|
I've got a player who is a Gunsmith Artificer right now, and I really had to consider how I presented the Revisited version to him, since it pretty much is an entirely different class. I want to be excited for him if he likes it, but frankly I wouldn't want to switch over if I were him and I'm not planning on making him. They clearly were responding to the folks who were unhappy with the idea of a dedicated gunslinger subclass, because they basically removed it and came up with an Eberron-flavored warlock. It seems like they've got three or four competing subclasses that they're trying to combine into two, and it's not working well. I can definitely see why they mentioned that they plan to spend more time on the Artificer in future UAs, since this latest iteration is more rough than diamond.
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2019 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Thoughts on the Mystic? One build I'm looking at: Changeling, Order of the Awakened, Mind Thrust, Mantle of Command and something else. The Mystic is fun but a bit unwieldy. It can be anything you want it to be, and the biggest complaint I have is that it offers an overwhelming amount of options for any individual round - causing a lot of slowdown if the player doesn't restrict themselves. Beyond all that, a psionic basically sidesteps all the rules involving spellcasting. Plus their abilities precisely target typically weak saves like INT. So balance is really going to require a levelheaded DM and a reasonable player to get right. Ex: I've got a Mystic in my campaign who basically wants to appear outwardly pacifistic, while simultaneously mindslamming and thought-controlling everyone he comes across. Can NPCs even recognize that the psionic is using her abilities? RAW there's no guidance either way. How do you rule in a way that recognizes the unique traits of psionic casting without functionally giving them permanent invisibility? Conversely, when I played a Mystic I built a character that was powerful at range, in melee, and during non-combat. It took surprise legendary enemies to slow me down, while the rest of the party struggled to keep up. As a player it was frustrating for the difficulty to suddenly and significantly increase just for my character, but as a DM I understand the conundrum that I put the DM into. Finding a good balance that empowers the player without doing a disservice to the rest of the party is always difficult, but particularly with a class that is as slippery as the Mystic. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Mar 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
It's difficult to defend multiclassing as anything other than powergaming when the typical builds are entirely based on combat damage and generally poach just a couple levels of another class in order to create a Warlock+ or whatever. That being said, I wouldn't see multiclassing as any different from using an overpowered UA or 3rd party build, particularly if the whole party is onboard. Just don't be surprised if NPCs find it necessary to target your character because you're the one wrecking havoc on the field. Kaal fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Mar 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
ritorix posted:That is loving awesome and way better than 'rocks fall dragon dies'. That is awesome. Good thing the dragon didn't have some sort of throat-borne attack to defend itself with. 😂
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
Honestly I think that DMs and players should endeavor to be involved in crafting character hooks during character creation. So many PCs struggle to find motivation if they're developed without any plot context.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2019 16:22
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Hey guys I need an appropriate price tag for this thing. Lurdiak posted:Hey guys I need an appropriate price tag for this thing. I'd say that it would be broadly equivalent to an uncommon magical weapon, so 100-500 GP. Note that Ziraj is a CR 8 monster, despite the weapon effectively only adding a 1d4 on a hit. It really depends on your campaign, but I'd price it comparable to a Longbow+1. For my campaign I'd probably price it around 400 GP.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
Arthil posted:"You choose whether your equipment falls to the ground in your space, merges into your new form, or is worn by it. Worn equipment functions as normal, but the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment, based on the creature’s shape and size. Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it. Equipment that merges with the form has no effect until you leave the form." I'd say that this is a great opportunity to reward a smart druid at level two, and that most casters would be able to dump the item easily from level five onwards, and if the DM wants to keep the cursed item in play then they should just find another way of gluing it onto a different player / quest NPC.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Play a temporary character till you get to level 9. Agreed. Maybe the barbarian has a friendly mage friend who wants to save them. Maybe they have a long lost sibling who is identical in every way and is sworn to avenge their loss and complete their life's work. Maybe it's just an excuse to play randos for a few weeks while the party figures out what to do next.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 03:42
|
|
|
