New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 287
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    TBH, I'm tired of seeing thread that say "such and such class is boring or unbalanced." Usually (but not always) it's aimed at martial classes, whose primary benefits are combat.

    Folks, that is what a DM is for. The DM is there to make sure that EVERYONE has fun, and that usually means EVERYONE participates in the classic three pillars of RPGs = social, exploration and combat.
    The DM is a consumer of a product. If they have feedback about that product, why can't they share that feedback?
    The other players are consumers of a product. If they have feedback about that product, why can't they share that feedback?
    Yes, the DM and other players will try to fix it locally, but they prefer a product that works better VS one they have to apply lots of bodges and patches before it works.

    The rest of your post is about engagement. That is the responsibility of all of the players. However it does not negate their feedback about the product they are consuming.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2016

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    The DM is a consumer of a product. If they have feedback about that product, why can't they share that feedback?
    The other players are consumers of a product. If they have feedback about that product, why can't they share that feedback?
    Yes, the DM and other players will try to fix it locally, but they prefer a product that works better VS one they have to apply lots of bodges and patches before it works.

    The rest of your post is about engagement. That is the responsibility of all of the players. However it does not negate their feedback about the product they are consuming.
    Exactly, the game is purchased/chosen to be fun, and if the game fails to provide the framework it aims or claims to, it is, in fact, failing to some extent. We could just as easily write:

    Folks, that is what the game is for. The game (ruleset) is there to make sure that EVERYONE has fun, and that usually means EVERYONE participates in the classic three pillars of RPGs = social, exploration and combat.
    But the game is bad at that, and the DM therefore has to go out of their way or put extra work into what are failings of the base game. The non-combat pillars are... uh... well, let's just say they make CR and adventuring day expectations seem great! :P

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomSoul View Post
    Exactly, the game is purchased/chosen to be fun, and if the game fails to provide the framework it aims or claims to, it is, in fact, failing to some extent. We could just as easily write:

    But the game is bad at that, and the DM therefore has to go out of their way or put extra work into what are failings of the base game. The non-combat pillars are... uh... well, let's just say they make CR and adventuring day expectations seem great! :P
    I disagree. 5e has "some assembly required" and "heavy DM involvement" all over the rules. And what counts as a fix for some people (ie the "social rules" I've seen bandied about here on these forums) would be much worse than the disease (whose existence is also a matter of contention and opinion) for many people (myself included). So there isn't a possible "fix that works for everyone". Which means that the system isn't broken here; we just disagree on what it should do. Which is totally fine. But we should be honest about the fact that we're discussing matters of taste and opinion, not objective truth.

    The 5e base rules, by and large, do exactly what they promise. It's just that what they promise isn't what some people want. And then they conflate "not what I want" with "is bad".
    Last edited by PhoenixPhyre; 2021-09-05 at 07:40 PM.
    Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
    Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
    5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
    NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
    NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2019

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    "In order to fix this, you have to do a lot work, making a homebrew list of banned and nerfed spells and abilities. No DM really wants to do that, and no player really wants to have their choices neutered by arbitrary rules by the DM"
    I quoted this way because the post was very long.
    That's not true, I did it, fairly recently even. And I discussed it with my group who was supportive, even when I took drastic decisions in term of game design. It is a very interesting experience.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    I disagree. 5e has "some assembly required" and "heavy DM involvement" all over the rules. And what counts as a fix for some people (ie the "social rules" I've seen bandied about here on these forums) would be much worse than the disease (whose existence is also a matter of contention and opinion) for many people (myself included). So there isn't a possible "fix that works for everyone". Which means that the system isn't broken here; we just disagree on what it should do. Which is totally fine. But we should be honest about the fact that we're discussing matters of taste and opinion, not objective truth.

    The 5e base rules, by and large, do exactly what they promise. It's just that what they promise isn't what some people want. And then they conflate "not what I want" with "is bad".
    Or it could really be "is bad" but a few people like it anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Sep 2007

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Look folks, no one is saying that publishers are excused from poor game design.

    But I think we all recognize that it is literally impossible to account for every combination of player personalities and character choices, and that the DM has always been responsible for polishing off the rough edges. Heck, some of people in this thread have long lists of interesting homebrew rules which they are justifiably proud of. That's good DM-ing!

    And there are plenty of feats, subclasses, backgrounds and items that can extend the chassis of a martial character and give them options beyond "I hit it with my axe." Go look at the "Collection of Interesting and Eclectic Characters" thread to see page after page of examples.

    I believe that the DM should give everyone the chance to be engaged in all forms of play, even though they aren't optimized. Sometimes the players - especially when they are good roleplayers - will seize on the opportunity to do something outrageous and memorable just because its fun.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    Look folks, no one is saying that publishers are excused from poor game design.

