The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[D&D 5E] You killed me with, you killed me with a roper, a roper

1767779818289

Posts

  • RendRend Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    Rend wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Rend wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Tactical thinking and action is a function of abilities and advantages, not a function of when you go in the round.[/i].

    So, if I announce at the top of the round that the dragon is getting ready to breathe, you don't think that it suddenly becomes more important to go before the dragon? Or, if you find yourself at the top of the round low on health, you don't think you might find it important to go first to put yourself in a protected position? Or maybe you have some sort of combination of a magic item and a spell which is much more effective if you can use one right after the other before any enemies activate. Maybe you'd find it advantageous to go as soon as possible in the initiative order on that particular round.

    There are a million situations where going first in a given round is a tactical advantage. It doesn't happen every round, but to simply assert that who goes first is never a meaningful decision is foolish.

    No. None of those things are functions of when you go in the round, they're functions of

    A) Being told what the enemy is going to do
    B) Situations which need resolution

    Nothing forces those situations to come from having this type of initiative system. Nothing in this initiative system generates those types of situations.

    I didn't say this initiative system generated those situations, I said that such a system would promote tactical thinking when situations like that happen to come up.

    If you're low on health at the top of the round, under normal circumstances, you hope any enemies that go before you either miss or choose not to hit you. However, maybe you choose to just move, dramatically lowering the EV for your initiative roll and making it much more likely you go before those enemies so you can make it into cover of some sort. That's an additional tactical decision, which is fun. Unfortunately, "attack" or "attack move" or "move without attacking" are generally the only three choices you've got due to the way dnd classes hyper specialize, so that is just about the only sort of situation where you actually would be making an addition nontrivial decision. That's the reason this system doesn't work, not because it doesn't provide meaningful decisions.

    Uh...I'm pretty sure this post literally says "This initiative system adds additional meaningful decisions, which is fun. Unfortunately, due to the way dnd classes hyperspecialize, it usually won't add additional meaningful decisions. This system doesn't work because it doesn't provide meaningful decisions, not because it doesn't provide meaningful decisions."

    Even the narrow situation you're describing is still a trivial decision, because skipping your action is virtually never correct. You need your action in that scenario, either to disengage with the enemy you're fighting so you don't eat OAs running for cover, to drink a potion/otherwise heal yourself, or just to kill your opponent before he hits you again. The whole reason you're trying to go first in that scenario is so that you don't get knocked out before your turn and lose your action for the round. If you give up your action to go first, all you've done is turn "I might not get my action" into "I definitely do not get my action". And then very probably gotten knocked out anyway.

    You're right, there's an inherent contradiction in there. The system provides some meaningful decisions, but it sucks because it doesn't really provide enough of them and it doesn't provide them often enough, AND because it essentially categorizes initiative order by character archetype.

    Typically at my table players attempt to avoid being knocked out at all costs, so for them, definitely losing your attack action in exchange for escaping and hopefully catching a heal from someone so you can get back into the fray with like 3 more hp or whatever is almost always going to be what they go with. Mathematically this course of action doesn't make much sense. You're nearly as likely to get knocked out after a low level heal as you are before it, but my tables don't usually play super optimally. The situations I described are ones in which I envision my players taking advantage of the decisions offered to them to go sooner in combat. But, as I said, I wouldn't implement this system because I still think it doesn't do what it sets out to do, and it's almost certainly more trouble than it's worth.

    Besides, we moved to dungeon world after the finale of my last campaign a few months ago, so my group is done chucking d20's for the time being.

  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    Honestly, I'd just drop initiative completely before using these alternate systems you folks are describing. A system like you find in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying would do the job better than all this ridiculous tiered rolling and such.

