Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 10 of 50 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718192035 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 300 of 1483
  1. - Top - End - #271
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post

    1)Monster design-a monster is given a bunch of abilities of which few will see actual play. Monsters are designed to fit into a ratio of 4 players for one monster in equal terms. Why is it that way? Few monsters will have the defenses to avoid getting hit at all and while it might take a while for the players to take the monster out, it won't be doing enough damage in return to concern them. Unless they happen to be squishy.
    1a. Monster designed is centered around the IDEA of the monster. Say a large dumb brute who lives in the wilderness. Why does he have spot or listen skills when he may not need them against the players? Because he lives in the friggin wilderness and he needs to be able to hunt and not get eaten by bigger critters. Will he need these skills in every PC encounter? No. Does that mean they shouldnt be in the stat block? NO.

    The monsters are designed as a whole creature that can actually live in its place in the world with at least moderate success and have skills and feats to match. And that is the right way to build them. Believe it or not monsters lives are not made up of constantly jumping from one PC battle to the next.

    1b. none of the encounter charts work for any edition. Picking on 3's and ignoring the equal or greater failure of 4's is unfair.

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    2)The Tiers, I guess. Why do wizards and other such casters need to be able to do everything else everyone else can do? Do wizards really need to be able to fight better than the fighter while already being able to manipulate and mess with reality anyway?
    This is nothing but a myth created on internet forums. Not only is it so grossly exaggerated that its laughable but in actual play if any caster tried to be a Codzilla the damn fight would be over before he finished casting all those preparatory spells. Either the rest of the party would have won the fight without the caster and be giving him dirty looks for not helping and wasting all those resources or they would have been defeated and the caster would be dead along with the rest because he didnt have 8 or 9 rounds to jerk around casting spells to be just right.

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    3)The magic item mess. Why so many items? Most adventurers in stories rely on personal ability or skills or some kind of innate talent rather than the junk they happen to be carrying around. Items with useful powers that they couldn't do themselves is understandable, but needing items to remain able to viable at higher levels? Doesn't that end up defeating the purpose of having such a variety since most players will just get the best items they can for their character and usually don't splurge for other stuff. some items are simply better than others and so they usually are picked up as soon as possible.
    Magic items are fun and interesting. They make the game magical . And they dont all need to be balanced against each other. In fact that very idea just inevitably leads to the horrid, bland, sameyness of 4e items.

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    4)Vancian magic
    I cant actually disagree with any of this. Vancian magic is dumb and annoying. All the casters should have worked like sorcerers IMO.



    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    8)Non casters. Why do noncasters have to be so low powered compared to the spellcasters?
    They arent. Once more a forum myth.

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    There are different schools of magic but apparently not different schools of fighting with weapons. Or that really different schools of monk learning. A monk can hit things with their fists or special weapons. Why couldn't a fighter learn a similiar thing for a weapon? why can't fighters learn a unique style of fighting?Wizards can specialize in a school of magic, but a fighter can't learn to specialize in doing more different things with their weapons beyond just hitting with it and a few tricks?
    Their called feat chains. Look it up. Power attach chain is different then trip fighter chain, is different from two weapon chain, is different then mobility fighting chain, are all different from ranged weapon chains.
    Last edited by Ironvyper; 2012-05-13 at 02:51 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #272
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironvyper View Post
    This is nothing but a myth created on internet forums. Not only is it so grossly exaggerated that its laughable but in actual play if any caster tried to be a Codzilla the damn fight would be over before he finished casting all those preparatory spells. Either the rest of the party would have won the fight without the caster and be giving him dirty looks for not helping and wasting all those resources or they would have been defeated and the caster would be dead along with the rest because he didnt have 8 or 9 rounds to jerk around casting spells to be just right.
    Its overblown, but its not a myth.

    I cant actually disagree with any of this. Vancian magic is dumb and annoying. All the casters should have worked like sorcerers IMO.
    I think even Psions are better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fawkes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fralex View Post
    A little condescending
    That pretty much sums up the Scowling Dragon experience.

  3. - Top - End - #273
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Istari's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironvyper View Post
    This is nothing but a myth created on internet forums. Not only is it so grossly exaggerated that its laughable but in actual play if any caster tried to be a Codzilla the damn fight would be over before he finished casting all those preparatory spells. Either the rest of the party would have won the fight without the caster and be giving him dirty looks for not helping and wasting all those resources or they would have been defeated and the caster would be dead along with the rest because he didnt have 8 or 9 rounds to jerk around casting spells to be just right.

