A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2
You can get A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2 now at Gumroad
Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121314 LastLast
Results 361 to 390 of 395
  1. - Top - End - #361
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak Dog View Post
    It's a mechanic that encourages actions on a meta level which do not correspond with sensible actions in the narrative. Is the game supposed to have players fish for actions that let them roll dice? Regardless of whether those actions make sense?
    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    It encourages players to keep asking for rolls necessitating DMs declining then eventually flat out telling players stop doing that, so the resentment is in needing to have that conversation.
    Players aren't supposed to be "asking for rolls" in 5e, period. The sooner you nip that 3.5 attitude in the bud the better.

    Players say what they want to accomplish, the DM (and only the DM) determines whether and which roll might be necessary.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  2. - Top - End - #362
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Such a strange sentiment, that to play the game "properly" you have to control what the players are allowed to say.

    Thou shalt not ask me if you can do something!!!

  3. - Top - End - #363
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Such a strange sentiment, that to play the game "properly" you have to control what the players are allowed to say.

    Thou shalt not ask me if you can do something!!!
    They can say whatever they want. But if the fear is that players might "fish for actions that let them roll dice" (Sneak Dog's words, not mine) it betrays a fundamental lack of understanding for how rolls are intended to come up in 5e.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  4. - Top - End - #364
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Players aren't supposed to be "asking for rolls" in 5e, period. The sooner you nip that 3.5 attitude in the bud the better.

    Players say what they want to accomplish, the DM (and only the DM) determines whether and which roll might be necessary.
    Yes to this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Such a strange sentiment, that to play the game "properly" you have to control what the players are allowed to say.

    Thou shalt not ask me if you can do something!!!
    I think this entirely missed the point. You can have your character do whatever you want them to and inform the DM as such. (You can even preemptively roll the dice for no reason, if that tickles your fancy.) The DM determines whether or not a roll is needed based on three possible outcomes: auto-succeed, auto-fail, or an actual level on the scale of difficulty. Two of those do not require a roll.

    Think of it this way, the DM could save you from wasting that precious nat-20 on what should have been auto-success. (If you believe in dice gods and their limited access! )
    Death Itself is the current 5e base class contest!

    I Read This in a Book Once is the current 5e subclass contest!




  5. - Top - End - #365
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Well, I'm not saying players should roll dice without checking with the DM.

    But I do think that a lot of these issues are overblown, and this is a collaborative game, and players have special abilities and features and mechanics and they're going to want to use them. And so they're going to ask to use them.

    In my estimation, the expectation that players shouldn't ask to roll dice because 5E is petrified of players is unrealistic. Sometimes it just flows naturally to ask to make a roll or a check. I don't think this is a big deal. And the DM isn't always aware of everything the players have to bear, and so leading with the specific features or abilities you want to use might help the DM see where you're going and/or your reasoning and what you're trying to accomplish, instead of just stating an intention and then slinking back into your seat to submit yourself to the DM's final authoritative word.

  6. - Top - End - #366
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    It has nothing to do with "petrified of players." If anything, the folks who are deathly afraid of attaching inspiration to die rolls because they think people will roll a d20 to cross the street and the DM will be powerless to do anything about it are "petrified of players."
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  7. - Top - End - #367
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    False, all casters can be strategic if you want except probably sorcerers. Wizards probably have more options in general, but clerics have great domains and even bards and druids can do all sorts of shenanigans. Favored Souls and Spirit Shamans are probably better-off than sorcerers just because sorcerers barely get any spells and arcane spells are more likely to do only one thing vs. divine spells and psi powers. Psions aren't casters in games that don't have transparency, though.

    If people want martials to be as good as casters, that's not a real problem, they should just use Tome of Battle. I'd rather play an initiator than a blasting sorcerer or warlock. Initiating is really fun and strategic.

  8. - Top - End - #368
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    It encourages players to keep asking for rolls necessitating DMs declining then eventually flat out telling players stop doing that, so the resentment is in needing to have that conversation.
    I actually agree more with Psyren, here. To elaborate, I will respond to this objection:
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Such a strange sentiment, that to play the game "properly" you have to control what the players are allowed to say.

    Thou shalt not ask me if you can do something!!!
    The position Psyren is espousing is that the DM does not allow players to roll just for the sake of rolling. If players ask for a roll when it is inappropriate (by the DM's judgment), the DM will say, "No need to roll; you automatically succeed/fail," depending on why the roll is needless.

    If players are fishing for Inspiration, the DM will likely encourage them with suggestions on better ways to do so. As a DM, merely being reminded to award it is helpful, at least for me!

  9. - Top - End - #369
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    If players ask for a roll when it is inappropriate (by the DM's judgment), the DM will say, "No need to roll; you automatically succeed/fail," depending on why the roll is needless.
    I think you said that better than I.

    I think everybody should just start the day with one inspiration, provided you completed a long rest. Leave it at that. Let the human start with two, if it hurts their ego.
    Death Itself is the current 5e base class contest!

    I Read This in a Book Once is the current 5e subclass contest!




  10. - Top - End - #370
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by animorte View Post
    I think you said that better than I.

    I think everybody should just start the day with one inspiration, provided you completed a long rest. Leave it at that. Let the human start with two, if it hurts their ego.
    Humans get an extra feat. If they have an ego, it's probably because they're doing well, not badly. Don't take their inspiration away, though. Just give everyone one. If someone played something stupid that's their fault.


  11. - Top - End - #371
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by GloatingSwine View Post
    Yeah, rituals should be relatively simple things that are just effects of how the world works.

    Like Speak With Dead should be something like "light a tallow candle each side of the head of the corpse and a stick of incense at their crown and chant this mantra for 1 hour", and if you want to do it right now you just need the stick of incense and a third level spell slot.
    That's like saying sneak attacking or raging is a simple thing that is just an effect of how the world works. Maybe channeling ki through your body, opening your chakras, or gaining constant telepathy and mindsight to go with it are just simple effects of how the world works, and everyone should get everything. Also all basic spells are rituals. Non-rituals are psi powers, soulbinds, maneuvers, stances, supernatural feats, and those kinds of things. If you want to do rituals, take a spellcasting class. If you want a class that's not a spellcasting class and you want a spellcasting class, multiclass or join a gestalt game and take a PrC.


  12. - Top - End - #372
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2022

    confused Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    "Psionics = spellcasting without components" works fine for me.
    3.5e psionics was fine. 3.5e psionics also had powers come with their own augmentations and made metapsionics kind of harder to use as a result. If you're a psion or an ardent you get fewer powers than a sorcerer but way more you can do with it, because spells are big and flashy and usually unsubtle so psionics should be more flexible to work to its strengths. You're not using a formalized system of rituals and techniques, you're just using your mind like a fighter or rogue uses their body.

    We can't have anything from 3.5e because Wizards of the Coast couldn't copyright it and therefore couldn't make money on it, so now we have lots of bad junk instead so that Wizards of the Coast can copyright it, kind of like how Unix worked perfectly fine but Bill Gates couldn't copyright it so he created Windows. 3.5e and Unix both still exist, but people like to complain anyway. And Windows and D&D NextPlusUltraWhateverEdition will never be good.


  13. - Top - End - #373
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobthewizard View Post
    I would love for them to get rid of the battlemaster fighter and give their maneuvers to all martial classes. In OneDND, that would be fighters, barbarians, and monks, but I'd rather they include artificers, rangers, rogues, and paladins in that too.

    Then the splat books could add maneuvers, including more powerful ones gated behind level in a martial class.
    3.5e already has this. Play it.


  14. - Top - End - #374
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2022

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum View Post
    Humans get an extra feat. If they have an ego, it's probably because they're doing well, not badly. Don't take their inspiration away, though. Just give everyone one. If someone played something stupid that's their fault.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum View Post
    snip: ritual casting talk
    Disagreed. Iíll preface my next words with this: my disagreement doesnít matter because the game doesnít include my preference on this particular matter, and thatís fine.

    I look to ritual spells from the mediaís perspective. You mark a circle in the ground and light candles at the appropriate segments. Sure it takes 10 minutes, but it accomplishes the thing you need it to. Itís the only spell you know, and you can only cast it as a ritual.

    If, as part of some included feature, each character was able to choose one 1st level ritual spell (only useable as a ritual) as defined by their background/class/what-have-you, I donít think that would hurt anything.

    It just makes more sense to me. However, you can read my first bit again and feel good.
    Death Itself is the current 5e base class contest!

    I Read This in a Book Once is the current 5e subclass contest!




  15. - Top - End - #375
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jun 2016

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Players aren't supposed to be "asking for rolls" in 5e, period. The sooner you nip that 3.5 attitude in the bud the better.