    RendOptimusZedDevoutlyApatheticElvenshaeA Dabble Of TheloniusAegeriTheDrifterRainfall
  • NotoriusBENNotoriusBEN Registered User regular
    i'm actually kind of sorry for bringing it up.
    I didn't realize you all hashed this out before (should have since the dnd threads are a decade old), but I never heard of it before and thought it was interesting in that since rangers have been getting the shaft, maybe if they attacked first and yea, its a bad idea to try and make them more than they are right now.

    notoriusben_zpsa205e831.png
    Steam, Fortnite - NotoriusBEN
    Uplay, Arc Gigantic - notoriusben
  • see317see317 Taco Count 2017: 61 Registered User regular
    Is there a good online resource for sorting spells in D&D 5e?
    For example, I'm rolling up an Arcane Trickster Rogue. I can take spells off the Wizards list that are in the Enchantment or Illusion schools.
    The PHB has the spells sorted by class list and alphabetically, with the alphabetic list also noting what schools they're from.

    I can look at the spell list and say "Hey, that looks like it might be illusion" but then I have to look it up to confirm.
    Just a bit of a pain to be flipping back and forth. Seems like it would be pretty easy to put together a database where you could submit a query for lvl X spells from Y list in Z schools.

    Ringo wrote: »
    Well except what see317 said. That guy's always wrong.
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    edited July 2
    see317 wrote: »
    a good online resource for D&D

    I'm so sorry.

    Edit: As a serious answer, the SRD probably will help, though I don't know how exhaustive it will be (I doubt it has the Faerun book since that likely doesn't fall under OLG).

    It also doesn't list via school of magic, but you can just click through each spell rather than flip pages.

    Aegis on
    Currently DMing: None right now! :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +4/1d8+2 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    see317 wrote: »
    Is there a good online resource for sorting spells in D&D 5e?
    For example, I'm rolling up an Arcane Trickster Rogue. I can take spells off the Wizards list that are in the Enchantment or Illusion schools.
    The PHB has the spells sorted by class list and alphabetically, with the alphabetic list also noting what schools they're from.

    I can look at the spell list and say "Hey, that looks like it might be illusion" but then I have to look it up to confirm.
    Just a bit of a pain to be flipping back and forth. Seems like it would be pretty easy to put together a database where you could submit a query for lvl X spells from Y list in Z schools.

    https://donjon.bin.sh/5e/spells/

    wbBv3fj.png
    FuselageFry
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited July 2
    The D&D Beyond thing supposedly entered the later phases with like a character gen and all that. That has a spell listing with some ability to search by qualities. Just be sure to use advanced search.

    I know that the thread is *so* abuzz with Wizards latest digital efforts but you should really go take a look at it. It's a marvel. A character gen where I've gone through like six pages with drop down menus and long lists with no actual information but still take up a huge amount of screen space and wow I'm impressed at how bad it is.

    I mean, it is more responsive than that Silverlight garbage their last web based builder used so I guess that's a plus?

    Edit: Wow, doesn't even have a dice roller for attributes build in. I don't think rolling for stats is a good idea for long games but it is very Iconic.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
  • EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    edited July 2
    Are there single quest games? E.g. roll your stats cause who cares, start at level 6, then like 3 sessions max?

    Einzel on
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    Are there single quest games? E.g. roll your stats cause who cares, start at level 6, then like 3 sessions max?

    Probably a bunch if you know where to look for them.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • italianranmaitalianranma Registered User regular
    Denada wrote: »
    Honestly, I'd just drop initiative completely before using these alternate systems you folks are describing. A system like you find in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying would do the job better than all this ridiculous tiered rolling and such.

    This is the post that made me try out initiative-less RPGs. Like I said, I haven't done it (yet) with my current group because I want them to have the most 'standard' D&D experience for their first game, but in all my others this is what I do.
    Ars Ludi wrote:
    Saying “okay, the monsters just went, now what do you guys do?” tells the players to huddle up and figure out what they’re doing. It implicitly encourages the players to cooperate and play together. There is negotiation or even debate about who goes when.

    On the other hand, saying “okay, initiative 17, so now it’s Mikey’s turn” tells one player it is their turn to act, and tells the other players that it is _not_ their turn so they should butt out.