    But I think we all recognize that it is literally impossible to account for every combination of player personalities and character choices, and that the DM has always been responsible for polishing off the rough edges. Heck, some of people in this thread have long lists of interesting homebrew rules which they are justifiably proud of. That's good DM-ing!
    What if it takes more than polishing? You mentioned you were tired of certain threads

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    TBH, I'm tired of seeing thread that say "such and such class is boring or unbalanced." Usually (but not always) it's aimed at martial classes, whose primary benefits are combat.
    However these threads are rarely talking about polishing. They are generally talking about systemic problems. Those are the kind of problems that cause the GM to have to rewrite a system rather than polish the edges on a system they bought. That prompts the players (including the GM) to criticize the publishers for the poor game design.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    I believe that the DM should give everyone the chance to be engaged in all forms of play, even though they aren't optimized. Sometimes the players - especially when they are good roleplayers - will seize on the opportunity to do something outrageous and memorable just because its fun.
    Sure, but please expect the players (including the DM) to criticize the publishers for systemic problems. The DM bought the game so they would not have to write the system themselves. So if something needs more than polishing (5E skill system discouraging participation in the social pillar for example) then perhaps threads voicing that criticism are acceptable and expected?


    In summary, I hear you are not trying to excuse publishers, but it does sound like you are tired of criticism of the publishers. That might be a communication issue. Maybe it only sounds like you are casting your net that wide.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2021-09-07 at 01:12 AM.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    stoutstien's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    It would be nice if they actually published material in a way so the formatting is more intuitive for those who are going to DM rather than the rest of the player pool.
    what is the point of living if you can't deadlift?

    All credit to the amazing avatar goes to thoroughlyS

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by stoutstien View Post
    It would be nice if they actually published material in a way so the formatting is more intuitive for those who are going to DM rather than the rest of the player pool.
    Could you give an example to elaborate / clarify your desire? Is it context dependent? Are you talking about a section that they can only make intuitive for DMs XOR the rest of the player pool, and/or are you talking about sections that are intuitive for everyone but made even more intuitive for one or the other?
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2021-09-07 at 10:15 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    stoutstien's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Could you give an example to elaborate / clarify your desire?
    Let's say you are running any published campaign that has an encounter on page 36. The stats for the NPCs needed are probably on pg 99, their motivations are probably hiding on pg 50 and if there is any specific mechanical things involved they don't give a quick reference or even a page to refer to if needed. I.e spells.
    For some things the rules are sprinkled throughout 2-3 different books so for newer people looking to DM it's a huge investment to even begin with let alone fine a way to reference them without grinding the game to a halt.
    Last edited by stoutstien; 2021-09-07 at 10:22 AM.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vacation in Nyalotha

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    The main flaw with 5e when it comes to advising GMs is the absence of knowledge that was gathered over decades of play and no mention of the design intent behind certain archetypes. New GMs are left to figure out that wizards have more explicit tools for interacting with just about everything and if generous allowances or accommodations are not made they will mechanically eclipse the fighter in a neutral setting. The game doesn’t suggest running a setup where the GM gives the fighter more opportunities to shine, nor does it tell prospective players that the fighter will be more dependent on the GM for such opportunities. We know what happens in each case, WotC knows what happens in each case. They designed the fighter to explicitly lack those levers but neglected to tell players what to expect and GMs how to provide opportunities to the fighter players that want them.
    If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    The idea that fighters' or barbarians' job is combat so it's okay if they don't do much outside it comes up a lot, but is flimsy. Other classes can contribute fully to combat while having a lot more tools outside it. Fighters' and barbarians' combat skills just aren't good enough to justify their lack of capability outside it. It only sort of works when you compare them to rogues, who have more skills but need to rely on sneak attacks. Otherwise not really.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by stoutstien View Post
    Let's say you are running any published campaign that has an encounter on page 36. The stats for the NPCs needed are probably on pg 99, their motivations are probably hiding on pg 50 and if there is any specific mechanical things involved they don't give a quick reference or even a page to refer to if needed. I.e spells.
    For some things the rules are sprinkled throughout 2-3 different books so for newer people looking to DM it's a huge investment to even begin with let alone fine a way to reference them without grinding the game to a halt.
    Good example.

    I think it makes sense for the NPC details to be located in one place rather than repeated each time the NPC comes up, however the information should be consolidated and page numbers provided. Even then, some information (for example the NPC's motivational context related to the encounter) it might be possible to give a summary on the encounter page.

    This is also why, when I GM, I rarely use spells outside the big spell books (PHB or some kind of Spell Compendium) unless I am using an online compendium.