    Players say what they want to accomplish, the DM (and only the DM) determines whether and which roll might be necessary.
    And so the players start saying weird things in the hopes that it leads to a roll with which they can gain inspiration. They start taking actions not because their character would do that, but because they want to gain this metaresource. This is fine when these actions are ones you want characters to take. But there is no mechanic here beyond needing a die roll. So any action that leads to the GM asking for a die roll where failure isn't a big deal (but big enough for the GM to ask for a die roll) is one this mechanic promotes.

    Players will start looking for the least risky significant action. Or even manufacturing them. And that's when this has to happen:

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    It encourages players to keep asking for rolls necessitating DMs declining then eventually flat out telling players stop doing that, so the resentment is in needing to have that conversation.
    The rules cause a ridiculous conversation to be held with the players. One where the game mechanics tell the players to do X, and the GM really doesn't want them to do X. This mechanic is a detriment to the game. It causes players to have to stop themselves from doing the sensible thing, to instead to the other sensible thing: Ignore what the rules are suggesting them to do.
    Last edited by Sneak Dog; 2022-11-24 at 05:41 AM.

  16. - Top - End - #376
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Brookshw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    It encourages players to keep asking for rolls necessitating DMs declining then eventually flat out telling players stop doing that, so the resentment is in needing to have that conversation.
    The assertion was burdensome, not resentful. It's no effort to say "sure" or "no" when it comes up, and a single actual conversation isn't much of a burden if necessary (between sessions preferably); if more than a single conversation is required then the issue is the players don't like the rules of the game, which is a separate issue from using them being burdensome.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vedhin View Post
    As always, the planes prove to be awesomer than I expected.
    Quote Originally Posted by jedipotter View Post
    Logic just does not fit in with the real world. And only the guilty throw fallacy's around.
    Avatar courtesy of Linklele

  17. - Top - End - #377
    Orc in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Tuscany, Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Brookshw View Post
    The assertion was burdensome, not resentful. It's no effort to say "sure" or "no" when it comes up, and a single actual conversation isn't much of a burden if necessary (between sessions preferably); if more than a single conversation is required then the issue is the players don't like the rules of the game, which is a separate issue from using them being burdensome.
    Players may not like rules because they're burdensome, and if rules are burdensome, it's more likely for players not to like them.

  18. - Top - End - #378
    Troll in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Lower Menthis

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum View Post
    3.5e already has this. Play it.
    No, thank you. I much prefer the overall simplicity of 5e. Mine was meant to be a small suggestion for a system that works very well. 3.5e has a few good things in a system that is too clunky for me.

  19. - Top - End - #379
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak Dog View Post
    And so the players start saying weird things in the hopes that it leads to a roll with which they can gain inspiration. They start taking actions not because their character would do that, but because they want to gain this metaresource. This is fine when these actions are ones you want characters to take. But there is no mechanic here beyond needing a die roll. So any action that leads to the GM asking for a die roll where failure isn't a big deal (but big enough for the GM to ask for a die roll) is one this mechanic promotes.

    Players will start looking for the least risky significant action. Or even manufacturing them. And that's when this has to happen:



    The rules cause a ridiculous conversation to be held with the players. One where the game mechanics tell the players to do X, and the GM really doesn't want them to do X. This mechanic is a detriment to the game. It causes players to have to stop themselves from doing the sensible thing, to instead to the other sensible thing: Ignore what the rules are suggesting them to do.
    This may as well be an argument to eliminate the use of personality traits to garner inspiration.

    Which are easier to fish for than excuses to roll for meaningless crap, anyway.

  20. - Top - End - #380
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Brookshw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Cap View Post
    Players may not like rules because they're burdensome, and if rules are burdensome, it's more likely for players not to like them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak Dog View Post
    It makes the very act of rolling a currency. But rolling is a result of actions, which are freely taken in D&D outside of combat. For this kind of mechanic to work without a big burden on the GM, you need structures around it like combat has. Or it encourages actions that you want to encourage, but then the mechanic needs to be more refined and specific.
    Sure, but that wasn't the topic (leaving aside the circular position). Also, having to do 'less' of something is a bit antithetical to being a burden
    Last edited by Brookshw; 2022-11-24 at 10:14 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vedhin View Post
    As always, the planes prove to be awesomer than I expected.
    Quote Originally Posted by jedipotter View Post
    Logic just does not fit in with the real world. And only the guilty throw fallacy's around.
    Avatar courtesy of Linklele

  21. - Top - End - #381
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Players aren't supposed to be "asking for rolls" in 5e, period. The sooner you nip that 3.5 attitude in the bud the better.

    Players say what they want to accomplish, the DM (and only the DM) determines whether and which roll might be necessary.
    Semantic refuse.

    Players are not forbidden to ask DMs "May I roll for . . .?" It is not Forbidden Speech, take 100 lashes of the whip.

    It's the same thing. 'I want to do this.' 'I want to do that.' The proposed Inspiration rule encourages players to ask for more things to get the rolls.

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    I actually agree more with Psyren, here. To elaborate, I will respond to this objection:

    The position Psyren is espousing is that the DM does not allow players to roll just for the sake of rolling. If players ask for a roll when it is inappropriate (by the DM's judgment), the DM will say, "No need to roll; you automatically succeed/fail," depending on why the roll is needless.

    If players are fishing for Inspiration, the DM will likely encourage them with suggestions on better ways to do so. As a DM, merely being reminded to award it is helpful, at least for me!
    I have no issue disagreeing with the idea the proposed inspiration rule would encourage PCs wanting more rolls. However, players ask to make rolls all the time just in the vernacular of playing. They are not playing the game wrong. It's just how people speak. The DM is free to decline, but players will ask. Players really into the dramatic acting will speak in first person to the guard to get past. The DM calls for a roll after. Other players will ask the DM "Can I persuade the guard?" The DM will respond "Yes, but what do you say?" then call for a roll based on that response. It depends on the player's experience/comfort level/personal style of how he plays the game. The DM who resents that shouldn't be in the chair, in my opinion.

    What I do agree is poor player behavior is "I persuade the guard by offering a bribe." Rolls die. "I got 21 total." Players should not roll the die before being prompted, but players are very much entitled to ask to make a roll.
    Last edited by Pex; 2022-11-24 at 12:01 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  22. - Top - End - #382
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jun 2016

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    This may as well be an argument to eliminate the use of personality traits to garner inspiration.

    Which are easier to fish for than excuses to roll for meaningless crap, anyway.
    Are the personality traits promoting desired behaviour? Or are they promoting players to take actions that don't fit their character?

    That's the question to ask for any of these meta mechanics. Mechanics that don't exist in the fictional world, but do in the system. They're dangerous, because they can take one out of playing a roleplaying game and into playing a (non-roleplaying) game. Taking actions not based on the role/character they play, but based on the game's mechanics.
    On the other hand, they can align the player by representing something in the fiction which is hard otherwise. A player doesn't feel the need to spend gold on recreation rather than arms, but it may fit a desired sword and sorcery thematic. so a mechanic that says characters get XP for spending a certain amount of gold on entertainment may align the player, character and thematics.

  23. - Top - End - #383
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Semantic refuse.

    Players are not forbidden to ask DMs "May I roll for . . .?" It is not Forbidden Speech, take 100 lashes of the whip.

    It's the same thing. 'I want to do this.' 'I want to do that.' The proposed Inspiration rule encourages players to ask for more things to get the rolls.



    I have no issue disagreeing with the idea the proposed inspiration rule would encourage PCs wanting more rolls. However, players ask to make rolls all the time just in the vernacular of playing. They are not playing the game wrong. It's just how people speak. The DM is free to decline, but players will ask. Players really into the dramatic acting will speak in first person to the guard to get past. The DM calls for a roll after. Other players will ask the DM "Can I persuade the guard?" The DM will respond "Yes, but what do you say?" then call for a roll based on that response. It depends on the player's experience/comfort level/personal style of how he plays the game. The DM who resents that shouldn't be in the chair, in my opinion.

    What I do agree is poor player behavior is "I persuade the guard by offering a bribe." Rolls die. "I got 21 total." Players should not roll the die before being prompted, but players are very much entitled to ask to make a roll.
    Then if you acknowledge that they can't roll unpriompted, what exactly is the problem with inspiration from die rolls? No matter how much players try to "fish" they won't actually be able to. Problem solved.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  24. - Top - End - #384
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Then if you acknowledge that they can't roll unpriompted, what exactly is the problem with inspiration from die rolls? No matter how much players try to "fish" they won't actually be able to. Problem solved.
    The problem is an increase of players asking to make the roll the DM needs to decline until the DM gets fed up and tells the player stop doing that. The players keep asking for rolls to get more chances of Inspiration for the sake of getting Inspiration. The problem is in the need of that conversation.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  25. - Top - End - #385
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    The problem is an increase of players asking to make the roll the DM needs to decline until the DM gets fed up and tells the player stop doing that. The players keep asking for rolls to get more chances of Inspiration for the sake of getting Inspiration. The problem is in the need of that conversation.
    And I'm saying that's a conversation the DM should have had long before 1DnD. If it prompts that necessary conversation, great. Running from it helps no one.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  26. - Top - End - #386
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    The problem is an increase of players asking to make the roll the DM needs to decline until the DM gets fed up and tells the player stop doing that. The players keep asking for rolls to get more chances of Inspiration for the sake of getting Inspiration. The problem is in the need of that conversation.
    I just don't see that happening unless there are already other, deeper problems that this will not exacerbate, in the same sense that scratching an itch on your arm does not exacerbate leukemia.

