|
Are there any abilities that let you use your reaction for extra movement?
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
Toshimo posted:Yes. Scouts (Rogue archetype) get this:
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
What if you just gave everyone that skirmisher ability so they could reposition on the fly ? No convoluted marking mechanics
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
You really have to examine how you want martials to interact with the game, and imagine them succeeding instantly at everything and balancing that against casters. (Unless you care about balance with monsters like I do in which case this won't work) For example, if a martial rolled a 20 and maximum damage dice every single hit and passed every single save, would he be overpowered compared to the rest of the party? Go from there I still believe that the real issue is the game becoming turn based was the real issue, because one of the major options fighters had was tactical movement and that was stripped away to make the game easier to run. That's why I think that having the abilities like mobile flourish or the skirmish thing apply to all martials would be an excellent buff without needing to completely rethink how 5e operates
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
You can make a charismatic fighter leader but you'd need to roll stats instead of array or point buy I actually like that different classes operate on different resource recharging so there's extra tension between players but it certainly makes things harder to balance if balance is something you think should exist between classes
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Mind flayers are one of the most legendary and famous of all D&D specific monsters (I'd argue beholders are #1 then them) and are supposed to be horrifically scary enslavers of intelligent beings due to their mental powers. If they ever get the drop on the party things should be really nasty.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
How does playing a game that allows and is built upon the concept of player characters potentially dying ever going to line up with "modern concepts" of always having something to do on your turn ? From the getgo D&D always has the risk of someone getting ambushed and killed and being out of the fight if not an entire session. How do you reconcile this if you find it so distasteful?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
My friends playing his first ever 5e campaign and is doing a warlock for 2 levels then all wizard after that and it sounds pretty good to be able to blast away while still getting all the wizard versatility (albeit a bit later)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
Yeah I think he dumped Cha because EB doesn't add an ability score modifier from what I can tell
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
You can't use your spellcasting int modifier for the attack roll of a warlock cantrip ? Multiclassing is such a mess and he probably shouldn't have done it with his first 5e char
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
How did blackrazor take out a vampire, am I missing something? I thought attacking undead with it backfired
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:This is not true and the core problem we are discussing. Glass and Wall of force are clear. Thus they provide a clear path. Of course, that means you can't target anything that isn't behind something clear
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2019 16:18
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:"clear" as in "is see-through" is not the same as "has a clear path to", as in "you can trace / walk a path to the target" It was a joke about sloppy wording
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
CJ posted:I think people are overreacting to that death thing. He told them before hand that the first session would basically be an interactive cutscene showing how they they lose as a prologue. The guy who died said he had a feeling that he was going to die. He has to spend time making a new character but it's literally part of his job so he's doing it on company time. Overall it seems like a much more memorable way to tell the backstory than handing out an A4 printout with a description of what happened. it's still pretty bullshit if it's just DM fiat with no rolling allowed. Did the guy targeted even have a chance via dice ? If not the DM should have handed him a pregen to play, said trust me, then let the guy actually play his character he put time and effort into rolling up
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
Maybe it's in skills & power? 2.5e had a ton of wild poo poo and it used to be all online on the purpleworm site for easy access but got taken down last I looked Edit woo it's back https://www.purpleworm.org/rules/ Missing like half the books but has the important ones Edit: don't see anything anywhere about armor also having damage reduction but I bet it exists Triple edit: apparently it only existed back then in a dragon magazine supplement . I wish all that stuff was better compiled (like rogue assassinate abilities and such) mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Feb 21, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Light armor is 1 damage reduction, medium 2, heavy 3. If magic add the + to the Dr as well Simple and you can even make custom heavy armor with even more reduction
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
PhyrexianLibrarian posted:On the other side of that coin, as a player, how do you deal with a DM who seems to have a "correct" solution in mind? Just ask what's up. Maybe there's some horrible creature on this base you don't know about and can't reasonably find out about and it's just gonna kill you. The angel thing is weird as hell so I think your dm should be willing to just say you can't go here without ruining everything just trust me
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
inthesto posted:Yeah, the problem with multiclassing isn't that it's always used to powergame; it's that if you use it as almost anything other than powergaming, your character inevitably turns into a non-functional heap of poo poo. Yeah my friends first character being a wizard/warlock is a disaster, two weeks in and he realized he was rarely hitting with some spells and was never going to be able to be much better There's simply no need for multiclassing when so many classes have their own variants. If it was just the 4 main classes, sure, but someone who wants to be a fighter mage can just be an Eldritch knight And it's obvious the system is built with multiclassing in mind or else you'd get way more at level 1 instead of having to wait for no reason to get your "real" class benefits later on
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
I think the only way to do rogue warlock or whatever is all 18s . It's why even wizard/warlock sucks , MAD is real
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2019 03:17
|
|
|
Numlock posted:I just ignore dumb dndisms like “no bladed weapons for clerics” or “Druids don’t use metal armor.” Why do you want things as bland as possible
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
inthesto posted:I was about to say "No, this is a completely standard rule in 2e" and then I realized you were talking about 5e and said to myself "no way, they would never bring back speed factor" Why did they bring that back when attacks don't interrupt spells? Sure it makes the dagger user hit before the greatsword but the times that matters is super rare Kung Food posted:Forgetting all other factors like RP, flavor, mechanics, ect, why would any DM choose to give themselves this sort of workload? Tsr based games (2.5 and before) weren't turn based like 3 -5 are. So if you wanted to whack someone with a weapon, you had to count off the initiative to reach them, and if they had a ranged weapon they could often go before you. This really, really matters for spells since they could get interrupted. So that DM is probably playing off legacy memories of How Things Worked without really thinking it through One side effect of the old system is you didn't have all the issues of "gentlemen's agreements" because if all the orcs ran after the wizard he could just run around the fighters or whatever , who could also move to body block . That's all gone now for simplicitys sake The homebrew I play in uses that system and it's not that bad - every player announces general action at start of round - attack , spell, defensive, hold action, etc. Then dm counts down from 10 to 1 and we track when our attacks/spells go off. It gets messy if you change your mind a bunch or are doing complicated stuff but overall it works well and it's always the spellcasters poring over options that slows stuff down mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Tell him no, it was your char. He should be a descendant of his own pc
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
Social skills should be houseruled by every DM to cease to exist. That wouldn't solve all this argument about skill checks but it would help!
mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Mar 19, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 14:14
|
|
|
We've had this exact same argument before but players shouldnt just say "I roll to convince the npc" anymore than they should say "I don't know how to make this decision I'll just roll against my high int/wisdom and the dm will tell me the right choice " It's ridiculous It's not like I'm saying people need to act and do funny voices, describing your plan/argument is sufficient and thinking that rolling a 1 or 20 afterwards is the right way to decide is silly. The DM already has to decide a bunch of factors - is the npc friends with you? Enemy? Racial hatred? Religious Ally? Etc so the roll and skill are pointless . Its not like high charisma stat classes are suffering otherwise in the game and need this one thing to make them viable . Quite the opposite really mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Mar 19, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:A player should get to state their intent and make a roll with a relevant skill or stat if they can't or even if they don't feel like describing their character's exacts words and actions. I think the problem is the social skills are so badly done in d&d this is the worst possible option Choice a) player states intent and outlines argument to make, dm decides if it works, etc Choice b) all the above, but rolls a die that produces a number. The dm now arbitrarily makes up a number to beat, as well as a number for how good the argument was . Choice c) play a system with real social combat There's no reason to ever do B) Imagine the following comparison A) free form roleplay, describe how you kill the dragon. DM allows (ornot I guess) B) describe how you kill the dragon. Now you roll a d20. Did it happen??? C) actual super detailed rolling and math and stat block for the dragon. c) is how d&d actually works. As a side note, if your wisdom/int/charism are doing every mental action for you what exactly is left . Just have the DM play your char
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Farg posted:like before I play the game I got syllables and poo poo down so I don't need the book to tell me that just tell me what dice to roll after I do it How dare you gatekeep d&d by disallowing people who cant read, write or speak your language from playing it
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
Farg posted:it was maybe a flippant way for me to make a point Nah I'm doing the same thing . There's a certain baseline to be expected of someone who's going to show up at a group table with a bunch of other people.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 01:50
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:Our DM seemingly rewards us with a lower DC if we come up with something clever for our social checks. That's dumb as hell but more power to you I guess
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:I think you and I have come to an agreement. I'm specifically referring to mastershakeman's "There's a certain baseline to be expected" comment. I'm not ok with a kid playing a high wisdom/int character and saying "my character solves the problems " , I've mentioned several times it's a problem just like charisma scores. But more specifically , the skills associated with those abilities - nature, arcana, etc, aren't real life skills people have so it's ok to have them in game for their character since it's not supplanting roleplaying People know how to persuade, lie, intimidate. If they don't, they wouldn't be able to even communicate and show up at the table. I don't have a problem with someone saying "I'm gonna try to persuade the npc with these ideas, remember I have a high / low charisma score and am dressed like this and of that race and bla bla". I do have a problem with going *rolls* I am now the king because I roll a 20 , just like I would have a problem with trying to solve a combat with a single roll Social skills are a half measure that make things worse. The rolling ends up being a crutch and has absolutely no benefit and actually makes things worse due to the concept of a "party face," instead of saying hey why don't we have the barbarian negotiate with his barbarian tribe , the elf with other elves, and don't let the dwarf sweet talk orcs even if his character sheet says he has the biggest bonus. And that's why DMs should house rule them away. Plus it actually makes martials a more valuable class since they (outside of paladins) aren't usually able to do party face duties if they're using the standard rules I seriously wonder what some of you want to do besides roll dice over and over while being completely silent mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Do you all just loving stare at the player who's been asked how they do things or what. How the gently caress is your group and/or GM not throwing out some examples of stuff they could do. That quickly turns into quarterbacking other players
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 13:52
|
|
|
Remora posted:uhhhhhhhhh o_o
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
I'm playing in a d&d offshoot so I think this is the best thread for questions .( If not what is?) Anyways for the first time ever we're allowed to use molotovs . Never been able to use gunpowder or anything explosive. What's the best ideas of how to use them?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2020 00:26
|
|