy posted:

This is my point. Plus you would be in the underdark not going to find any easily there.

Quadratic_Wizard posted:

What happens when/if Hasbro gives it up? Paizo comes in and saves the day, releases the new, true DnD we've always wanted?

LGD posted:

it would actually seem to be an easier setting to adapt into the sort of game most players think of when they hear "RPG" post-Mending though, because prior to that Planeswalkers were operating at such a high level that you'd probably need a fairly abstract/freeform system to make things workable

gradenko_2000 posted:

You know, this sort of turns itself around and turns everyone back into Fighters rather than Fighters needing to be "magical"

+1 attack bonus every level and 1d6 damage per hit, except Wizard adds his INT instead of STR and the AC comes from ... mirror images or some poo poo rather than plate armor

Turtlicious posted:

I'm the GM, my group wants to switch from Dungeon World to DnD, they want something more structured and crunchy, with defined turns, grids, and all that. That means I have to learn DnD 5e, (They saw it on "Critical Roll" w/e that is and are in love.) I've never run a pre-genned adventure before, and normally just "wing it" what's some good resources for a guy like me?

I saw the Donjon thing and read the op, which I will be using a ton, and am leafing through the DM's manual right now. I guess I also have to learn how to create characters, unless there's a character creator already out. Not to mention a repository of battlemaps. (Preferably with hexgrids.)

denimgorilla posted:

Are there any good forum suggestions for constructive 5e discussion? The WOTC forums are... not so great. Giant in the Playground has the occasional good discussion.

Kaysette posted:

WotC community forums being shut down on 10/29.

thespaceinvader posted:

Implication is it's hosed for good.

Now I will have nothing to get my grognards.txt from.

Meh, it was cheating anyway.

Boing posted:

Today I ran a one-shot of Dungeon World for my D&D 5E group and they absolutely loved having interesting things to do, the freeform nature of the narrative and the collaborative worldbuilding. They were planning on running Elemental Evil and Out of the Abyss after we get finished with Tiamat but they're getting me to just continue running straight DW for them instead. I thought the group were very traditional grognardy D&D-heads so it feels great for them to see how to actually have fun with RPGs.

quote:

DnDSports is the first online D&D Tournament in a cooperative Party vs Party setting from EncounterRoleplay & DnDBeyond with a grand prize of $5,000. Over the course of 4 weeks, 16 players will compete in teams of 4 in single elimination games. Each game is a best of 3 arena battle and played via Roll20.

How is it Played?

The full rules for DnDSports will be released shortly after our next round of Playtesting. We don’t claim to have created perfect balance, nor is that our aim, as every competitive game has an element of strategy. We’re also implementing MOBA-esque mechanics such as a Pick/Ban phase to help expand the strategy. We’ve been working closely with over a dozen talented DMs to create 15 pre-generated characters from which the players will choose, and adapt the pre-existing Dungeons & Dragons: 5th Edition rules.

Tetracube posted:

Announcer: I'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH A NAT 20 IN MY LIFE *crowd goes wild*

Maybe it'll just be scripted