    D&D expects the GM to occasionally access each book. Improving that user experience would be ideal.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Morty View Post
    The idea that fighters' or barbarians' job is combat so it's okay if they don't do much outside it comes up a lot, but is flimsy. Other classes can contribute fully to combat while having a lot more tools outside it. Fighters' and barbarians' combat skills just aren't good enough to justify their lack of capability outside it. It only sort of works when you compare them to rogues, who have more skills but need to rely on sneak attacks. Otherwise not really.
    This was touched upon in a previous thread of hypothetical 6E. In 5E a fighter and barbarian can do things out of combat. Through their background, class offering, and race they can choose skill proficiencies that make it easier for them to succeed on tasks as well as a background power. There's also the factor that not everything needs a roll or DCs are low enough proficiency isn't as needed, though there is a lack of guideline as I like to gripe about in another subject. What the fighter and barbarian lack is a class specific button power to Solve The Problem that isn't combat. (It's changing. The PsiWarrior can use his abilities out of combat.) The issue is some people want the fighter to be given a class specific power button for an out of combat thing. They are upset spellcasters get them, namely spells. Other people don't want that but are happy the fighter can do out of combat things via character non-class specific game mechanics and aren't bothered spellcasters also get class specific button powers to do out of combat things. They whole heartedly objected to the idea of a fighter being given a button power to do an out of combat thing. I told them if that's what they want they need to stop complaining fighters can't do things out of combat.

    I'd be happy for a fighter to be given a class specific button power for an out of combat thing. It was also suggested that getting such a button power should not be in competition of a combat power button, i.e. choosing one at a given level means not getting the other. The character instead gets a choice from among several non-combat button powers and a choice from among several combat button powers, accepting if necessary each choice is made at a different character level.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Man_Over_Game's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Between SEA and PDX.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    TBH, I'm tired of seeing thread that say "such and such class is boring or unbalanced." Usually (but not always) it's aimed at martial classes, whose primary benefits are combat.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    The real trick is engineering the situation so that there are things the non-socially-adept barbarian could choose to do that will help. Or not, their choice. While still respecting the established fiction.

    And I don't agree about spotlights. Unlike some games, D&D doesn't have hard niche protection. Or shouldn't. The spotlight should be on the party, not only any individual within the party. Situations should encourage group participation, not cater to heroes with sidekicks, even if who gets to be the hero changes from scene to scene.
    As usual, I agree with PheonixPhyre.


    A huge part in multiplayer design is moving away from binary expectations. A player's mindstate is not "PLAYING" and "NOT PLAYING", it should always be somewhere between the two, that's how you make the player stay engaged. But having a system where every question is immediately answered with a Yes or a No (the DC system), and no rules about how to incorporate multiple characters or how they can interact with that roll, just makes it really, really poor for multiplayer. It's one of the many reason skills are terrible in 5e. Even the mechanics that slow the game down enough to interact with each other, like the Ready Action, are so weak that they aren't worth working together for outside of incredibly niche circumstances.

    The complaints folks have about Martials is all based around those binary expectations. Trying to compare Anything to a Wizard's ability to Teleport just doesn't work. A Fighter can't get 80% of a teleport using his Fighter abilities, he either can teleport or he can't. His abilities are relevant, or they aren't. Breaking down those binary expectations, so that a player can always contribute using abilities that are relevant as dictated by the game creates a system where nobody is ever bored or irrelevant despite a lack of experience or creativity.

    The problems of binary expectations are everywhere; try to eliminate them whenever you can and you'll find yourself becoming a better DM. For instance, instead of waiting for the player to come up with a reason why his 8 Charisma Barbarian should be the one to talk to the king, come up with a consistent way they can contribute that is still mechanically better than if they didn't, and now you've fixed more than just one scene.
    Last edited by Man_Over_Game; 2021-09-07 at 02:58 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    MOG, design a darn RPG system. Seriously, the amount of ideas I’ve gleaned from your posts has been valuable. You’re a gem of the community here.

    5th Edition Homebrewery
    Prestige Options, changing primary attributes to open a world of new multiclassing.
    Adrenaline Surge, fitting Short Rests into combat to fix bosses/Short Rest Classes.
    Pain, using Exhaustion to make tactical martial combatants.
    Fate Sorcery, lucky winner of the 5e D&D Subclass Contest VII!

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Man_Over_Game View Post


    As usual, I agree with PheonixPhyre.

    DnD is more than just one game. It's an exploration game, a social game, a combat game, and not everyone wants to play all of those aspects of DnD all of the time and shouldn't always have to.

    The Barbarian with 8 Charisma probably wasn't expecting to be doing a lot of talking unless their poor Charisma is used ironically (a social character that's bad at it), and those kinds of players will let you know.

