[D&D 5E] Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

18911131499

Posts

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    The Essentials-era 4e books had wonderful monster fluff.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    MsAnthropyOptimusZedHexmage-PATox
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    Fry wrote: »
    I am confused by the claims that 4E had good monster fluff in its rulebooks. My recollection from running 4E as a DM was that the Monster Manuals usually had a heading for a monster type, like "Orc" or "Red Dragon", maybe a paragraph at most with a basic physical description of the creature, and then like six or ten stat blocks. Maybe I was spoiled by growing up with 2E-era Dragon Magazines to read monster descriptions, where they give the full ecology of where things live, what they eat, how they reproduce, etc.

    To be fair, I haven't looked at the DM books for 5E, maybe they're somehow worse?

    4e varied from book to book and monster to monster.

    A lot of entries in the early books were more or less as you describe - paragraph or two of description and lore, short blurb about its tactics in a fight, then the statblock. More 'important' monsters got longer fluff, up to a page or two. By the later books (monster vault etc) most monsters had ~a page of fluff and background associated with their statblocks, and then obviously stuff like the Draconomicons/Demonomicon were wall-to-wall with fluff and lore and ecology stuff for their monster type.

    the 5e monster manual has probably more fluff for most things than the 4e MM1/MM2 and about the same amount as the later books (obviously a lot less than the Draconomicons 1 and 2, Demonomicon, etc, but those are somewhat special-case).

    MsAnthropy
  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Eastern coastal temptressRegistered User regular
    Hey everyone! I had a quick question. I've played D&D, but have never run, and my siblings have never played, but were curious, so I am running a game for them when I'm back in California during winter break. We're doing 5E. I am not sure exactly what mood I want to run, but I am confident I can reskin whatever to be appropriate. I want to know if people know of a specific module or whatever that would be good to start with, or if there is a large repository of modules from which I could pick one for new players. I probably want to start them off closer to level three or four than one, since I don't know how much time we're going to have, and a lot of the fun stuff comes in around there (being a druid who can't wildshape, for example, seems like a lame introduction). Does anyone have advice or suggestions, or knowledge that would be helpful/specific recommendations?

  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion The Land of Flowers (and Dragons)Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    My link goes to maps without modules, if you are looking for a flat map to design your campaign around. For example, my Kells mapset has a dungeon, a town and inn, a highland games area, and a wilderness encounter map for a short campaign (https://falleron.com/portfolio/mapset-kells/ ). All free. You'd have to choose your mobs and such though.

    For prefab modules, 5e's Lost Mine of Phandelver is pretty solid for beginners and comes with the full set of the campaign pre-designed.

    Enc on
    SleepShivahnElvenshaeSmrtnikRawr_303
  • MsAnthropyMsAnthropy Our Lady of Perpetual Mazes The CageRegistered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Hey everyone! I had a quick question. I've played D&D, but have never run, and my siblings have never played, but were curious, so I am running a game for them when I'm back in California during winter break. We're doing 5E. I am not sure exactly what mood I want to run, but I am confident I can reskin whatever to be appropriate. I want to know if people know of a specific module or whatever that would be good to start with, or if there is a large repository of modules from which I could pick one for new players. I probably want to start them off closer to level three or four than one, since I don't know how much time we're going to have, and a lot of the fun stuff comes in around there (being a druid who can't wildshape, for example, seems like a lame introduction). Does anyone have advice or suggestions, or knowledge that would be helpful/specific recommendations?

    I know some people liked Raven’s Call by Kobold Press. It should run $4-5 in pdf form from their store or rpgnow.

    MsAnthropy on
    "The only real politics I knew was that if a guy liked Hitler, I’d beat the stuffing out of him and that would be it." -- Jack Kirby
    Shivahn
  • SteelhawkSteelhawk Registered User regular
    Pointing to the "special" monster books from 4e does not address the scant amounts of fluff in the core 4e monster manual.

    Fry
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    Steelhawk wrote: »
    Pointing to the "special" monster books from 4e does not address the scant amounts of fluff in the core 4e monster manual.