    By precisely enforcing when each player goes, in effect by slicing a broad turn for all the players into several smaller individual turns for each individual player, you set the stage for each player to make decisions in isolation. Each player is closer to being in a solo game with the GM rather than playing with the other players (for extra credit, add up the amount of time each player talks to the GM rather than to other players).

    Isolated decision-making also leads to inattention: players pay attention when the GM goes, but stop paying attention to each other. If you aren’t interacting or coordinating with your fellow players, watching what they’re doing becomes a lot less interesting. Players pay attention when the GM acts, because the GM may try to kill their character (one of the more drastic forms of interaction).

    飛べねぇ豚はただの豚だ。
    Elvenshaemysticjuicer
  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    Are there single quest games? E.g. roll your stats cause who cares, start at level 6, then like 3 sessions max?
    Sure - they're usually called "one-offs."

    They can be a lot of fun and a good way to break out of a character rut (e.g., if you always play fighter-types, take a wizard in a one-off).

    omgbfz5lzi1s.png
    Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
    The Disappearance of Inigo Sharpe: Tomas à Dunsanin
    italianranmaEinzelFuselageSleepJustTee
  • EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    In regards to certain checks, like strength to open a door, what prevents players from just "trying" over and over side from DM intervention? Is there a rule/mechanic in place for this that I overlooked?

  • RendRend Registered User regular
    edited July 4
    Einzel wrote: »
    In regards to certain checks, like strength to open a door, what prevents players from just "trying" over and over side from DM intervention? Is there a rule/mechanic in place for this that I overlooked?

    If a character is capable of opening a door, they should only roll a strength check to open it if there's an extenuating circumstance. Such as, if they have to open the door fast due to being chased or in order to surprise things that are inside. Or if trying is inherently dangerous, or uses up resources like spells or hit points.

    If there's no penalty to try over and over, then they should just do it.

    Rend on
    DevoutlyApatheticSteelhawkwebguy20JihadJesusAnialosJustTeeCantideMegaMek
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    In regards to certain checks, like strength to open a door, what prevents players from just "trying" over and over side from DM intervention? Is there a rule/mechanic in place for this that I overlooked?

    Generally, if a player fails a check on something and there isn't a mitigating factor on the retry (I.E. they have a crowbar or someone is helping them) I generally remind that they've already proven that it's beyond their abilities.

    Otherwise you wind up with situations where players will rely on dice roll entropy to give them the result they want.

    That having been said, I generally make sure that plot centric stuff is within a reasonable threshold for the players.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • FairchildFairchild That'll be the day. Registered User regular
    In Very oldschool D & D, the rule used to be that you needed a strength check to open ANY door. Which, when you consider that you're exploring a centuries-old dungeon where everything is crumbling into ruin, is not so far-fetched, but it did slow the game down and forced the DM to scramble whenever the players couldn't get a vital door open.

  • webguy20webguy20 Registered User regular
    Not sure if it was linked here or not, but I'm a big fan of this post from the angry GM about skills.

    Angry GM on Skills

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    In regards to certain checks, like strength to open a door, what prevents players from just "trying" over and over side from DM intervention? Is there a rule/mechanic in place for this that I overlooked?

    For checks with no consequence on failure, that's what Taking 10 or Taking 20 was designed for.

    Currently DMing: None right now! :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +4/1d8+2 | Spell +4/DC 12
    Steelhawk
  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    In regards to certain checks, like strength to open a door, what prevents players from just "trying" over and over side from DM intervention? Is there a rule/mechanic in place for this that I overlooked?

    There's multiple ways to answer this, depending on your ruleset and the philosophy at the table, and there's not really any such thing as a "right" answer, just what will be right for you and your group.