    But even someone with an 8 into Charisma should still be considered a valuable member of the team in all stages of gameplay. And for that, you need a solution that encourages all players to participate, but requires none of them to. 5e isn't designed for that, which is why you see folks like me complain about it. And since 5e isn't designed for it, it comes down to the DM's job to figure it out, and that sucks.

    The game is a lot easier when it tells you what to do, and there aren't any mechanics that encourage your lowest Charisma character in the party to say or contribute anything in an important conversation. And while some folks will enjoy failure as part of the game, not everyone has played enough DnD to develop that sentiment. It's certainly not something the game encourages through mechanics.

    So do you tell folks to get over themselves (generally not a good habit to develop as a DM), or do you put in a lot of work to fix it at the risk of having none of your efforts matter? You could come up with the best houserules in the world, doesn't mean anything if your players don't trust you enough to do it.

    So it's complicated. Personally, I've always found it much easier to just complain on the internet, play a crappy DnD game in person, and then wait for someone to someone to clearly show that they're not having fun before I stress too much over anything.
    Not all things in social scenarios need solving with Charisma checks alone. From cases where you could be making a Strength (Persuasion) check to convince a bunch of people that you are tough enough to handle it (say arm-wrestling the big guy to prove your strength so they'll trust you), to dumping a bunch of orc heads on the table and describing what you saw (Wisdom (Perception) if anything, likely nothing) to just talking shop with a bunch of the rough-edged military folks (no check, but doing so as someone familiar with their way of life [aka Soldier background] improves their attitude to your group) etc. There are lots of ways that any character can, in keeping with the fiction, contribute to a social event. The main thing that needs to happen? DMs need to stop railroading the path into a "all social things can be solved by one Charisma check" pathological state and stop thinking of spotlight as a serial thing. The spotlight should always be on the group as a whole.

    The Charisma check comes at the end, after you've laid out all the bits of the scene, and only determines whether you get what you're asking for. And any scene that consists of a single check is a trivial scene. Or a badly designed one.
    Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
    Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
    5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
    NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
    NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful View Post
    I would far rather prefer for the dwarf barbarian to be engaged - if not necessarily to the party's benefit - in negotiation with the Elven King than than have the player "check out" because "this isn't their thing."
    To pick this one part out in particular.

    When I DM every character who is present in a social encounter makes the Charisma check if one is called for.

    They all get a chance to participate by saying something. If they don't say anything they get disadvantage to their roll. It doesn't matter how Charismatic the Bard is, if the rest of the party 'checks out' the king won't be impressed.
    If you are trying to abuse the game; Don't. And you're probably wrong anyway.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    stoutstien's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Good example.

    I think it makes sense for the NPC details to be located in one place rather than repeated each time the NPC comes up, however the information should be consolidated and page numbers provided. Even then, some information (for example the NPC's motivational context related to the encounter) it might be possible to give a summary on the encounter page.

    This is also why, when I GM, I rarely use spells outside the big spell books (PHB or some kind of Spell Compendium) unless I am using an online compendium.

    D&D expects the GM to occasionally access each book. Improving that user experience would be ideal.
    Aye. There's no one size fit all for the perfect formatting just like there's no one size fits all for dming/game style but any attempt to help out the fledgling DM would be greatly appreciated.
    Magic currently coaching somebody who is brand new to not only DMing but the genre in general. You can physically see the stress drain from their face when you hand them index cards with quick references for NPCs on them so they can stick them in the pages or one with an actual graph of success chances with a given DCS for abilities checks.
    what is the point of living if you can't deadlift?

    All credit to the amazing avatar goes to thoroughlyS

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    The issue is some people want the fighter to be given a class specific power button for an out of combat thing. They are upset spellcasters get them, namely spells. Other people don't want that but are happy the fighter can do out of combat things via character non-class specific game mechanics and aren't bothered spellcasters also get class specific button powers to do out of combat things. They whole heartedly objected to the idea of a fighter being given a button power to do an out of combat thing. I told them if that's what they want they need to stop complaining fighters can't do things out of combat.
    Right. The issue isn't that the Fighter can't climb trees with an Athletics check. The issue is that a spellcaster can cast Mage Hand without even rolling a dice.

    Let's be clear:
    Save DC - Acid Splash, Poison Spray
    Spell Attack - Chill Touch, Fire Bolt, Ray of Frost, Shocking Grasp

    These are, for all intents and purposes, attack spells. This is what a Wizard can do one of these things, every turn, in combat. These things also scale. Just like Extra Attack does. These spells are also Cantrips, and cost zero resources, just like an Attack action. You can do them infinitely. We'll also remember that a Dragon Sorcerer at Level 6 will gain their casting stat to damage as well. Then of course no-one should ever forget that it's a Warlock, that is commonly understood to be the baseline for damage.