inthesto posted:Stuff like druids having equipment made from obsidian and bone and wood is cool for just a little bit of spice, as long as the DM isn't using it to play arbitrary scarcity games and making it significantly more difficult for one character to obtain basic equipment Agreed. Things like that rightly should be viewed as opportunities for flavor, not handicapping. It's neat that the cleric wants to use a bone crushing maul rather than a sword, but they should still be rolling the same dice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
inthesto posted:I think about that weapon type vs armor type chart all the drat time, because to this day I cannot make heads or tails of it It reminds me of the DMG's optional variable initiative system, where every potential action is associated with an initiative penalty and must be called before each round - ensuring that combat takes approximately 4000% longer. I had a DM who really disliked combat and wanted to use that system (along with creating a special medium rest system so mages could reset their spells without letting the fighters use their hit dice). A great roleplayer but the guy just has the oddest sense of mechanical balance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
Kung Food posted:Forgetting all other factors like RP, flavor, mechanics, ect, why would any DM choose to give themselves this sort of workload? Well a lot of that workload would still be on the players, since they'd be the ones who would have to call and track their initiative v. actions undertaken. I think that he underestimated how much work it would be to do that sort of thing every round, largely because his games are typically very slow and non-combat focused. We'd spend several sessions between having any combat at all. They reminded me of the D&D I used to play as a kid, which was 95% first-person storytelling and very little in the way of mechanics. To be fair, I think that I'd have been down to try it out as part of a one-shot or a single-session mechanic. He seemed excited about the idea and I'm all for trying out different things. But as a basis for an ongoing campaign, particularly when the game was already struggling with pacing issues, I think it was wildly overambitious. I might try introducing it for a session with him at some point, just to honor his intentions, but personally I found the whole thing rather unwieldy and introduced far more problems than it solved. Kaal fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
Fresh Shesh Besh posted:So I'm a very inexperienced DM, and I typically don't allow homebrew classes/mechanics because I don't feel confident that I can handle extra variables yet. One of my players has really been hammering the point that he wants to play a Blood Hunter, so to placate him I told him he could do it for the next adventure (now my current adventure). I definitely understand not wanting to have to learn too many moving parts at once. But I would lean towards letting them do it, tell them that you'll see what it's like playing with it, and ultimately be comfortable with changing your mind as a DM down the road if you need to. Being able to rule case by case without aggravating players is a useful skill. The Blood Hunter is known for being relatively balanced, and if it's a real problem then I'd just tailor a scenario that would write off that character. I would be uncomfortable with someone multiclassing with one though. For what it's worth, I rely heavily on the MPMB character sheet - if a class isn't popular enough to be get incorporated into that sheet, or if it's starred as being unbalanced, then I'd be quite hesitant about letting anyone use it. Conspiratiorist posted:If you're going several sessions without combat, you're playing the wrong system. Oh 1 million percent agreed. We brought that game to a close and he focused his DMing on a different group. When playing he can still bring a session to a crawl by talking every NPC to death, but he's a great face so long as the rest of the party keeps things moving. Kaal fucked around with this message at 02:21 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted: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 I believe the reasoning presented is that some people prefer the unpredictability of not knowing the turn order, but not wanting it entirely random either. Personally it seems just as open to mechanical manipulation as the far simpler standard initiative system.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
inthesto posted:One of my players made their character as a descendant of one of my PCs from a few campaigns ago. While I think it's awesome to have continuity like this, my character also never had a family (to the point where he was actually kind of known for it). Any creative ways to resolve this one? He never had or wanted a family: 1) until he realized what he was missing 2) but his apprentice became like family 3) so he cloned his perfect self 4) and he adopted an orphan anyway 5) and was never interested in raising his bastard child 6) but was a proud and supportive uncle. 7) which is why that demonic contract for his firstborn was so convenient! 8) so why did he wake up in a reality where he was married with children? 9) but after becoming patriarch he was responsible for the entire clan 10) and he can't understand why this kid is pretending to be his child Just build on one of the character traits or backgrounds - certainly there's plenty of room for any character to have a legacy. Kaal fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2019 14:46
|
|
|