    In some cases, there's nothing that prevents you from just trying over and over. If the players want to sit there and roll dice until they get through the door, then they get to sit there and roll dice until they get through the door. Previous editions - like 3.X - actually went ahead and codified that with a rule called "Take 20," which says "In the case where there is no immediate penalty for failure, figure out how long the task takes to do once, multiply it by 20, and at the end of that time, assumed the characters rolled a 20." It lets you get the effect of rolling a whole bunch of dice without the physical pain. The main cost here is time. Also, note, that there has to be no direct penalty for failure - if they're trying to Take 20 on something that, e.g., harms a character each time the check is tried and failed, then taking 20 doesn't work. You can take 20 to search a bookcase (since failure is "you don't find anything") but you can't take 20 to disarm a trap (since failure is, potentially, "you set it off").

    In others, with a more narrativist bent, like @Gaddez, a check represents the absolute best of your efforts in this particular situation. Unless you can meaningfully change the situation, the result will be the same every time - you fail to get through the door. Like he says, if you want to try again, you better find some way to get magically stronger, or find a crowbar, or magically weaken the door, or ... Etc. This is many ways ties back to the original "pick locks" rules, where your thief character had a percentage chance to pick a lock and, if you failed, could only retry after gaining a level (and, presumably, improving your pick locks %).

    In still other cases, there's @Rend's approach, which is that doors are either openable (have a DC < 20 + Strength or whatever) or not, and the only time that the difference between hard to open and easy to open is really interesting is if there's something else going on. If there isn't, then you kinda hand-wave the time and the rolls and announce that the players opened the door - failure, in this case, means they stand around trying again until they eventually get through and who wants to be bothered playing that out? But, if they're in the middle of a combat with possessed sea snakes and the water level is rising and this door stands between them and freedom and the sahuagin crossbow troops are getting closer ... Well, now whether they open the door immediately or in 5 rounds is important and potentially interesting, so you roll the dice.

    So, pick your poison.

    omgbfz5lzi1s.png
    Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
    The Disappearance of Inigo Sharpe: Tomas à Dunsanin
    Rendwebguy20
  • EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    The door was just what came off the top of my head. I suppose it could be perception check this new room, climb a wall, *.trivialtask. I like the "that 10 is the best you can do" but then doesn't PC2 just say "my turn now"?

    I'm not looking to punish my players with excessive dice rolling, but I also like the idea of small failures with low stakes. "That door you couldn't open earlier had a small armory behind it. Bummer."

  • RendRend Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    The door was just what came off the top of my head. I suppose it could be perception check this new room, climb a wall, *.trivialtask. I like the "that 10 is the best you can do" but then doesn't PC2 just say "my turn now"?

    Usually yes, or they just all roll at the same time. The only time you get an actual failure tends to be when the entire party rolls poorly at the same time.

    Also I'm not really a big fan personally of rolls whose fail result is "bummer" because I don't find that very interesting. It sounds kinda cool on paper, but ime it ends up falling pretty flat, pretty consistently. YMMV, though.

    DevoutlyApatheticElvenshae
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    The door was just what came off the top of my head. I suppose it could be perception check this new room, climb a wall, *.trivialtask. I like the "that 10 is the best you can do" but then doesn't PC2 just say "my turn now"?

    I'm not looking to punish my players with excessive dice rolling, but I also like the idea of small failures with low stakes. "That door you couldn't open earlier had a small armory behind it. Bummer."

    I'd allow anyone who wants to try a thing try a thing, though if they're doing a help action I'd count that as having attempted to do that thing themselves.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • Nerdsamwich Nerdsamwich Registered User regular
    I must be playing a different game from most folks, because I've never seen a combat round take more than a minute or two, even over Roll20, except when the options had to be explained to a noob. Even then, once the options were clear, it took longer to find the button to execute the action than it did to decide on it. What's going on to slow things down that much?