    When a Wizard hits 5th Level, all their Cantrips are boosted, of course. But, additionally, let's say that twice per day, as a resource, they can cast Fireball in combat. Secondly Fireball sets everything on fire (DMs forget this...The book that was on the table, that the party was sent to get? It's burned to a crisp now because you cast Fireball in the boss' room. Quest failed.), which has several uses. I'm ignoring 1st Level spells per day that they can also do. And I'm ignoring the 2nd Level spells per day that they can also do.

    At 5th Level, in combat the Fighter gets to umm...Yeah...Twice per day. Not equal.

    Spellcasters are fantastic in combat. Anyone who says otherwise, is simply not reading the book.

    Now, the major balance issue, is that Spellcasters aren't just good in combat. They can do basically anything.

    No resource abilities, at-will (Wizard):
    Dancing Lights, Friends, Light, Mage Hand, Mending, Message, Minor Illusion.

    I'm not even going to discuss leveled spells. But there you go. Those are Cantrips that every single Wizard has access to, and can choose from, in addition to choosing what weapon spell attacks they'll have. ...Also Wizards can make weapon attacks, too, but y'know. Let's stay focussed. They even get more Cantrips as they go along. Again, this is what a Wizard can do outside of combat, without spending any resources and largely not even rolling any dice for a chance of failure.

    A Fighter, chooses one Fighting style...And it wasn't until Tasha's that they could even change it (without DM fiat), and even then they can only change it every 4th Level.


    The magic system needs to be neutered. First thing that needs to done is to hard limit each individual character to particular schools of magic, so that spellcasters can do anything, but they can't do everything.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-09-07 at 05:18 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    The magic system needs to be neutered. First thing that needs to done is to hard limit each individual character to particular schools of magic, so that spellcasters can do anything, but they can't do everything.
    Schools of magic are a horrible way to balance anything, as I've discovered. They're already so far out of balance as to be meaningless.

    I think there's even a threshold question before that--

    What shouldn't spells be able to do at all? Ie what are the limits of magic?

    Because if the answer is "within D&D's magic system, there is nothing you can't write a spell to do, then you're fighting a losing battle here. It is impossible to balance "can only do a few things" against "can do anything". Unless, of course, you make everyone spell casters. Which is an option, of course, but not one that would get widespread acceptance. Because, in essence, that's what 4e did. Those "powers"? Those are more similar to spells (minus the 9-level system) than they are to how martials played before. Individual, self-contained units that have a specific effect, often supernatural in nature. That's a spell, just without the wording.

    As it stands, there isn't any room for "you need to do that with mundane means". Everything that can be done mundanely can be done as easily, usually more powerfully, and certainly more reliably by a spell. And if there isn't an exact spell yet--just wait. Each new book brings dozens of new spells. Spellcasters all get new options, often without even leveling up, whenever a new book is published. Non-casters (and non-casting options)? No. Usually only at most a feat. Or something where they'd have to take a new subclass.
    Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
    Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
    5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
    NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
    NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Balance is a crock. Complete balance is stagnation and the more that balance becomes a driving concern the less interesting the game ends up being. It's not that balance isn't important AT ALL, just that you'll never actually achieve it to a seriously high degree - and you shouldn't want to.

    Obsession with balance leads to players who always see that the grass is greener over another fence and will never be satisfied unless their character is absolutely equal - in THEIR eyes - or possibly just better enough than everybody else's PC that they'll find something else to complain about.

    "A" is better than "B"? I don't care. Play "A" then. The more someone whines about "B", the less interested I am as DM in balancing it with "A". Players shouldn't be concerned with someone else having more fun than themselves, because: Balance.

    JMO
    Last edited by D+1; 2021-09-07 at 05:56 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Some players play the dwarf barbarian that just wants to hit things, because they just want to hit things, social and exploration pillars be damned. I hope to all that is good and right in this world that you're not forcing those players to actively participate in parts of the game they have zero interest in. I'd quit if the DM pulled that kind of shenanigan on me - and rightfully so.

    DMs aren't "strict teachers trying to get a kid to learn some lesson." We're the arbiter of the game; the world the game takes place in. You might ask the inattentive player why they're inattentive - but if the answer is "I'm not really interested in why the party is going wherever the party is going, or how we get there - just let me know when I get to swing my axe into someone's head again." then take them at their word and leave them the f alone.

    It doesn't hurt your ego that they aren't glued to your every word. It actually allows the players who do care about those things to have more table time without having to squeeze in the player(s) who don't. It's a bit of a win/win, honestly. I like when a have a player or two who's only interested in a part of the game (I prefer it if they're not actually interested in combat, as I find that's actually the dullest part of D&D personally).
    Trollbait extraordinaire

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    What shouldn't spells be able to do at all? Ie what are the limits of magic?
    I think spells need to be neutered.
    I think magic items that do spells need to be more plentiful and accessible.

    Wizard: At Level 5, I'll pick up Lightning Bolt and Fly, also all my Cantrips are better.
    Barbarian: At Level 5, I'll grab a Javelin of Lightning and some Winged Boots, also I'll get Extra Attack.
    DM: ...Umm, no Barbarian. You can't do that.
    Barbarian: What do you mean? Extra Attack is on my class table.
    DM: No I meant you don't just get a Javelin of Lightning and Winged Boots.
    Barbarian: But the Wizard just gets Lightning Bolt and Fly?
    DM: ...Yes?

    As it stands, there isn't any room for "you need to do that with mundane means". Everything that can be done mundanely can be done as easily, usually more powerfully, and certainly more reliably by a spell.
    That's what I mean.
    I believe that the back part of the PHB needs to get cut in half. At minimum.
    I also believe that magic items that do what gets removed from the PHB, get added.
    I also believe that 'mundanes' should be able to cast from Scrolls, so long as the character has spent at least one long rest reading the scroll. Kind of like an attunement. I also believe that Scrolls, or spell instructions, should be able to be used to imbue magic items, temporarily and/or permanently.

    Magic needs a significant rework, as a game rule. No. It doesn't make sense that a character with Int 8 should be able to cast spells. But, if a Fighter finds a Wand of Fireballs, they should be able to use it. The spellcaster who already casts Fireball, does not need a Wand that casts more Fireballs.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre View Post
    And if there isn't an exact spell yet--just wait. Each new book brings dozens of new spells. Spellcasters all get new options, often without even leveling up, whenever a new book is published. Non-casters (and non-casting options)? No. Usually only at most a feat. Or something where they'd have to take a new subclass.
    Are the creatures in Volo's and Mord's significantly more powerful than the creatures found in the MM? Not really. CR is CR.

    Characters just get new options, often more powerful than what they already have. 'Cause that's the point of power creep and that's how you make sales.
    But DMs get nothing on their side of the table. A Goblin is still a Goblin, there's no rule to make more powerful Goblins. Technically yes, you can make Goblins more powerful, but that technically increases their CR. What I'm talking about is simply improved monsters without increasing their CR. Just like how each book increases PC power, without actually increasing their level.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-09-07 at 06:53 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Man_Over_Game's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Between SEA and PDX.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    I think spells need to be neutered.
    I think magic items that do spells need to be more plentiful and accessible.
    Instead of focusing on magical items, I think a better solution would be to fix the skill system. Right now, we use skills to represent things that are difficult, but not impossible, and they are still stuck behind a check that determines whether or not the skill does anything (which, as we've discussed, things like Mage Hand do not make those kinds of rolls).

    For instance, you could say that having a skill is enough to automatically succeed on almost all mundane activities related to that skill (for instance, kicking down a normal door), and only have the player roll for things that are overtly heroic. Now players are automatically succeeding and rolling when it matters, just like when casting spells.

    The tricky part is coming up with supernatural uses for skills, but it's not too hard as long as you're creative about it. Medicine can raise a Frankenstein, Stealth turns people invisible, Sleight of Hand catches an arrow right out of the air, that kind of stuff. Start at a DC 25 for Superhero, add DC examples for every 5 points until a DC 10 is something that a mundane person still wouldn't want to attempt but could if their life depended on it. For instance, picking mundane manacles should be a DC 10 for those with Thieves Tools or Sleight of Hand.

    A lot of the problems go away if we just figure out how to make skills scale appropriately. The foundation's there, the system just doesn't make good use of it. Personally, I've always felt that we should feel challenged into making skills as overpowered as they can, as the game will feel more rewarding for everyone once you figure out how to do so. It's fixed a lot of my concerns with my games, anyway.

    Sure, casters get skills, too, but simply giving everyone options is enough to make the angry mob dissipate. It's not necessarily about numbers, or how effective one class's feature is compared to another's, but that one subgroup of character options can do things that another can't really interact with, so it ends up feeling like half of the game can only be played by half of the classes. Even if Barbarians aren't very good at the Level 10+ meta-reality campaign stuff, it'd go a long way if they had something useful that the rest of the party leans on them for. 1/100 is a LOT more than 0/100.
    Last edited by Man_Over_Game; 2021-09-07 at 07:12 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    MOG, design a darn RPG system. Seriously, the amount of ideas I’ve gleaned from your posts has been valuable. You’re a gem of the community here.

    5th Edition Homebrewery
    Prestige Options, changing primary attributes to open a world of new multiclassing.
    Adrenaline Surge, fitting Short Rests into combat to fix bosses/Short Rest Classes.
    Pain, using Exhaustion to make tactical martial combatants.
    Fate Sorcery, lucky winner of the 5e D&D Subclass Contest VII!

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Man_Over_Game View Post
    Instead of focusing on magical items, I think a better solution would be to fix the skill system. Right now, we use skills to represent things that are difficult, but not impossible, and they are still stuck behind a check that determines whether or not the skill does anything (which, as we've discussed, things like Mage Hand do not make those kinds of rolls).

    For instance, you could say that having a skill is enough to automatically succeed on almost all mundane activities related to that skill (for instance, kicking down a normal door), and only have the player roll for things that are overtly heroic. Now players are automatically succeeding and rolling when it matters, just like when casting spells.

    The tricky part is coming up with supernatural uses for skills, but it's not too hard as long as you're creative about it. Medicine can raise a Frankenstein, Stealth turns people invisible, Sleight of Hand catches an arrow right out of the air, that kind of stuff. Start at a DC 25 for Superhero, add DC examples for every 5 points until a DC 10 is something that a mundane person still wouldn't want to attempt but could if their life depended on it. For instance, picking mundane manacles should be a DC 10 for those with Thieves Tools or Sleight of Hand.

    A lot of the problems go away if we just figure out how to make skills scale appropriately. The foundation's there, the system just doesn't make good use of it.
    You already only roll when doing mundane things. Proficiency is not even required.

    Ability checks should only be called when:

    1. The outcome is in doubt
    2. There are meaningful consequences for failure
    3. It's interesting

    Most of the time the characters should just be able to do things. No rolling for walking across the room.
    If you are trying to abuse the game; Don't. And you're probably wrong anyway.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Man_Over_Game's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Between SEA and PDX.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    You already only roll when doing mundane things. Proficiency is not even required.

    Ability checks should only be called when:

    1. The outcome is in doubt
    2. There are meaningful consequences for failure
    3. It's interesting

    Most of the time the characters should just be able to do things. No rolling for walking across the room.
    I agree, it just seems we just use that to ignore the most mundane of results. I'm saying take that a step further.

    Put another way, unless there is significant risk of injury or a negative consequence, skills automatically succeed. When a roll does need to be made, it is only made because the challenge at hand is something a normal person cannot reasonably deal with, even if it's a DC 10.

    Kinda like if you reduced the DC of all skills by 5, and then made anything that was "Easy" as now an automatic success. Essentially, you're just making skill proficiencies overpowered, although I sincerely doubt anyone can buff them to the point of being OP. Which is kinda the point.

    We universally have this belief they're really limited, but there's virtually no benefit for them to be that way. Worst-case scenario, the Rogue or Bard with Expertise does things you normally would think someone twice their level would do, but...what's the harm in that? Does a Rogue being good at stealth make the game worse?
    Last edited by Man_Over_Game; 2021-09-07 at 07:18 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    MOG, design a darn RPG system. Seriously, the amount of ideas I’ve gleaned from your posts has been valuable. You’re a gem of the community here.

    5th Edition Homebrewery
    Prestige Options, changing primary attributes to open a world of new multiclassing.
    Adrenaline Surge, fitting Short Rests into combat to fix bosses/Short Rest Classes.
    Pain, using Exhaustion to make tactical martial combatants.
    Fate Sorcery, lucky winner of the 5e D&D Subclass Contest VII!

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Man_Over_Game View Post
    Instead of focusing on magical items, I think a better solution would be to fix the skill system.
    A Fighter with INT 12 and proficiency in Arcana, has a Passive Arcana of 13 at Level 1:
    - The Fighter will never cast spells from Scrolls,
    - The Fighter can't attune to even to some basic items like Wands.

    In order to do anything, the Fighter must become an Eldritch Knight, or multi-classes later. This ties into what PhoenixPyre said; The endgame is simply 'Everyone is Spellcasters'. Now, that's fine. I, personally, have no problems at all if everyone at my table plays spellcasters.

    However, someone earlier misconstrued the point I was making. But now I'm making the point for real. Playing a spellcaster is hard, and requires real-world brain power and effort to comprehend. You need to remember the difference between VS and VSM, and whether or not you need a free hand. You need to bookkeep your spell slots. You need to remember how Concentration works, and of course you need to understand the difference between Spell DC and Spell Attack, etc.

    Which I think actually does cause a problem IRL, not in the game.
    If you, personally don't have the brain-power and diligence to track your spellcasting, you can only play mechanically worse characters. As someone earlier pointed out, the Fighter (Champion) is designed specifically the way it is, for a very good reason. Certain classes and subclasses are simpler to play, by design.