    They arent. Once more a forum myth.
    Except with day-long buffs or Persist spell Codzilla can work very well.
    And while martial characters are fine in a large number of typical games, it doesn't change the fact that casters have a larger number of options than non-casters and obviously have the potential to outclass their non casting peers.

  4. - Top - End - #274
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Scowling Dragon View Post
    Its overblown, but its not a myth.
    Of course its a myth.
    What are the common supposed culprits?
    Invisibility and knock
    Supposed to make rogues useless. But even a common guard dog would sniff out an invisible wizard in a heartbeat and once thats done in a world with common magic like that even the local rent a cop in his guard room is going to have a bag of some sort of flower or sparkly powder to throw all over where the dog is snarling at. Poof wizard revealed. And knock? Knock explicitly says its NOT silent. So if you want to pick a lock with loud chanting and you happen to have used up your 2nd level spell slots with a bunch of knock spells then go ahead. But if you want to do things quietly or pick more then 2 or 3 locks in a day you need a rogue.

    Stoneskin.

    Not awful but certainly not a fight winner. Just helps to make up for some of a casters squishyness. And since energy damage generally ignores regular DR its not that hard to damage him anyway considering how many fighters have flaming/ freezing/ zapping/ thundering, weapons. hell use one action each turn to toss an alchemists fire on the wizard then then whap him and even a mid level fighter is doing 6d6 damage each round to the wizard that ignores his stoneskin.

    Time stop?
    By RAW actually not that great of a spell. its reputation is mainly overblown by DM's who didnt bother to read it or chose not to run it by RAW.

    Wish.
    Same thing but even worse. wish lets you use a 9th level spell slot to duplicate any 8th level or less wizard spell or 6th level or less non wizard spell. thats it. You trade your 9th level slot for a LOWER level spell you had not prepared already.

    Oh and for this privilege you must pay 5k experience points. Wish's rep for being overpowered is a left over from 2e days and DM's who think it should be better then it is by RAW and let players basically get away with murder when they cast it.

    Theres more of course but all in all none of these spells are half as good as forum goers make them out to be. Simply actually following the material component guidelines that most DM's handwave goes a long time to balancing things. Actually reading the spells and using them RAW does most of the rest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scowling Dragon View Post
    I think even Psions are better.
    I cant disagree with that. But for some reason theres a lot of resistance to point based magic in some parts of the community.

  5. - Top - End - #275
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Scots Dragon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Trapped in England
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    I have no problem with point-based magic as an alternative option, though the Vance-based system is so iconic to D&D now that changing it wouldn't be a very great idea.

  6. - Top - End - #276
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Narsil View Post
    I have no problem with point-based magic as an alternative option, though the Vance-based system is so iconic to D&D now that changing it wouldn't be a very great idea.
    Keeping Vancian magic is an awful idea if "it's iconic" is the only reason to do so. Make the best game design you can: If this means abandoning old, obsolete ideas, so be it.

  7. - Top - End - #277
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Crow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft (Cheese) View Post
    Keeping Vancian magic is an awful idea if "it's iconic" is the only reason to do so. Make the best game design you can: If this means abandoning old, obsolete ideas, so be it.
    Couldn't disagree more.

    Your statement makes perfect sense from the standpoint of designing an entirely new fantasy rpg. But you're not. Look at how they design cars. As models progress through the decades, there are always certain design cues that stick with the model. The majority of the car is completely different, but those design cues remain and tell the end user "I am a Porsche".

    You change the guts. Make vancian magic run better. Improve it. But you don't scrap one of your model's iconic design cues. Not if you're making a D&D game.
    Last edited by Crow; 2012-05-13 at 05:17 PM.
    Avatar by Aedilred

    GitP Blood Bowl Manager Cup Record
    Styx Rivermen, Feets Reloaded, and Selene's Seductive Strut
    Record: 42-17-13
    3-time Division Champ, Cup Champion

  8. - Top - End - #278
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    Couldn't disagree more.

    Your statement makes perfect sense from the standpoint of designing an entirely new fantasy rpg. But you're not. Look at how they design cars. As models progress through the decades, there are always certain design cues that stick with the model. The majority of the car is completely different, but those design cues remain and tell the end user "I am a Porsche".