Kung Food posted:What does everyone think of the recently revised Artificer? https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-Artificer-2019.pdf As far as class design goes, it is pretty limited since it basically requires the player to take Crossbow Expert, the player can't make the class work without the DMG's magic item guide, and basically the entire class struggles to operate without heavy DM support. I have a player who transitioned over their Artificer because the Gunsmith didn't have enough going on, and while I'm down for helping him with it the whole thing is an overpowered mess of a class. And it's powerful because of some individually potent elements, rather than having any particular skill synergy. It tries to be everything to everyone, and frankly it's not any better than the version that came before it - just different. It feels like somebody saw the design documents for the technoranger that was the first full attempt, and instead thought it should be a crafting warlock. The crafting part is tricky, because on the one hand I agree that the crafting mechanics are vestigial at best, but they're also fundamental to the mechanist concept. I've been trying out the XGE Downtime Crafting rules to variable success. It seems to be making people happy but takes a lot of effort as a DM and I suspect remains fairly opaque to the players - not really ideal. I hope they make another attempt, because right now it seems hard to recommend over the homebrewed Improved Artificer class, which is equally overpowered but has much better design. Kaal fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Mar 17, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:So a player in one of the games I'm in is looking to start running his own campaign, but sort of has it in his head that 3 players is the ideal number (and yes I've talked to him about that; he might be consider allowing 4.) Three players as a party means meeting once a month when it actually works out for everyone. Boo hiss. I have six players and I generally only get three or four players per game, but at least people can meet semi-regularly. As far as party composition goes: you want a warrior, a face, and a mage. Beyond that, you're fine.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
At my table at least, bring skill checks or be prepared to be undermined by your character's poo poo stats. Clever players can prove their smarts by getting around bad rolls, not ignoring them. You'll get where you're going, never fear, but you need to find a path that your character will succeed at pursuing. Some of the funniest parts of a session come when your character just absolutely fails you and you have to come up with an unlikely alternative. Just like in combat, I'll try to reward your character strengths, but I'm also going to poke at your character faults. Tangentially: I try to encourage players to use their skills in combat as a free action. They usually struggle to come up with stuff, but when they do it's typically the most memorable element. Succeeding at an arcana check and realizing that you need to kick over the ritual candles brings an unpredictable narrative into what is otherwise a straightforward fight.
Kaal fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Mar 18, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2019 06:24
|
|
|
This sort of back and forth seems pretty ridiculous, since every table is going to be different. Of course all the skills should be used, and you should also be encouraging fellow players to engage with the level of roleplay that they are comfortable with. Some players love doing the first-person performance, others are going to want to remain in third-person and be more narrative, and there's others who need to be coaxed into speaking up without an initiative table. When players are confronted with a problem, they should describe what they want to do and then roll some sort of skill check to see how it goes - they should do both. If a player has a particularly good or bad plan, then feel free to hand out advantage or disadvantage to a check. It's fun to have a hail mary work out, as well as to have a sure bet crumble in the face of unlucky dice. It sounds like some folks are largely having issues with DMs introducing non-failable contests, which I agree cheapens the whole experience. But the answer should be to find interesting fail conditions - if the Rogue somehow fails the lockpicking check, then maybe they broke the lock, or opened it but damaged the goods inside.Piell posted:If your group spends more than 5 minutes on a puzzle and you don't let them roll to solve it then you're a bad DM. Both players and DMs underestimate how difficult it is to have a meaningful mystery in a campaign. Players only get tidbits of information - imagine a mystery novel that was only a few pages long. So often either there's not much of a mystery to unravel, or the investigation is just overwhelming for the players who get frustrated with the lack of progress and give up. I definitely think that players should have opportunities to use their skills to garner real clues, of which they should need no more than three. And if the party starts to get stuck then they should be encouraged to use stuff like Insight, Zone of Truth, or Divination to get real advice from the DM. Kaal fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Mar 19, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 22:40
|
|
|
Besesoth posted:Sadly, that post wasn't enough to let you pass the Persuasion check to get everyone to shut up. If only there was a dice to throw to settle whether or not that Persuasion check was reasonable. Oh wait! https://www.wizards.com/dnd/dice/dice.htm I rolled an 18. What's the modifier for being a goon?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:Yep! I bungled the transition a really - I thought we were dragging but to them it felt abrupt, I think Harshnag should be involved earlier than the book suggests. I had talked about him but meeting him and hearing his plan to go off into the mountains was out of nowhere. Yeah that's an odd trend with the WoTC campaigns: They give DMs loads of information that they frequently will never have any opportunity to deliver to the players - who also would never be interested. I understand wanting to give depth to the NPCs, but frequently it seems like the important elements get skimped while the writer spends five paragraphs talking about character histories that have no relation to the plot and no clear way to even be communicated. Hoard of the Dragon Queen was filled with that sort of thing. I liked how Dragon Heist had the enchiridion to give to the players, so at least a lot of that stuff was consolidated and spoiler-free.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
Nash posted:Setting talk. What campaign setting do most people play in? Are the forgotten realms/ sword coast the standard because of the books? Or do many people play in homebrew settings? I rely heavily on the Faerun background materials since it's so extensive and that lets me focus my attentions on other things. I like being able to layer things in both as a player and a DM, like basing my characters off of existing gods and locations, or including regular city holidays into my Waterdeep Heist updates, or immediately having background info available for Nobleman 14 when the players start getting exploratory. There has been talk in my group about running some sort of an Eberron airship campaign, perhaps modeled off of Storm King's Thunder. It sounds great, but it also sounds like a lot more work, and Eberron already has a variety of materials for it. The truly homebrew campaigns I've been involved in have always seemed to fray at the edges a bit - they can be exciting and fresh, but it takes a lot of DM effort to ensure that when you run off the edge of the map you find dragons - not the void.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2019 14:21
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Thanks, y'all. I'm seeing now why a lot of people think you should start at L3; enough HP to survive more than two modest hits, plus my pally would have got her Smite, spells, Oath stuff, a big enough healing pool to make Lay on Hands worth a drat, etc. For what it's worth, I almost always try to knock a player down in one of the first sessions, just to remind everyone that while the game can be dangerous, being unconscious is not dead. A little bit of healing goes a long way, since it'll wake up a downed player to get their retaliatory strike in. By the mid levels the party is typically very resilient and rarely sees deaths.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2019 13:50
|
|
|
Pussy Quipped posted:If a player polymorphed an ogre into a snail(or any small bug), then another player swallowed the snail whole, what would happen? There's no reason to rule that it's an instant change, in my opinion. The effects clearly indicate that the snail should revert to form once it starts being digested (which might take a little bit), but I'd be more likely to rule that the player should roll a Con save to see whether they vomit it out before it bursts through their stomach. Either way, I'd say the player should take some damage based on the size difference but not be instantly killed. Congrats, your players invented a fun method of poisoning someone. Kaal fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Mar 27, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2019 23:35
|
|
|
inthesto posted:This was exactly the situation I was hoping to avoid. Creating custom tokens and entering all the stats is far and away my least favorite part of using R20, and if the SKT module can't save me that issue, then it's probably not worth the money. For what it's worth, you can drag and drop spells and abilities into a character sheet from the compendium, which also has the stats for a variety of SRD monsters. Between that and the free graphics assets, you can populate a Roll 20 campaign pretty quickly. I wouldn't want to do a entire random encounter table all at once, but once you build up a library you can reuse it fairly easily.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2019 01:59
|
|
|
I feel like without a little railroading you always end up with a couple players who managed to make characters that either don't like adventuring or are so utterly anti-social that they have a roll persuasion just to open their mouths.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Piell posted:We have a TV on the wall connected to Roll20 so we play with the health bars. It's a good in-between because while the players don't know the exact number of HP left they have a reasonable idea. I like the way Roll20 does this as well. I also make it fairly easy for my players to research their enemies through arcana checks, nature, or history checks, whereupon I reveal the character sheet to them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2019 14:57
|
|
|