    If players want to fish for Inspiration, there are easier ways than the proposed method. And players are more likely to pursue the easier way.

  27. - Top - End - #387
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jun 2016

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    And I'm saying that's a conversation the DM should have had long before 1DnD. If it prompts that necessary conversation, great. Running from it helps no one.
    Without rolling having inherent value, there's nothing wrong with a GM letting players roll for small inconsequential things that're just fun to roll for. Arm wrestling between players? Chess match? Singing an opera in the woods? Roll it, lets see whether birds will perch on your arms or divebomb you.
    With this rule, these rolls change. They suddenly gain significance and value just for being a roll. And that's but one example where this rule changes incentives ever so sneakily.

    Besides, why would a GM have this conversation before? What is wrong with players taking actions and hoping they result in rolls without this rule? What would even prompt a player to do such a thing? I do not see this conversation as necessary. For example, one could instead throw out such rules of die rolls inherently causing rewards. Frivolous rolling incentive gone, conversation avoided.

  28. - Top - End - #388
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Brookshw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2013

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak Dog View Post
    Besides, why would a GM have this conversation before? What is wrong with players taking actions and hoping they result in rolls without this rule? What would even prompt a player to do such a thing? I do not see this conversation as necessary. For example, one could instead throw out such rules of die rolls inherently causing rewards. Frivolous rolling incentive gone, conversation avoided.
    They could also split the difference and only do inspiration when the DM ruled the roll was significant, build it in as guidance in the DMG.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vedhin View Post
    As always, the planes prove to be awesomer than I expected.
    Quote Originally Posted by jedipotter View Post
    Logic just does not fit in with the real world. And only the guilty throw fallacy's around.
    Avatar courtesy of Linklele

  29. - Top - End - #389
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak Dog View Post
    Without rolling having inherent value, there's nothing wrong with a GM letting players roll for small inconsequential things that're just fun to roll for. Arm wrestling between players? Chess match? Singing an opera in the woods? Roll it, lets see whether birds will perch on your arms or divebomb you.
    With this rule, these rolls change. They suddenly gain significance and value just for being a roll. And that's but one example where this rule changes incentives ever so sneakily.

    Besides, why would a GM have this conversation before? What is wrong with players taking actions and hoping they result in rolls without this rule? What would even prompt a player to do such a thing? I do not see this conversation as necessary. For example, one could instead throw out such rules of die rolls inherently causing rewards. Frivolous rolling incentive gone, conversation avoided.
    If you want to roll for inconsequential or frivolous things you can. But by doing so you're already deviating from the designers guidance on DMG 237, so any tweaks you'll need to do to the rules to support that deviation are your responsibility. That can include something like inspiration being awarded only on a "significant" roll, that's up to you.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  30. - Top - End - #390
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jun 2016

    Default Re: Claims about casters having "strategic" capabilities are really mostly about wiza

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    If you want to roll for inconsequential or frivolous things you can. But by doing so you're already deviating from the designers guidance on DMG 237, so any tweaks you'll need to do to the rules to support that deviation are your responsibility. That can include something like inspiration being awarded only on a "significant" roll, that's up to you.
    Is losing 300 gp a significant consequence? Play a game of chess with a party member, bet 300 gp. This inspiration system invites players to take actions not based on the narrative, not aligned with the fiction, but based on mechanics and rules. Until the DMG tells you in no uncertain terms what a meaningful consequence is, this rule is bad.

    Lets go by the rules. So on a natural 1 you gain inspiration. Four players get a combat, eight easyish enemies as just a fight in their standard adventuring day of eight encounters. They spend inspiration and beat up seven enemies. They all now stow their weapons, and start punching the last enemy to regain their inspiration. The ones that regained it start inflicting debuffs on the enemy to mitigate the risks. Make sure the enemy has disadvantage on every attack, no weapons to attack with, can't escape, all that.
    Even in the strict mechanical framework of combat which tells you when to roll quite explicitely, this rule leads to weird results.

Posting Permissions

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