    You change the guts. Make vancian magic run better. Improve it. But you don't scrap one of your model's iconic design cues. Not if you're making a D&D game.
    Those cues are kept around due to reasons of marketing. And appealing to the Pathfinder crowd and the 3.5 holdouts is precisely the reason why Vancian magic is back in. That's perfectly understandable but me? I care about making the best games possible.

    EDIT: To extend that car analogy, let's say you had a car brand called the Sviestenschwein. The key, "iconic" feature of the Sviestenschwein is that it bursts into flames when you drive one at over 10 miles per hour. Now, are you going to keep this "feature" instead of trying to improve it, to appeal to the hardcore Sviestenschwein fans who will hate you forever if you remove this burst-into-flames property? Or are you going to make a better car?

    Please note I'm not saying "Yes, definitely toss out Vancian magic." I've not really done the proper design work to make a statement like that. What I'm saying is vancian magic should leave or stay depending on how it, mechanically, affects the game. If the only argument you can make for Vancian is "it's iconic" then we'd probably be better off without it.
    Last edited by Craft (Cheese); 2012-05-13 at 05:53 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #279
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Totally Guy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft (Cheese) View Post
    I care about making the best games possible.
    This is why I don't really care about D&D much anymore.
    Attempting to say controversial things that everyone will agree with.

  10. - Top - End - #280
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Totally Guy View Post
    This is why I don't really care about D&D much anymore.
    ouch. QFT, but still, ouch.

  11. - Top - End - #281
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Crow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    For the record, "bursts into flames" is not a design cue. That is a design flaw.

    It wasn't vancian casting that was the big flaw in 3.5. It was the spells themselves. You could break the game with the spell point variant, with the recharge magic variant, etc. As long as you were using the spells.
    Last edited by Crow; 2012-05-13 at 07:18 PM.
    Avatar by Aedilred

    GitP Blood Bowl Manager Cup Record
    Styx Rivermen, Feets Reloaded, and Selene's Seductive Strut
    Record: 42-17-13
    3-time Division Champ, Cup Champion

  12. - Top - End - #282
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Totally Guy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    My problem with vancian casting is that there is no conflict to it.

    Situations are presented in the game where it is trivial and safe to use. If there is no risk then why wouldn't you use it? Situations with conflict are always the most interesting.

    Introduce risk!

    At that point it becomes a meaningful choice whether you cast off your spell or not. Vancian casting usually makes this an optimal decision.
    Attempting to say controversial things that everyone will agree with.

  13. - Top - End - #283
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Totally Guy View Post
    My problem with vancian casting is that there is no conflict to it.

    Situations are presented in the game where it is trivial and safe to use. If there is no risk then why wouldn't you use it? Situations with conflict are always the most interesting.

    Introduce risk!

    At that point it becomes a meaningful choice whether you cast off your spell or not. Vancian casting usually makes this an optimal decision.
    What is the risk of swinging a sword at people? Penalizing casters for casting just encourages people to find workarounds (it stuns you when you cast it, but its okay because now you are undead and immune to stunning!). Personally I would prefer they just make it so that more options are capable of competing with spells in the usefulness area.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  14. - Top - End - #284
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightDisciple View Post
    Wow. Could you maybe tone down the condescension a little bit, please?

    I get that you apparently think it's better for the game to have everyone in the art be on the verge of nudity and sex, but it's pretty clear a lot of us don't prefer that.
    Actually NO. Its pretty clear that a very small, vocal minority wants to force their opinions on the rest of us and we dont like it.

    You happen to be on the wrong side of that divide and its bothering you so you would rather the conversation stop.

    But i am not particularly interested in letting the prudish, moral, minority control the conversation in that way.

    So if you dont want to hear opinions you dont like then you can not bring up the topic in a public forum. But if you choose to do so then you get to deal with dissenting opinions like an adult.

  15. - Top - End - #285
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Totally Guy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    What is the risk of swinging a sword at people?
    If you are in a sword fight the risk is pretty obvious.
    Attempting to say controversial things that everyone will agree with.

  16. - Top - End - #286
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Totally Guy View Post
    If you are in a sword fight the risk is pretty obvious.
    A caster takes most of the same risks though. You generally don't cast from miles away, more on the order of a few ft.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  17. - Top - End - #287
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    {Scrubbed}

  18. - Top - End - #288
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Istari View Post
    Except with day-long buffs or Persist spell Codzilla can work very well.
    And while martial characters are fine in a large number of typical games, it doesn't change the fact that casters have a larger number of options than non-casters and obviously have the potential to outclass their non casting peers.
    LOL sure. you blow a 6th level spell slot to gain 3 pts of AC. Great use. No sorry, that doesnt actually exist either. Once more, actually READING the spells and understanding the system helps a lot with these imagined problems

  19. - Top - End - #289
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironvyper View Post
    LOL sure. you blow a 6th level spell slot to gain 3 pts of AC. Great use.
    You serious mate?