  • webguy20webguy20 Registered User regular
    Players trying to determine optimal actions for their turn. Trying to remember which spells do what. That kind of thing. I would wager about a minute a turn for my group of 5 PCs.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
    Sleepitalianranma
  • RendRend Registered User regular
    If a player was just using their phone and has to ask what's happening, or if they ask the dm to re-describe the situation you can safely add like 30s.
    If a player asks other players what they recommend as an action, you can add about 15-45s.
    If a player asks other players if they need healing or protection or help of some kind, you probably add 15-45 seconds depending on if anyone answers.
    If a player is chilling out sipping at their drink or conversing with another inactive player and starts thinking about their turn when you call their name instead of prior to their turn coming up, you just add a base of like 10s to that.

    Plus, if you need to consult a list of options like spells, look up anything from a spell or item description to whether or not a monster has some specific quality, etc, that's probably about a minute.

    Maybe they have to ask which die to roll, and then look around their dice bag to find it. (+7s)
    Maybe they take a second to add up the result of their die and all their modifiers (+7s)
    They probably roll to hit and then roll for damage separately. (+7s)

    If you're playing with expert players who know approximately what they'll do when their name is called, the turns go real quick. If you're playing with players who like to converse at the table, or who aren't fully involved with the game at all times, or who frequently need to ask questions about the rules, their turns tend to take 4-5x the amount of time as the others. It's easy for a player's turn to take like 2 minutes at that point, which means a full round around the table can easily take like 5 or even 10m.

    ElvenshaeSleepIncenjucar
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    even with expert players, at high character levels in 4e, you have so many options that if the group starts treating it like a puzzle of how they can use their options together to do cool things, it takes a lot of discussion to decide on each action

    sig.gif
    RendDarkPrimusElvenshaeSleepIncenjucar
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    So I was farting around with some source books and came up with a Goal (tm) for next season tying into my character that exists outside of my direct control; to have the front liners in my party choose to prioritize saving me over some of the more squishy/valuable backliners (I.E. wizards or clerics). Specifically I'm building a kobold thief with the long term goal of making him a mastermind and simply spamming help actions and grovel as much as possible to make those tanks as accurate as possible.

    Further, I can spam help during non-combat rounds to power through any skill challenges that come up!

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    Denada wrote: »
    Honestly, I'd just drop initiative completely before using these alternate systems you folks are describing. A system like you find in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying would do the job better than all this ridiculous tiered rolling and such.

    This is the post that made me try out initiative-less RPGs. Like I said, I haven't done it (yet) with my current group because I want them to have the most 'standard' D&D experience for their first game, but in all my others this is what I do.
    Ars Ludi wrote:
    Saying “okay, the monsters just went, now what do you guys do?” tells the players to huddle up and figure out what they’re doing. It implicitly encourages the players to cooperate and play together. There is negotiation or even debate about who goes when.

    On the other hand, saying “okay, initiative 17, so now it’s Mikey’s turn” tells one player it is their turn to act, and tells the other players that it is _not_ their turn so they should butt out.

    By precisely enforcing when each player goes, in effect by slicing a broad turn for all the players into several smaller individual turns for each individual player, you set the stage for each player to make decisions in isolation. Each player is closer to being in a solo game with the GM rather than playing with the other players (for extra credit, add up the amount of time each player talks to the GM rather than to other players).

    Isolated decision-making also leads to inattention: players pay attention when the GM goes, but stop paying attention to each other. If you aren’t interacting or coordinating with your fellow players, watching what they’re doing becomes a lot less interesting. Players pay attention when the GM acts, because the GM may try to kill their character (one of the more drastic forms of interaction).

    Oh my god. This might have just completely changed my table. I don't know how I never thought of that.

    italianranma
  • discriderdiscrider Registered User regular
    edited July 9
    Denada wrote: »
    Honestly, I'd just drop initiative completely before using these alternate systems you folks are describing. A system like you find in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying would do the job better than all this ridiculous tiered rolling and such.