    Again, Essentials.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Comparing the first Monster Manuals of 4E and 5E, I think on average 5E has more fluff. I think this was a natural evolution of the better fluff from the Monster Vaults at the end of 4E's run and I'm down with it. That fluff is a great way to spark adventure and side quest ideas.

    4E has stat blocks that are far superior, but that's just a product of 4E's superior combat rules and monster/encounter design ethos.

    Edit: It's kind of disingenuous to disregard products on the 4E line because they're "special", imo. What defines special? Is Volo's special? Xanathar's? Should anything other than the Main Three be disregarded?

    Denada on
    OptimusZedMsAnthropy
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    DarkPrimus on
    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    Steelhawk
  • SteelhawkSteelhawk Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    That is indeed what I meant. Fry asked about Monster Manuals and the first couple of responses pointed to the Draconomicon and Demonomicon.
    Denada wrote: »
    Edit: It's kind of disingenuous to disregard products on the 4E line because they're "special", imo. What defines special? Is Volo's special? Xanathar's? Should anything other than the Main Three be disregarded?

    I think when someone points points out a perceived flaw in a core monster manual, its a poor argument to point to a book specifically aimed at providing information for one type of monster as a rebuttal.

    Steelhawk on
  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    Yeah that's the comment I was referring to. Those are 4E products. Why don't they count? I mean sure, if you're comparing Monster Manual to Monster Manual, fine. But if you're comparing edition to edition, why would you exclude books like that?

  • SteelhawkSteelhawk Registered User regular
    Denada wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    Yeah that's the comment I was referring to. Those are 4E products. Why don't they count? I mean sure, if you're comparing Monster Manual to Monster Manual, fine. But if you're comparing edition to edition, why would you exclude books like that?

    See my edit right above your post.

    Its a better comparison to pit 4e's MM vs 5e's, and 4e's Draconomicon vs. 5e's Volo's Guide I think. That way you are going for apples to apples.

    Fry's particular comment on 4e's MM fluff and the replies aimed at the Draconomicon where what my post about "special" books was aimed at.

    Smrtnik
  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Steelhawk wrote: »
    Denada wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    Yeah that's the comment I was referring to. Those are 4E products. Why don't they count? I mean sure, if you're comparing Monster Manual to Monster Manual, fine. But if you're comparing edition to edition, why would you exclude books like that?

    See my edit right above your post.

    Its a better comparison to pit 4e's MM vs 5e's, and 4e's Draconomicon vs. 5e's Volo's Guide I think. That way you are going for apples to apples.

    Fry's particular comment on 4e's MM fluff and the replies aimed at the Draconomicon where what my post about "special" books was aimed at.

    Okay I think we're more or less on the same page then. Comparing MM1 to MM1, I agree that 5E has more fluff in it. And yeah it isn't entirely fair to compare a sourcebook that is specifically about expanding fluff for a subset of creatures to a Monster Manual.

    Now if you're just comparing "4E rulebooks" to "5E rulebooks" then sure, throw it all in.

    Denada on
    SteelhawkMsAnthropy
  • ToxTox I kill threads Punch DimensionRegistered User regular
    That's something I didn't realize I was missing, monster fluff. Like, I had no problem with the 4e monster manuals because I was a huge AD&D nerd and basically memorized the MM out boredom and geekiness.

    But now thumbing through 13th Age Bestiary 2 I'm like holy shit this is so fluffy where has this been all my life! and it's super nice.

    Wishlists! General | Gaming | Comics | Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Hey everyone! I had a quick question. I've played D&D, but have never run, and my siblings have never played, but were curious, so I am running a game for them when I'm back in California during winter break. We're doing 5E. I am not sure exactly what mood I want to run, but I am confident I can reskin whatever to be appropriate. I want to know if people know of a specific module or whatever that would be good to start with, or if there is a large repository of modules from which I could pick one for new players. I probably want to start them off closer to level three or four than one, since I don't know how much time we're going to have, and a lot of the fun stuff comes in around there (being a druid who can't wildshape, for example, seems like a lame introduction). Does anyone have advice or suggestions, or knowledge that would be helpful/specific recommendations?