    At 6th level I can cast repulsion making you unable to even APPROACH me.

    Stoneskin, Shield, Mage armor.

    Even in pathfinder where polymorphing is heavily nerfed you can turn into a medium dragon at level 6 with the following bonus:

    You gain a +4 size bonus to Strength, a +2 size bonus to Constitution, a +4 natural armor bonus, fly 60 feet (poor), darkvision 60 feet, a breath weapon, and resistance to one element. You also gain one bite (1d8), two claws (1d6), and two wing attacks (1d4). Your breath weapon and resistance depend on the type of dragon. You can only use the breath weapon once per casting of this spell. All breath weapons deal 6d8 points of damage and allow a Reflex save for half damage. In addition, some of the dragon types grant additional abilities, as noted below.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fawkes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fralex View Post
    A little condescending
    That pretty much sums up the Scowling Dragon experience.

  20. - Top - End - #290
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft (Cheese) View Post
    Please note I'm not saying "Yes, definitely toss out Vancian magic."
    Then I will do it for you:
    "Yes, definitely toss out Vancian magic."
    We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.

    Beneath the Leaves of Kaendor - Writing Sword & Sorcery
    Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying

  21. - Top - End - #291
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
    Then I will do it for you:
    "Yes, definitely toss out Vancian magic."
    You can still have spell levels to value spell power. Just toss vanician casting into the grinder!

    Alongside having the stupid start at 10 and get +1 every other number. Just get 0 and then get +1 or -1 for every value!
    Quote Originally Posted by Fawkes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fralex View Post
    A little condescending
    That pretty much sums up the Scowling Dragon experience.

  22. - Top - End - #292
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tyndmyr's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironvyper View Post
    This is nothing but a myth created on internet forums. Not only is it so grossly exaggerated that its laughable but in actual play if any caster tried to be a Codzilla the damn fight would be over before he finished casting all those preparatory spells. Either the rest of the party would have won the fight without the caster and be giving him dirty looks for not helping and wasting all those resources or they would have been defeated and the caster would be dead along with the rest because he didnt have 8 or 9 rounds to jerk around casting spells to be just right.
    This is...accurate. In addition, relying on a array of buff spells before every fight is remarkably hard on your spell slots.

    I've played the paranoid prepared Incantatrix/IoT7V with persist...the kind of caster to which these restrictions matter LEAST. Still, I had to carefully watch my buff list, axing those that were not generally worth it. Spell slots are valuable. Also, I had to take notable anti-dispel precautions, because packing an entire set of backup buffs was just...painful.

    You *can* CoDzilla or play a buff heavy caster, and it can indeed work quite well. However, there's a little more balance to it than the "LAWL, Wizards faceroll everything" internets would have you believe. For instance, an Incantatrix persister NEEDS to boost Spellcraft pretty significantly. This isn't terrifically hard, skills being very boostable by casters in 3.5...but it does take resources.


    Also, yes, the spell point and recharge magic variants fixed rather little. I was not particularly fond of the implementation of them, though the ideas were interesting.

    I see no reason to toss out vancian casting. It's very D&Dish, and it's pretty unique. Most other systems are used commonly in many RPGs, it's nice to keep the unique things, even if you do offer other options too.

  23. - Top - End - #293
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Totally Guy View Post
    My problem with vancian casting is that there is no conflict to it.

    Situations are presented in the game where it is trivial and safe to use. If there is no risk then why wouldn't you use it? Situations with conflict are always the most interesting.

    Introduce risk!

    At that point it becomes a meaningful choice whether you cast off your spell or not. Vancian casting usually makes this an optimal decision.
    Because players should not be punished for the audacity of using their character's abilities. Other game systems have that. Play them. D&D doesn't need it.

  24. - Top - End - #294
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    They shouldn't be punished for using abilities, but there should be some risks when using some of the more powerful spells. like lvls 1-5 are safe spells, and lvl 6-9 should be a tad more risky as their power increases. Of course with this in replacement must remove some of overly expensive material components.