    This is the post that made me try out initiative-less RPGs. Like I said, I haven't done it (yet) with my current group because I want them to have the most 'standard' D&D experience for their first game, but in all my others this is what I do.
    Ars Ludi wrote:
    Saying “okay, the monsters just went, now what do you guys do?” tells the players to huddle up and figure out what they’re doing. It implicitly encourages the players to cooperate and play together. There is negotiation or even debate about who goes when.

    On the other hand, saying “okay, initiative 17, so now it’s Mikey’s turn” tells one player it is their turn to act, and tells the other players that it is _not_ their turn so they should butt out.

    By precisely enforcing when each player goes, in effect by slicing a broad turn for all the players into several smaller individual turns for each individual player, you set the stage for each player to make decisions in isolation. Each player is closer to being in a solo game with the GM rather than playing with the other players (for extra credit, add up the amount of time each player talks to the GM rather than to other players).

    Isolated decision-making also leads to inattention: players pay attention when the GM goes, but stop paying attention to each other. If you aren’t interacting or coordinating with your fellow players, watching what they’re doing becomes a lot less interesting. Players pay attention when the GM acts, because the GM may try to kill their character (one of the more drastic forms of interaction).

    Oh my god. This might have just completely changed my table. I don't know how I never thought of that.

    You could steal the Star Wars RPG initiative system too.
    Roll initiative.
    Determine when enemies are moving relative to players in a round.
    Initiative slots each round are then assigned to whoever wants to take that spot in the initative.

    So someone could take two consecutive turns on the 3 and the Rogue's 23, or can act first to minimize damage or to move first out of areas so the Wizard can get his AoE off, or so on.

    discrider on
    Oats
  • AistanAistan Registered User regular
    So we're going to be switching over to 5th from 4th, just to try it and see if we like it better. In converting my character over I noticed that all Bard spells seem to be save vs., instead of direct attacks. In that case how is she supposed to get benefits from magic items to help her spellcasting? A +1 focus wouldn't add +1 to the DC, would it? That would be kind of nuts given how few things increase save mods.

    steam_sig.png
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited July 10
    Aistan wrote: »
    So we're going to be switching over to 5th from 4th, just to try it and see if we like it better. In converting my character over I noticed that all Bard spells seem to be save vs., instead of direct attacks. In that case how is she supposed to get benefits from magic items to help her spellcasting? A +1 focus wouldn't add +1 to the DC, would it? That would be kind of nuts given how few things increase save mods.

    You're not really supposed to. Spells with attacks are supposed to have that advantage.

    However bards can get magical instruments iirc

    Edit: also worth noting that spell attacks always target AC and most monsters tend to scale in AC. But not every monster scales in all saves and being able to hit a creatures lowest save will often be worth some value over attacking. Additionally most save effects are stronger than attack effects and many save spells are for half rather than zero on a miss. (And/or more AoE)

    An example. A TRex has AC 13. Weakish.... you average level 4 spellcaster needs a 7 to hit for a probability of 70%.. but it also has a -4 int save. So against your average level 4 caster(8+2+4) will need to have an 18 rolled to not effect it. An 85% chance.

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
    JustTee
  • AistanAistan Registered User regular
    That's what I figured. But what would a magical instrument do? Just being a +1 wouldn't do anything in that instance except maybe make perform checks better.

    It could be something that has its own ability as a 1/day thing, but still that's separate from her abilities.

    I'm not very imaginative when it comes to thinking of magic item ideas. I guess there could be a lute that gives a bonus to concentration checks? A spell slot? More spell damage?

    steam_sig.png
  • FryFry Registered User regular
    The models for how magic items are treated in 4E and 5E are very different. 4E expects you to fill out a hojillion equipment slots and constantly be churning new items in those slots just to keep pace with the rate that enemies grow stronger. 5E you don't expect to see nearly as many items in a typical character's lifetime, and much fewer of them are straight bonuses to your basic functionality (hit chance, damage, and defenses), particularly if you're a spellcaster.