    You don't have to think about what to do because you don't have a lot of choices; Attack with Polearm, or Attack with Polearm, but angrier. Very easy. You know what to do. Do it.

    And therein lies the problem. People who are unwilling to play spellcasters, are often envious of those who do play spellcasters, and that causes problems.
    (And holy **** if you couldn't apply that sentence to the real world by replacing 'play spellcasters' with...Anything.]

    'I want to play a Barbarian, because they're easy to play...But also I want to cast Fireballs because I don't like that every round of combat is the same for me...'
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-09-07 at 07:29 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    You already only roll when doing mundane things. Proficiency is not even required.

    Ability checks should only be called when:

    1. The outcome is in doubt
    2. There are meaningful consequences for failure
    3. It's interesting

    Most of the time the characters should just be able to do things. No rolling for walking across the room.
    But DMs have no such guidelines when such a thing applies. One DM's trivial is another DM's need to roll is another DM's need to roll but at a higher DC, so mundanes don't get do to things reliably or at all. Spellcasters cast a spell, they never have to roll or any applicable DC is distinctly defined.

    No rolling to walk across the room, but do they have to roll to climb a tree? That has never had a universal answer, in 5E.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Man_Over_Game's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Between SEA and PDX.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    A Fighter with INT 12 and proficiency in Arcana, has a Passive Arcana of 13 at Level 1:
    I'm gonna be honest, this seems like you didn't really read through my post. The arguments and the rebuttals just don't seem like they're related to much of what said.

    Perhaps you were trying to convey that the rules just don't have enough supporting skills for them to be useful, but then that'd mean that we agree. I just feel that we shouldn't give it up so easily and build on what we already have. Why add new content when we can fix what's already there?
    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    MOG, design a darn RPG system. Seriously, the amount of ideas I’ve gleaned from your posts has been valuable. You’re a gem of the community here.

    5th Edition Homebrewery
    Prestige Options, changing primary attributes to open a world of new multiclassing.
    Adrenaline Surge, fitting Short Rests into combat to fix bosses/Short Rest Classes.
    Pain, using Exhaustion to make tactical martial combatants.
    Fate Sorcery, lucky winner of the 5e D&D Subclass Contest VII!

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Let's Get Real - the DM's responsibility is balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Man_Over_Game View Post
    Instead of focusing on magical items, I think a better solution would be to fix the skill system. Right now, we use skills to represent things that are difficult, but not impossible, and they are still stuck behind a check that determines whether or not the skill does anything (which, as we've discussed, things like Mage Hand do not make those kinds of rolls).

    For instance, you could say that having a skill is enough to automatically succeed on almost all mundane activities related to that skill (for instance, kicking down a normal door), and only have the player roll for things that are overtly heroic. Now players are automatically succeeding and rolling when it matters, just like when casting spells.

    The tricky part is coming up with supernatural uses for skills, but it's not too hard as long as you're creative about it. Medicine can raise a Frankenstein, Stealth turns people invisible, Sleight of Hand catches an arrow right out of the air, that kind of stuff. Start at a DC 25 for Superhero, add DC examples for every 5 points until a DC 10 is something that a mundane person still wouldn't want to attempt but could if their life depended on it. For instance, picking mundane manacles should be a DC 10 for those with Thieves Tools or Sleight of Hand.

    A lot of the problems go away if we just figure out how to make skills scale appropriately. The foundation's there, the system just doesn't make good use of it. Personally, I've always felt that we should feel challenged into making skills as overpowered as they can, as the game will feel more rewarding for everyone once you figure out how to do so. It's fixed a lot of my concerns with my games, anyway.

    Sure, casters get skills, too, but simply giving everyone options is enough to make the angry mob dissipate. It's not necessarily about numbers, or how effective one class's feature is compared to another's, but that one subgroup of character options can do things that another can't really interact with, so it ends up feeling like half of the game can only be played by half of the classes. Even if Barbarians aren't very good at the Level 10+ meta-reality campaign stuff, it'd go a long way if they had something useful that the rest of the party leans on them for. 1/100 is a LOT more than 0/100.
    yeah this is a benefit of basic system mechanics getting stronger, it makes everything better (at the cost of making classes less unique.)

    Personally I don't think you can use the skill system as it is to be a really powerful thing. Other considerations aside, skills are just fairly simple and can't be interacted with that much, which conversely would make those few options too good. You'd have to rework everything from the ground up, which would cascade into a lot of other features, and... yeah, it would be a deep-seeded rework.

    Personally I don't like the ability check system for a host of reasons. It doesn't scale, isn't customizable, and puts all t he work on the DM. Not a good system.

Posting Permissions

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