    You could do pretty well with Tales from the yawning portal; Run the players through the first or second dungeon at level 3 and watch them have fun with it.

    Alternately, if you have enough time storm king's thunder has a *fast* leveling system that will get the players up to level 4 in short order while presenting fairly minor threats in the first arc and could be fun for newer 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.
    Sleep
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    Denada wrote: »
    Steelhawk wrote: »
    Denada wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    Yeah that's the comment I was referring to. Those are 4E products. Why don't they count? I mean sure, if you're comparing Monster Manual to Monster Manual, fine. But if you're comparing edition to edition, why would you exclude books like that?

    See my edit right above your post.

    Its a better comparison to pit 4e's MM vs 5e's, and 4e's Draconomicon vs. 5e's Volo's Guide I think. That way you are going for apples to apples.

    Fry's particular comment on 4e's MM fluff and the replies aimed at the Draconomicon where what my post about "special" books was aimed at.

    Okay I think we're more or less on the same page then. Comparing MM1 to MM1, I agree that 5E has more fluff in it. And yeah it isn't entirely fair to compare a sourcebook that is specifically about expanding fluff for a subset of creatures to a Monster Manual.

    Now if you're just comparing "4E rulebooks" to "5E rulebooks" then sure, throw it all in.

    Yeah, the first two 4E Monster Manuals admittedly had very little fluff. Monster Manual 3 improved this by a lot, and the other monster books that followed were full of cool flavor.

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
    MsAnthropy
  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Denada wrote: »
    Steelhawk wrote: »
    Denada wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I think the comment about "special" refers to things like the Draconomicons or that book that was just undead monsters.

    Yeah that's the comment I was referring to. Those are 4E products. Why don't they count? I mean sure, if you're comparing Monster Manual to Monster Manual, fine. But if you're comparing edition to edition, why would you exclude books like that?

    See my edit right above your post.

    Its a better comparison to pit 4e's MM vs 5e's, and 4e's Draconomicon vs. 5e's Volo's Guide I think. That way you are going for apples to apples.

    Fry's particular comment on 4e's MM fluff and the replies aimed at the Draconomicon where what my post about "special" books was aimed at.

    Okay I think we're more or less on the same page then. Comparing MM1 to MM1, I agree that 5E has more fluff in it. And yeah it isn't entirely fair to compare a sourcebook that is specifically about expanding fluff for a subset of creatures to a Monster Manual.

    Now if you're just comparing "4E rulebooks" to "5E rulebooks" then sure, throw it all in.

    Yeah, the first two 4E Monster Manuals admittedly had very little fluff. Monster Manual 3 improved this by a lot, and the other monster books that followed were full of cool flavor.

    MM3 and the two Monster Vaults are really great books. The fact that the MVs also came with tokens for all the monsters was a really nice touch. MV1 also came with a pretty good adventure too. And poster maps.

    Damn those were good products.

    Denada on
    DevoutlyApatheticMegaMekDarkPrimusToxitalianranmaElvenshae
  • Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    Aldo wrote: »
    You hold a brick in your off hand, anyone who gets into a fight with you is going to be scared shitless of what you are going to do with that brick. You should basically just have combat advantage or intimidation bonuses. People are highly motivated to not get clobbered with a brick.

    Rocks in a sock. Rincewind-style.

    Advantage against Sorcerers

    Elvenshae
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Moridin889 wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    To throw my own 5e Hot Take:

    My biggest complaint about 5e comes as a player, in that there is no benefit to wielding a one handed weapon without a shield in your offhand. Want to be a swashbuckler? There is no fighting style that encourages that. Everything encourages a weapon and a shield. My fancy rapier fencer guy doesn't want a goddamn shield. Add a goddamn fighting style that rewards you for using a 1h weapon without a shield! Duelist? You can still use a shield (what, why there is a whole shield wielding fighting style already why would you dammit Wizards).

    I mean, I played (non-optimally) without a shield and was happy enough because I value character over mechanics most times, but it is still rather irritating at times.