    Sleep
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Fry wrote: »
    The models for how magic items are treated in 4E and 5E are very different. 4E expects you to fill out a hojillion equipment slots and constantly be churning new items in those slots just to keep pace with the rate that enemies grow stronger. 5E you don't expect to see nearly as many items in a typical character's lifetime, and much fewer of them are straight bonuses to your basic functionality (hit chance, damage, and defenses), particularly if you're a spellcaster.

    Yeah in converting from 4th to 5th just basically drop all magic items.

  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    Aistan wrote: »
    That's what I figured. But what would a magical instrument do? Just being a +1 wouldn't do anything in that instance except maybe make perform checks better.

    It could be something that has its own ability as a 1/day thing, but still that's separate from her abilities.

    I'm not very imaginative when it comes to thinking of magic item ideas. I guess there could be a lute that gives a bonus to concentration checks? A spell slot? More spell damage?

    What you're probably looking for is one of a bunch of different specific instruments collectively listed under "Instruments of the Bards" in the 5e DMG. In general they offer the ability to cast a certain set of spells (unique to each one), plus impose disadvantage on saves vs charm against any spells cast with/through the instrument.

    They are all generally very powerful for their rarity, mostly because they add a bunch of 1/day spells to your bard that don't require spell slots to cast, so you end up with a bard that has both a wider than normal variety of spells and significantly more spells per day.

    Alternately you could just convert something like a Pact Keeper rod over from a warlock item to a bard item - pact keeper rods come in +1/+2/+3 varieties and add their bonus to both attack rolls and spell save DCs for spells cast with the rod. They're also pretty powerful, because bonuses to spell DC are extremely impactful (and generally very hard to get at low levels - pact keeper rod is a bit of an outlier.)

  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    The really important thing to remember about saving throw magic in 5th is that it's actually pretty strong and gets that way pretty fast without the need for magic items boosting your stats as long as you properly advance your casting modifier and can earn a few proficiency increases; a level 5 bard should have around a 15 DC, which gets even nastier if you can figure out what your opponents weaker saves are (i.e. forcing dex saves on duergar, wisdom checks on orcs, charisma on fomorians etc.).

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    Sleep
  • captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    Or be a Lore Master Wizard and just pick your saves for every spell. I think it might be a little unbalanced...

    sig.gifSteam | D3: captaink#1674 | 3DS: 2466-1914-7679
    Sleep
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Fry wrote: »
    The models for how magic items are treated in 4E and 5E are very different. 4E expects you to fill out a hojillion equipment slots and constantly be churning new items in those slots just to keep pace with the rate that enemies grow stronger. 5E you don't expect to see nearly as many items in a typical character's lifetime, and much fewer of them are straight bonuses to your basic functionality (hit chance, damage, and defenses), particularly if you're a spellcaster.

    Even as someone who loved (and still loves) 4e, I wouldn't want to run a game any more without using the automatic enhancement bonuses detailed in the DMG2 & the Dark Sun Campaign Guide. Including the bonuses automatically as players level up allows for magic items to be truly special finds, and it also means that players won't feel pressured to give up an item they really like the ability of, because they need that extra +1 from a different item.

    gCnfF8U.jpg
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    ElvenshaeSleepIncenjucar
  • FuselageFuselage Bantha Three ValhallaRegistered User regular
    Another initiative thing I was going to post earlier from a different system. Ignore it if you're tired of that discussion!
    Initiative
    ....There are two initiative methods: duel and traditional. For duels, that is, one-on-one combat, use duel initiative. For combats with more than one participant on either or both sides, use duel or traditional initative. Of course, at the option of the GM and the group, you may use either initiative system for all combats. The game is yours. Find what works for you!

    ....In duel initiative, the combatants choose their maneuvers in secret and reveal them simultaneously. Each combatant tries to anticipate his opponent’s next action based on the accessible maneuvers in the opponent’s fighting style. Tactical thinking and planning is critical.