    This is of course only if they aren't able to manage to bring martial classes up to snuff.
    Last edited by GRM13; 2012-05-14 at 08:21 AM.
    My favorite policy on games is the MST3k mantra

    Supporter of Rule of Cool And their system, Legend. Give It a try, it won't disappoint.

  25. - Top - End - #295
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    kaomera's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    Because players should not be punished for the audacity of using their character's abilities. Other game systems have that. Play them. D&D doesn't need it.
    One: there is no intention to punish anybody, and especially not the players. I can certainly understand if some don't want to deal with a particular risk or type of risk in the game, but putting the characters at risk is core to D&D. Without risk there's no fun, and that's really punishing the players.

    At the same time, the risk involved in D&D spellcasting has traditionally been simply that of opportunity. Once a spell is cast it's gone until you can re-memorize it. Personally I've found that I prefer that kind of setup to a system of miscasts or the like. But there are ways to deal with risk that are more fun that others. If anything D&D magic may be a bit too formulaic - the spell does exactly X thing, and it will be either effective or not depending on the situation.
    Come, visit the exotic desert beauty of the City of Zangiers!
    (Just be sure to bring a sharp sword and sharper wits.)

  26. - Top - End - #296
    Banned
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Scowling Dragon View Post
    You serious mate?

    At 6th level I can cast repulsion making you unable to even APPROACH me.

    Stoneskin, Shield, Mage armor.
    BOW. You still lose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scowling Dragon View Post
    Even in pathfinder where polymorphing is heavily nerfed you can turn into a medium dragon at level 6 with the following bonus:
    Great. given that your a wizard your STR is now 14 your CON maybe 14 and your AC is 18 or so. Against a same level fighter who probably has a 19 STR, 18 CON and an AC of 25 or so.

    The casters BAB blows chunks so even though that dragon 3 attacks compared to the fighters 2 you arent hitting jack **** with them. While the fighter is going to land on you more often then not and wind up doing way more damage.

    The breath weapon sucks. An average of 25 pts of damage or so even if the target fails his save and 12 if he succeeds.

    Nope sorry that dragon is getting his ass handed to him by a same level fighter 9 times out of 10.

  27. - Top - End - #297
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    Because players should not be punished for the audacity of using their character's abilities. Other game systems have that. Play them. D&D doesn't need it.
    And yet AOOs are a thing for whenever a fighter wants to do just about anything but basic attacks. Players are punished for wanting to use their abilities, just not spellcasters.

    I actually like the notion of risk inherent in spellcasting, but it would have to be balanced very, very, well. Possibly too difficult to balance to be worth implementing honestly.

    Though personally, as far as spells go, my favorite system I've seen has been how Saga Edition handles Force Powers. Which admittedly doesn't have any risk other than a possible fizzle. But the players are limited in how many potential spells they know, but those spells scale rather reasonably.

    The only downside is that at early levels the check is easy and at late levels it's too hard. However, honestly I've found that can be fixed pretty easily by just altering the Skill Focus feat, instead of a flat +5 it changes your 1/2 level bonus to the selected skill to a level bonus.

    I'm not sure this would work as well in D&D but ehh, just throwing my bit in there.

  28. - Top - End - #298
    Titan in the Playground
     
    PairO'Dice Lost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Malsheem, Nessus
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    And yet AOOs are a thing for whenever a fighter wants to do just about anything but basic attacks. Players are punished for wanting to use their abilities, just not spellcasters.
    And note that pretty much every fighter/combat fix made in the past few years either gives the Improved X feats for free or just removes the AoO.
    Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
    You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.


    Spoiler: Sig of Holding
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by abadguy View Post
    Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
    Quote Originally Posted by Chambers View Post
    I'm pretty sure turning Waterdeep into a sheet of glass wasn't the best win condition for that fight. We lived though!
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxiDuRaritry View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'DiceLost View Post
    <Snip>
    Where are my Like, Love, and Want to Have Your Manchildren (Totally Homo) buttons for this post?
    Won a cookie for this, won everything for this

  29. - Top - End - #299
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost View Post
    And note that pretty much every fighter/combat fix made in the past few years either gives the Improved X feats for free or just removes the AoO.
    True, and honestly, I think that's a good idea. But I ask for consistency. Either make negative costs for ability use or don't, doing it halfway, and then only for the already weaker group is just cruel.

  30. - Top - End - #300
    Banned
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Thread #3

    Have we got a draft rule set yet? I've not been following.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •