Remove ads

Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

Reader mode
I've decided my Summoner is starting out annoyed at her eidolon. You see, he's an Azata, but she's merely chaotic neutral, and he keeps pushing her to do things other than party, insisting they'll be 'fun'.
 
The Imperator said:
How would one run a CE character who is that way because they were slaves, and the only thing that helped them was power from some CE demon lord? It'd be kind of like full on nihilism, right, freedom by realizing nothing matters? Or is that too neutral evil?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Assuming this is 5e, I think you're good, though I would perhaps argue that full-on nihilism would qualify as (moral) neutral rather than good or evil. Alignments in 5e are loosely defined specifically so you can play around with who your character is. Nothing says that an evil-aligned character needs to be actively malicious, or even in opposition with good ones - it just means that their outlook on life has to be fundamentally incompatible.

Personally I'd play them as:
  • Does whatever they want, whenever they want - they like to indulge their freedom after being deprived so long.
  • Does whatever it takes to get what they want, and has no boundaries they will not cross if sufficiently motivated.
  • Can't fathom the idea of a fair or good world.
  • Can't be selfless. Will not help others without payment or some other benefit to themselves.
  • Unable to believe that anyone else can be truly selfless or altruistic, either. Distrusts everyone else and believes that if they let their guard down for a second then others will stab them in the back.
 
Strunkriidiisk said:
Assuming this is 5e, I think you're good, though I would perhaps argue that full-on nihilism would qualify as (moral) neutral rather than good or evil. Alignments in 5e are loosely defined specifically so you can play around with who your character is. Nothing says that an evil-aligned character needs to be actively malicious, or even in opposition with good ones - it just means that their outlook on life has to be fundamentally incompatible.

Personally I'd play them as:
  • Does whatever they want, whenever they want - they like to indulge their freedom after being deprived so long.
  • Does whatever it takes to get what they want, and has no boundaries they will not cross if sufficiently motivated.
  • Can't fathom the idea of a fair or good world.
  • Can't be selfless. Will not help others without payment or some other benefit to themselves.
  • Unable to believe that anyone else can be truly selfless or altruistic, either. Distrusts everyone else and believes that if they let their guard down for a second then others will stab them in the back.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Edition doesn't matter, alignment is basically the same for any edition.

Thanks for those pointers!
 
In a 5e game, do you feel it would be bad to have two player characters duel to the death in an arena battle? If so, what's the best way to do it?
 
Muhkat Lomorki said:
In a 5e game, do you feel it would be bad to have two player characters duel to the death in an arena battle? If so, what's the best way to do it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To what end? It's not something I'd recommend doing in most campaigns. You've got two players playing against each other instead of with each other (bad for intra-group harmony), any other players stuck on the sidelines just watching (resulting in boredom and distraction), and it'll presumably end with at least dead PC (bad for storytelling purposes), who died through no fault of their own but because the GM just wanted somebody to die (which will breed resentment). (Depending on how hard it is to come back from the dead in 5E.)
 
Last edited:
I don't see it as a problem in a separate, for lack of a better word non-canon, deathmatch thing - it can be pretty fun, testing out builds and just having a quick battle. Doing it as part of an ongoing campaign, though, that's problematic.
 
Yeah, if your players just want to have a fighting tournament for the fun of it, that's no problem. But the way you were talking about it, it seemed like this was going to be a plot development during an ongoing campaign.
 
Heck, you can just justify it as a tournament where you get raised from the death afterwards. Which is very possible in-universe after all.
 
In the Skull and Shackles game I play in, the captain of our ship and one of the crew had a duel to the death.

By that point, through pretty solid roleplay the crewmember had become a CE Graveknight, after starting out CG, thanks to all the stuff that happened over the campaign. The Captain had a Cyclops helm, critted and then "killed" the Graveknight crewmember. The crewmember consented to stay on the crew as long as the captain is alive.

This was an in universe way to justify why a CE nagaji, who became evil because he hated pirates so much (again, really solid roleplay, and it wasn't planned in advance, it was organic), would stay on the crew.
 
The Narrator said:
Yeah, if your players just want to have a fighting tournament for the fun of it, that's no problem. But the way you were talking about it, it seemed like this was going to be a plot development during an ongoing campaign.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
[5e]

Okay, good point.

So how does this sound for a campaign event:

There is a tourney nearby wherever the adventurers are. It is offering a variety of Melees you may participate in, including both team-based and free for all. However, it is being secretly run by an evil force, potentially the one the party has been facing. Ideas include: Hobgoblin Empire, Yaun-Ti Shadow Government, Infernal Cult.
 