Celebrity Ghost posted:My group needs a new GM, and being the only one without kids, I've agreed to give it a shot. My group doesn't really powergame, but I have noticed some patterns in their play. I thought I might add a few house rules to encourage more character variety and I was hoping to get some feedback by more experienced people: I might suggest a parallel track, which would be to give players a free feat from an alternative list, like UA Racial Feats or UA Feats, or whatever else you please. That way they're engaging with new material, and you can set the power level by deciding which feats to include. Alternatively, do free quarter feats: Choose any half feat, strip off the +1 stat. That way you're largely avoiding involving yourself in rebalancing, while encouraging players to take feats that they otherwise might not be interested in. That would be quite similar to your idea to give a free non-attribute feat (which would also work), but at a lower power level. As for food, I'd suggest peppering in a session or two that focus those sort of logistical elements. Spending an afternoon or two navigating the rarely used weight, sustenance, and travel movement rules can be a fun change of pace - doing so every game gets to be a drag regardless of incentive. Similarly, I'd be hesitant about upending the martial balance too much by guaranteeing hits with "Uncanny Strike", especially because then you start having problems with the various traits that engage with missed hits. I generally help out the martials by being relatively free with items, which tend to help out the fighters more than the mages. Maybe try out your system in a one-off to see if you and your players like it. Do non-players have Uncanny Strike as well? Personally I'd vote against, but see what your party thinks by trying it out and listening to feedback. Kaal fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Apr 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Elector_Nerdlingen posted:What's "uncanny strike" and where did anyone talk about guaranteed hits? "Uncanny Strike" as in the opposite of Uncanny Dodge, which allows you to use your reaction to halve attack damage. Ghost mentioned it in his third point, where melee attacks would do half damage on a miss, similar to an area of effect spell. Skyl3lazer posted:Anything I should know before running Dragon Heist w/ a party of 3 medium-experienced PCs? Check out the Reddit page dedicated to it, they've got a bunch of content ideas: https://www.reddit.com/r/WaterdeepDragonHeist/ Personally I haven't found it to be particularly dungeon crawly - it has got a lot of maps available but they're all pretty optional. The biggest recommendations I have are to give your players time to explore the material rather than gunning them through it, be flexible when playing out the hunt for the Stone rather than following it exactly like it's laid out, and make sure to plant at least one of the vault keys inside the lair of a big bad or else your party won't have a heist. Kaal fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Apr 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
A Grung Assassin, a Minotaur Berserker, and a Yuan-Ti Mystic walk right into Strahd's castle and dare him to terrify the villagers as much as they will ...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Nat 20s on attack rolls auto-hit. In his Sage Advice series, Jeremy Crawford ruled the other way: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/21/are-fighter-champion-improved-critical-hits-like-a-normal-20/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
Farg posted:seems like a dumb edge case to me, just let the expanded crit be a crit Yeah same. From a close reading Toshimo is absolutely correct since the PHB separates auto-hitting on a nat-20 from scoring a critical hit, but I think it's a classic example of RAW v. RAI. Fighters have a tough enough time without rules-lawyering that the definition of a critical hit does not actually involve hitting something. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Apr 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Narsham posted:You are omitting an important word here. The most important phrasing is right here, where it clearly distinguishes between the attacking hitting and being a critical hit. "If the d20 roll ... is a 20, the attack hits ... In addition, the attack is a critical hit". Now this sort of rules-lawyering is way more appropriate for interpreting legal statutes than the Player Handbook, but I can absolutely see how a strict reading of the PHB would indicate that RAW a critical hit does not necessarily indicate a hit. That being said, I also think that is due to unclear writing and the intentions are so clear that Crawford didn't bother to include it in the Sage Advice compilation (which he should have, since it has been made it clear that only the compilation contains holdings). The Mash posted:Does anyone know of a good resource for ideas/templates for side quests for single players or small parts of a party? I'm DM'ing for the first time for a relatively large (8) group of players who are more or less all new to D&D and because of time constraints, we cannot play very often. I want to engage the players a bit more in their characters by giving them personal side quests that can run alongside the main campaign of the party, both to give the players something to think about outside of the main campaign which is currently mostly simple hack'n'slash to teach everyone the rules of combat, and to give me an option to run a small side-session for only some of the players. I've been doing something like this for the last several months with a group of about six players, typically having about three of them in a weekend session. What has been working for me has been focusing on side quests most games, and making sure to push the central Waterdeep Heist quest whenever schedules align for a larger party. I think the only drawback is that players sometimes struggle to keep up on plot events and character motivation - I publish a weekly summary but I think the players usually skim it. If I were to change anything, I'd want to further encourage the team element in the character development - making everyone the same guild employees, quest party, faction members, shipmates, whatever. Right now they're all living in the same manor, and it hangs together based on a "housemates help each other" sort of idea, but there's definitely a cat-herding element. Kaal fucked around with this message at 13:26 on Apr 5, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2019 13:14