    There is but it is not immediately clear and it mainly comes in action economy.

    Specifically doning and doffing a shield is a full action. Drawing a single weapon can be done as part of a move but it eats your “one thing as part of a move” requirement.

    So drink a potion as a sword and board... and you lose combat threat for two enemy rounds. Or you can drop your weapon...

    You cannot cast spells, operate machinery that requires two hands, pick up an important object off the ground without losing effective combat rounds...

    Another good example for rogues but also anyone really is the off hand dagger throw. To do so you must draw and throw and have an off-hand available.

    For the most part, I take this a bit further when I gm. You may only start combat with your shield equipped if you mention it before combat starts. Otherwise you had your shield on your back like a normal person not actively engaged in war.

    Listen, I stiffed an order of paladins of vengeance. Of course I'm going to have my shield out at all times!

    Sure, take a point of exhaustion every 4 hours

    wbBv3fj.png
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Let's try this statement on for size:

    The monster manuals published during the latter half of 4e's lifetime included sizable amounts of flavor text and lore fluff, a design philosophy that was retained when writing monster manuals for 5e.

    Look at that, a factual statement that manages to avoid disparaging either edition!

    DarkPrimus on
    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    AldoDenadaMegaMekSteelhawkOatsMsAnthropyToxHexmage-PAOptimusZedAnialosElvenshaeNyhtnever dieTheDrifterMrGrimoirejdarksunTofystedeth
  • BionicPenguinBionicPenguin Registered User regular
    I don’t think you understand how the internet is supposed to work.

    9MpLNPA.jpg
    Steam: MightyPotatoKing/King of the Impossible - Battle.net: PotatoKing#1893
    CarnarvonTox14357Hexmage-PAElvenshaeRhesus PositiveKwoaruTheDrifterMrGrimoireTofystedeth
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular

    Goumindong wrote: »
    Moridin889 wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    To throw my own 5e Hot Take:

    My biggest complaint about 5e comes as a player, in that there is no benefit to wielding a one handed weapon without a shield in your offhand. Want to be a swashbuckler? There is no fighting style that encourages that. Everything encourages a weapon and a shield. My fancy rapier fencer guy doesn't want a goddamn shield. Add a goddamn fighting style that rewards you for using a 1h weapon without a shield! Duelist? You can still use a shield (what, why there is a whole shield wielding fighting style already why would you dammit Wizards).

    I mean, I played (non-optimally) without a shield and was happy enough because I value character over mechanics most times, but it is still rather irritating at times.

    There is but it is not immediately clear and it mainly comes in action economy.

    Specifically doning and doffing a shield is a full action. Drawing a single weapon can be done as part of a move but it eats your “one thing as part of a move” requirement.

    So drink a potion as a sword and board... and you lose combat threat for two enemy rounds. Or you can drop your weapon...

    You cannot cast spells, operate machinery that requires two hands, pick up an important object off the ground without losing effective combat rounds...

    Another good example for rogues but also anyone really is the off hand dagger throw. To do so you must draw and throw and have an off-hand available.

    For the most part, I take this a bit further when I gm. You may only start combat with your shield equipped if you mention it before combat starts. Otherwise you had your shield on your back like a normal person not actively engaged in war.

    Listen, I stiffed an order of paladins of vengeance. Of course I'm going to have my shield out at all times!

    Sure, take a point of exhaustion every 4 hours

    Given the lengths of most combats in 5e it seems like expecting players to take an entire turn putting their shield on at the start of a fight is mostly just a complicated way of saying 'I don't allow shields in my game'

    Especially since there's already a lot of incentive to play with a 2-handed weapon anyway

    FrySleepMegaMekBionicPenguin14357SmrtnikJustTee
  • webguy20webguy20 I Spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    Yeah unless the group is surprised I assume both parties have time to ready their equipment and play accordingly.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
    italianranma14357Elvenshaenever die
  • CarnarvonCarnarvon Registered User regular
    The 5e monster manual is pretty basic, and a lot of the monsters are incredibly simple. Something like 80% of the listings are just different leveled versions of "here's a dude with a melee attack, maybe a ranged attack, and maybe a one single special ability." If you're lucky, you got a "here's a wizard version!" sidebar.

    Volo's is much better, but 13th Age's mm2 is pretty baller.

  • AegeriAegeri Plateau of LengRegistered User regular
    edited November 2017
    I don't think I have looked at the fluff of the monsters in any 5e book beyond once.

    More stat blocks would have been 100% more useful.

    Aegeri on
    The Roleplayer's Guild: My blog for roleplaying games, advice and adventuring.
  • ToxTox I kill threads Punch DimensionRegistered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Let's try this statement on for size:

    The monster manuals published during the latter half of 4e's lifetime included sizable amounts of flavor text and lore fluff, a design philosophy that was retained when writing monster manuals for 5e.

    Look at that, a factual statement that manages to avoid disparaging either edition!

    It's a good start, but can you make it shit on another game?

    Wishlists! General | Gaming | Comics | Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
    Elvenshae
  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    We all know that the real best edition of D&D is actually Gamma World. I don't think that's going to start another argument though because it's an undisputable, objective fact.

    ToxdiscriderDevoutlyApatheticPowerpuppiesCarnarvonElvenshae
  • italianranmaitalianranma Registered User regular
    See, the joke here is that Tox has the 13th age thread and...

    飛べねぇ豚はただの豚だ。
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    Denada wrote: »
    We all know that the real best edition of D&D is actually Gamma World. I don't think that's going to start another argument though because it's an undisputable, objective fact.

    Which Gamma World, though???

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
    DevoutlyApatheticElvenshae
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Denada wrote: »
    We all know that the real best edition of D&D is actually Gamma World. I don't think that's going to start another argument though because it's an undisputable, objective fact.

    Which Gamma World, though???

    Bravo. Perfectly played.
    The one with the cards obviously.

    Denada
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Moridin889 wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    To throw my own 5e Hot Take:

    My biggest complaint about 5e comes as a player, in that there is no benefit to wielding a one handed weapon without a shield in your offhand. Want to be a swashbuckler? There is no fighting style that encourages that. Everything encourages a weapon and a shield. My fancy rapier fencer guy doesn't want a goddamn shield. Add a goddamn fighting style that rewards you for using a 1h weapon without a shield! Duelist? You can still use a shield (what, why there is a whole shield wielding fighting style already why would you dammit Wizards).

    I mean, I played (non-optimally) without a shield and was happy enough because I value character over mechanics most times, but it is still rather irritating at times.

    There is but it is not immediately clear and it mainly comes in action economy.

    Specifically doning and doffing a shield is a full action. Drawing a single weapon can be done as part of a move but it eats your “one thing as part of a move” requirement.

    So drink a potion as a sword and board... and you lose combat threat for two enemy rounds. Or you can drop your weapon...

    You cannot cast spells, operate machinery that requires two hands, pick up an important object off the ground without losing effective combat rounds...

    Another good example for rogues but also anyone really is the off hand dagger throw. To do so you must draw and throw and have an off-hand available.

    For the most part, I take this a bit further when I gm. You may only start combat with your shield equipped if you mention it before combat starts. Otherwise you had your shield on your back like a normal person not actively engaged in war.

    Listen, I stiffed an order of paladins of vengeance. Of course I'm going to have my shield out at all times!

    Sure, take a point of exhaustion every 4 hours

    Given the lengths of most combats in 5e it seems like expecting players to take an entire turn putting their shield on at the start of a fight is mostly just a complicated way of saying 'I don't allow shields in my game'

    Especially since there's already a lot of incentive to play with a 2-handed weapon anyway

    It’s not that big of a deal really. Most combats in dungeons have ample time to ready and unless you’re really close most melee focused champions have a round before hitting anyway

    wbBv3fj.png
  • FuselageFuselage Oosik Jumpship LoungeRegistered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Hey everyone! I had a quick question. I've played D&D, but have never run, and my siblings have never played, but were curious, so I am running a game for them when I'm back in California during winter break. We're doing 5E. I am not sure exactly what mood I want to run, but I am confident I can reskin whatever to be appropriate. I want to know if people know of a specific module or whatever that would be good to start with, or if there is a large repository of modules from which I could pick one for new players. I probably want to start them off closer to level three or four than one, since I don't know how much time we're going to have, and a lot of the fun stuff comes in around there (being a druid who can't wildshape, for example, seems like a lame introduction). Does anyone have advice or suggestions, or knowledge that would be helpful/specific recommendations?

    @Shivahn this list has served me well in the past.

    https://merricb.com/dungeons-dragons-5e-adventures-by-level/

    https://merricb.com/the-great-list-of-dd-5e-adventures/

    o4n72w5h9b5y.png
    Shivahn
  • HellboreHellbore A bad, bad man Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    Hey everyone! I had a quick question. I've played D&D, but have never run, and my siblings have never played, but were curious, so I am running a game for them when I'm back in California during winter break. We're doing 5E. I am not sure exactly what mood I want to run, but I am confident I can reskin whatever to be appropriate. I want to know if people know of a specific module or whatever that would be good to start with, or if there is a large repository of modules from which I could pick one for new players. I probably want to start them off closer to level three or four than one, since I don't know how much time we're going to have, and a lot of the fun stuff comes in around there (being a druid who can't wildshape, for example, seems like a lame introduction). Does anyone have advice or suggestions, or knowledge that would be helpful/specific recommendations?

    There's www.adventurelookup.com, which is a curated, filterable list of hundreds of official and homebrew adventure modules from every edition of DnD and where to find them. Helped me find a quick little one-shot for my family that I DMed, and we're now considering extending into a longer game.

    ShivahnRawr_303Tofystedeth
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    A
    Denada wrote: »
    We all know that the real best edition of D&D is actually Gamma World. I don't think that's going to start another argument though because it's an undisputable, objective fact.

    it's so gooooood

    sig.gif
    DenadaTox
  • webguy20webguy20 I Spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    God healing spirit is so damn powerful for a 2nd level spell for out of combat healing. 1 minute duration and everyone can move through the effect once per round for 1d6 when cast at level 2. So thats 10d6 per person if everyone shuffles through per turn.

    My friends and I are going to play Tomb of Annihilation for a few weeks and my bard/swashbuckler is definitely taking this as one of their magic secret options. Also fireball because fireball.

    webguy20 on
    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
    ElvenshaeOptimusZed
  • AegeriAegeri Plateau of LengRegistered User regular
    It has now happened.

    A player has figured out the "summon 8+ wolves into every encounter" trick. A big con bonus and the feat for advantage on those saves is going to basically make all random overworld encounters irrelevant.

    This shall be tricky.

    The Roleplayer's Guild: My blog for roleplaying games, advice and adventuring.
  • AldoAldo Hippo Hooray Registered User regular
    Aegeri wrote: »
    It has now happened.

    A player has figured out the "summon 8+ wolves into every encounter" trick. A big con bonus and the feat for advantage on those saves is going to basically make all random overworld encounters irrelevant.

    This shall be tricky.

    How are the other players taking it? I woukd be so bored to watch this dude micromanage his pack.

  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    Have primordials or archfey been featured in 5E?

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • SmrtnikSmrtnik job boli zub Registered User regular
    Define featured

    steam_sig.png
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Aegeri wrote: »
    It has now happened.

    A player has figured out the "summon 8+ wolves into every encounter" trick. A big con bonus and the feat for advantage on those saves is going to basically make all random overworld encounters irrelevant.

    This shall be tricky.

    Two best ways to deal with this:
    1. Make liberal use of aoe's. Just splash damage and CC's all over the place and if it starts hitting non-canids then them's the breaks.
    2. Prioritize murdering him. If he's KO'd or in roll up a new character land then he can't very well keep a horde of puppers around.

    Afterwards, maybe have a discussion about how clogging the game up with a bunch of creatures you can't quickly resove actions for ~while technically a perfect use of a 3rd level spell slot~ is neither keeping to the spirit of the game nor feasible in an environment where you are going to be running multiple
    sessions a day.

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.