Why do some people think bargaining with demons is a great idea?

Party wizard is like "why not, he's nice?"
IT'S NOT A NICE GUY IT'S THE GIANT MISSING GLABREZU I SCOUTED OUT IN THE ROOM EARLIER USE YOUR GODS_DAMNED INT.

I also accidentally the relic cold iron greatsword I borrowed from a temple of Sarenrae.
"It's for killing demons."
*Sword gets rekt fighting acid demons*

0/10 would not crusade with.
 
Havock said:
Party wizard is like "why not, he's nice?"
IT'S NOT A NICE GUY IT'S THE GIANT MISSING GLABREZU I SCOUTED OUT IN THE ROOM EARLIER USE YOUR GODS_DAMNED INT.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean at least your DM thinks you're smart enough to have to attempt to trick. Mine has Demons and Blackguards walk up undisguised to be smotetempt me.
 
Now everyone is blaming me for breaking the relic.

Sure, blame me for the demon-slaying sword not standing up to actual demon slaying!
 
So I've been preparing for a new campaign when I saw the 5E Scout Archetype, and I got to say it looks... sorta broken?

As a Rouge, Cunning Action means I pretty much get to determine how long it takes for the enemy to reach me. Thus, anyone with 35 or less movement (i.e. most enemies) probably end their turn having dashed to get in range.

At that point, I can use my reaction to move half my speed (3.5 Squares) which lets me walk around them and take a step away without provoking an AoO. Now it's my turn and I take move another 35ft away before turning around and shooting them. This leaves me just outside their range, so they need to dash again.

Is this problem real or have I missed some rule that prevents this? Let me know if I need to clarify the issue.
 
PsyFarrow said:
So I've been preparing for a new campaign when I saw the 5E Scout Archetype, and I got to say it looks... sorta broken?

As a Rouge, Cunning Action means I pretty much get to determine how long it takes for the enemy to reach me. Thus, anyone with 35 or less movement (i.e. most enemies) probably end their turn having dashed to get in range.

At that point, I can use my reaction to move half my speed (3.5 Squares) which lets me walk around them and take a step away without provoking an AoO. Now it's my turn and I take move another 35ft away before turning around and shooting them. This leaves me just outside their range, so they need to dash again.

Is this problem real or have I missed some rule that prevents this? Let me know if I need to clarify the issue.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You presume a perfectly flat plane as the area of engagement. Which... yes, would favor a scout (as thematically it should!), but it's not the best presumption to make. This also disregards that many MM entries and NPCs will have at least some form of ranged attack: 5E did away with most of "I can fly 10' off the ground 90% of the MM and NPCs can get fucked" problems of earlier editions.
 
Ugh, can I get a DM who knows what game momentum is? I mean, no more of my games have ended, but most seem willing to let couple-day gaps of posting slide too much. At best it's slow pacing.
 
Q99 said:
Ugh, can I get a DM who knows what game momentum is? I mean, no more of my games have ended, but most seem willing to let couple-day gaps of posting slide too much. At best it's slow pacing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My bad, I'll take some responsibility for this. In my defense, however, I'm a pretty hands-off DM. I've run into too many DMs where they want to micromanage my character or concept and I don't like the idea that the campaign we're playing as a group is MY story, my view of DMing is that I'm supposed to be a producer of sorts in facilitating the players in telling their own story within the framework of the AP/campaign, so when the group didn't want to take initiative as a whole I got stuck on what to do. My bad, I should probably take a more directive role as a DM.
 
Wolf Ritter said:
My bad, I'll take some responsibility for this. In my defense, however, I'm a pretty hands-off DM. I've run into too many DMs where they want to micromanage my character or concept and I don't like the idea that the campaign we're playing as a group is MY story, my view of DMing is that I'm supposed to be a producer of sorts in facilitating the players in telling their own story within the framework of the AP/campaign, so when the group didn't want to take initiative as a whole I got stuck on what to do. My bad, I should probably take a more directive role as a DM.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh, this isn't about that campaign specifically, I'm in four current games on the same forum and it's not rare that I make zero posts in a day between the lot because the DMs are slow (and I did quit one before where the DM was slow *and* I wasn't engaging).

That said, for a PbP especially, a DM needs to be able to poke people into action and is in charge of keeping things moving. Facilitate player actions, but make sure they're moving, respond to their actions, and help make sure they know what they're doing.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top