    ....In traditional initiative, every participant on each side rolls his Quickness die. The PC rolling the highest has the option of going first or delaying. When a PC goes (that is, chooses an action from his combat style sheet), resolve his attack immediately. In the first round of combat, everyone chooses his opening maneuver simultaneously, but the maneuvers are resolved in initiative order. A delaying PC can jump in at any later moment save the middle of another characters' turn.

    ....In duel initiative, effects such as Grabbed and Rebalance take effect after the round ends. All actions occur simultaneously, so that two swordsmen can kill each other in a round. In traditional initiative, effects occur immediately on a character's turn. This often exposes a fighter to more rebalancing attacks and makes the maneuvers deeper in the combat tree harder to reach.

    ....In traditional initiative, roll for initiative only at the start of the combat. Keep the same order throughout the subsequent rounds. Mood and Inspirations can be used on initiative rolls as usual.

    Simultaneous Results
    ....In duel initiative, results occur simultaneously. In other words, even if a troglodyte’s Bash does enough damage to drop a PC to 0 Body, that PC still gets a chance to resolve his own attack and deal damage this round.

    ....This applies to effects other than damage, too. Effects apply at the end of a round and before the next round starts.

    ....Example. The PCs are fighting a nest of spellstalk victims. The PCs and the spellstalk victims choose their maneuvers simultaneously, in secret, and then reveal them. The two sides resolve their actions, and all resolution takes place simultaneously. As the resolution plays out, the PCs burn and stun the stalkers. But the stalkers still resolve their actions this round without being burned or stunned. The stunning and burning does not take place until the end of the round, after all other actions have been resolved.

    Targeting & Round Length
    ....Combat is a terrible mix of chaos and threat. Each round, you are assumed to be engaged with and threatening all other creatures in your area. Your action for the round – usually a combat maneuver - represents your best chance to score damage or cause some other effect. You can target any other creature in your area with a melee attack. See Movement and Maps below for more information on areas.

    ....Rounds vary in length. Generally, they are about six seconds long, but a round where all combatants circle each other, posture, and trade insults might be much longer. The GM is the final arbiter of round length, should it ever matter (usually it only matters for how long a noble can prattle on while the warriors go about the real business of combat!).
    Seize the Initiative
    ....Originally, SK used only duel initiative for all combats. I still love that style of play, but many people prefer the ease of narration afforded by traditional initiative. I admit that I enjoy it also, both as a GM and a player. In addition to the narration focus, I have fun trying to pick the perfect maneuver, already knowing what my opponent has selected to defend with.

    ....A third initiative system is the modified duel initiative system. The side with the highest single Quickness roll among its fighters gains the advantage in the chaos of melee. That side wins initiative and can choose whether to go first as a group - everyone choosing and revealing maneuvers before the other side - or to go second, waiting to choose and reveal maneuvers until after the entire other side has done so for the round. All effects apply simultaneously at the end of the round, as usual for duel initiative. In modified duel initiative, re-roll initiative each round.

  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    captaink wrote: »
    Or be a Lore Master Wizard and just pick your saves for every spell. I think it might be a little unbalanced...

    I think I'd be less disgusted at the inherent absurdity of the lore master wizard's power set if it had been a sorcerer archetype instead, since wizards are supposed to be the refined masters of ritualized casting while Sorcerers are supposed to wield it as a primal force it would make more sense for them to have it due to it's mutagenic properties.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Gaddez wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Or be a Lore Master Wizard and just pick your saves for every spell. I think it might be a little unbalanced...

    I think I'd be less disgusted at the inherent absurdity of the lore master wizard's power set if it had been a sorcerer archetype instead, since wizards are supposed to be the refined masters of ritualized casting while Sorcerers are supposed to wield it as a primal force it would make more sense for them to have it due to it's mutagenic properties.

    I have someone playing a lore master now.

    Only reason I gave it to the player is that i expect them to just forget they can do that for a long time because they don't normally play casters and will just be working on getting spells going for a while.

    FuselageTheDrifter
Sign In or Register to comment.