|
|
|
Hattie Masters posted:Just started Curse of Strahd. If the player doesn't value their money, then find ways to establish that the money does in fact have value (i.e. items, lifestyle, etc) and ensure that players are being fairly rewarded (equal involvement for equal award).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
kingcom posted:I wouldnt introduce an entirely new subsystem for one encounter to be honest, regardless of if the rules are really good or bad. I dunno, special encounters can be perfect opportunities for using novel subsystems - particularly if they are too complicated to use regularly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
I enjoy the idea of having rotating DMs and the experience of being a player, but I'm also enough of a control-freak that I quickly lose patience when a DM goes too far outside the bounds of how I would do things. Hence I've developed a bad habit of joining groups as a player and then becoming the forever DM.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2019 03:12
|
|
|
Ceros_X posted:If you dont want to DM just run a pre-published module. Yeah pre-published modules are great and I very much recommend them. Even if you end up not liking the direction it takes and deciding to stray far afield, having some sort of moderately coherent structure to hang everything off of is a huge help to both the players and the DM. It lets the DM focus on developing the story and reacting to the players, and it assures the players that there actually is a path through the adventure that they can be reasonably expected to figure out, and will involve combat, treasure, and roleplaying (which is definitely not a guarantee in homemade campaigns).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2019 03:22
|
|
|
Meridian posted:A friend and I were considering rotating DMing, but I don't really see a way to do it without having more than one campaign running which is a lot of effort and time. Figure he'll take over on the next one. Well you could start by having side-quest sessions, where you can join the party as a new member or an existing NPC (i.e. the bartender at their favorite tavern, or a rescued prisoner, or whatever). Maybe you know the plot already but just exempt yourself from decisions, maybe it's a new element (or just one you haven't figured out in detail yet), maybe it's based on randomized encounter tables. Just take a one-shot concept and adapt it for within your campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2019 04:25
|
|
|
Fresh Shesh Besh posted:My group enjoys a good story, but they're very much find-y hoard-y types. For example they really enjoy finding ruins and stuff in Skyrim, and then scouring them for loot/enemies. Is there any feasible way to have them make location discoveries like that rather than be explicitly told or is it best to have them tied to a quest? Maybe have them find a map Fresh Shesh Besh posted:Is there any way to make travel meaningful? I've been wracking my brain recently over how to make travel part of the adventure, rather than just something that you skip. IN THEORY I like the concept of supplies and navigation. However, tracking supplies is just busy work and if you're not tracking supplies then getting lost has no consequence other than wasting the player's time. Long-distance travel is tricky to make compelling, since there isn't a whole lot to do other than random encounters or getting to know travel companions. You can introduce a timed element, making them choose whether to force march or risk obstacles, etc. Or you can wear the party down by making the whole area too dangerous for resting in unprotected locations. I'd suggest trying out that sort of stuff in small doses, as that kind of endurance logistics stuff can be fun but it does eventually get tiresome.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Settle a debate for me. Nope. The blast might dig into the ground a bit but it's not typically going to rebound and affect the caster. If for some reason it did (I.e. if you took the push invocations and fired it at the ground in a moment of narrative extremis) I'd say it would inflict normal damage and push you the normal distance. I've given players rocket jump abilities before by letting them reframe or stretch their existing levitation/leap abilities. For example there was a monk who would point his Decanter of Endless Water at the ground in order to propel himself up - but mechanically it was nothing he couldn't already do with existing monk abilities and an acrobatics check, and a Decanter of Endless Water is basically an uninteresting ribbon item otherwise. I'd keep that sort of thinking in mind, particularly before extending the power of an already extremely potent cantrip. Kaal fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Apr 14, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2019 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
Liquid Dinosaur posted:My apologies for asking something that seems like a fairly simple math question, that there's lots of searchable discussion about. I'm just kind of confused about the matter: Crossbow Expert lets you unload a second time, but there are so many useful things that a Rogue can do with their Bonus Action that I don't think that it's necessary with a Rogue.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2019 04:16
|
|