Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

[The Narrator]

Should I take a level of Brawler to get Martial Flexibility, giving up a bonus combat feat and Weapon Mastery (not making a crit build though, so Weapon Mastery isn't as important as it could be), or should I take the Barroom Brawler feat and the Abundant Tactics Advanced Weapon Training?

Click to shrink...

My first instinct would be to avoid level-dipping if it's not crucial for your character concept. Pathfinder tends to reward players that stick to a single class by having class abilities that grow more potent as you gain class levels.

I wouldn't think of it in terms of losing the stuff that Fighter would get at 20th level (because what are the odds that the campaign will actually go all the way to 20th level anyway?) but in terms of putting off the stuff you'd gain from Fighter for a level. So you'll be waiting that little bit longer to get the Advanced Armor Training you wanted, that sort of thing.

If Brawler has a good Reflex or Will save (don't have the book in front of me right now), then dipping will have the advantage of giving a quick +2 to one of your Fighter's weak saves, so there's that.

"Arrow!" said the bowman. "Black arrow! I have saved you for the last. You have never failed to strike your mark, and I have always recovered you. I had you from my father, and he from of old. If ever you came from the forges of the true King Under The Mountain, go now and speed well!"
- The Hobbit Ch. 14, "Fire And Water"

Click to shrink...

It might be a magical arrow, or it might just be a well-made lucky arrow that's been in the family a while, but the reason it works is because he aimed it at the chink in Smaug's armor after a little bird told him about it (literally... Tolkien was weird sometimes), not because it's able to ignore said armor. And again, I don't recall anything special about the spear that kills the dragon in Children of Hurin, or Eowyn's sword in Return of the King (although the lich-king apparently had DR/estrogen ).

@The Narrator it's post campaign. I was just using the Second Darkness moniker to differentiate it from the Strange Aeons Campaign I'm also running.

Click to shrink...

Oh, noted. And it's not same big bad from the campaign, I'm guessing. Otherwise, "failed to perform a ten-thousand-year-old aboleth ritual that can shatter a continent" would be a good reason for her magic to be burned out.



Going back up the page a bit:

Or have a less-mathy approximation of it by having it lose one damage die every so many feet, which accomplishes the reality after the first two or three range "brackets."

Click to shrink...

That's roughly how Shadowrun handles explosive damage. The base damage drops by X amount for each meter of distance from the detonation point, where X is low for a fragmentation grenade and higher for HE.

I'm personally reluctant to implement a system like that it a D20 game, because it adds a fair bit of complication that could slow down the encounters: if you lobbed a grenade into a group of baddies, you'd have to roll separate damage for each one. (It's a non-issue for Shadowrun because everyone that got hit would already have to roll Body + Armor to soak the damage anyway.)

Going back to the subject of nukes, the rule in Shadowrun for tactical nukes or orbital KKVs was that anything within a certain radius of ground zero would be annihilated, period, no matter what its stats were. Past that radius, normal explosion rules would apply, but with an enormous starting damage, something like 150 in a system where no player character could ever have more than 15 boxes in their damage track. You had to be well away from it with good cover if you wanted to survive.

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

a little bird told him about it (literally... Tolkien was weird sometimes),

Click to shrink...

Wasn't there something about the old people of that country being able to talk to animals, and Bard specifically being "of Old Blood"?
Or am I drastically miss-remembering something?
In any case that's an example of exploiting a weak-point to ignore defenses, rather than mundane weapons being able to bull through defenses.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Wasn't there something about the old people of that country being able to talk to animals, and Bard specifically being "of Old Blood"?
Or am I drastically miss-remembering something?
In any case that's an example of exploiting a weak-point to ignore defenses, rather than mundane weapons being able to bull through defenses.

Click to shrink...

Yes. That's correct. Bard being from an old bloodline enabled him to understand the bird pointing out Smaug's single missing scale of armor. Armor that I'll note was described as being as thing as 10 stacked shields.

 

[The Narrator]

Wasn't there something about the old people of that country being able to talk to animals, and Bard specifically being "of Old Blood"?

Click to shrink...

Yeah, the men of Dale being able to talk to birds was a thing in the book, I'm just saying that it's a bit of an odd plot device for him to use.

In any case that's an example of exploiting a weak-point to ignore defenses, rather than mundane weapons being able to bull through defenses.

Click to shrink...

Which makes it an example of the hero's skill being able to overcome the monster, rather than his awesome magic weapon. High damage can represent precision, not just brute force.

 

[The Imperator]

Oh, noted. And it's not same big bad from the campaign, I'm guessing. Otherwise, "failed to perform a ten-thousand-year-old aboleth ritual that can shatter a continent" would be a good reason for her magic to be burned out.

Click to shrink...

I modified the story a bit, Allevrah was joint big bad with the older brother of one of the PCs. He's the current big bad. I decided that Abraxas didn't really care if the meteor fell, and was just using Allevrah as a patsy to get Drow to break their silence and hiding. the big brother of the PC is closer to a preferred servant of Abraxas, although he (Tsaer, I chose as his name) isn't that liked by Abraxas either.

He's been taunting the PCs for a while, setting up things to explicitly follow story classic story plot lines or tropes (classic in the sense of antiquity style stories). He has a pathological hatred of his brother thanks to a fortune teller telling him his brother would lead to his own death one day. He's bent on causing famous stories (Earthfall being a story he liked and why he helped Abraxas and Allevrah) to come about, while at the same time making sure his brother is there to "win" and stop the story.

He's a bit crazy. And the end of the day his goal is to make his brother (and thus the other PCs) feel just as bound by fate as he feels.

I might just have him mention the story trope of "villain disappears for years, only to return and pull heroes out of retirement" (kind of like in Beowulf, although that was an unrelated monster that just had its ire triggered on the anniversary of the old monster's death) as a justification for leaving for a while.

 

[Stormbringer 0]

So I've been working on a homebrew class for 5e, and I was wondering if it would be possible to post it and get a third opinion?

 

[The Narrator]

I might just have him mention the story trope of "villain disappears for years, only to return and pull heroes out of retirement" (kind of like in Beowulf, although that was an unrelated monster that just had its ire triggered on the anniversary of the old monster's death) as a justification for leaving for a while.

Click to shrink...

If he's being driven by narrative convention, then he could always just pull the "I need you stronger" trope and declare that he's going away for a while, but he will be back "when you're ready..."

Or be off questing for whatever artifact he's going to need for the next legend he wants to reenact.

Armor that I'll note was described as being as thing as 10 stacked shields.

Click to shrink...

Medieval shields were mainly made of wood, sometimes with a thin layer of metal over it. A rifle will probably cut through ten of them. A .50 BMG definitely will.

You know those characters in wuxia films or anime who can cut down a tree in one swing of a sword or punch it so hard it explodes? That's the kind of thing that I figure a high-level D20 warrior should be capable of.

 

[LordInsane]

Wait, what? *checks SRD* it just says that redundant abilities don't stack - Martial Versatility isn't a redundant ability with Fighter, is it? There's nothing in Fighter that gives the same ability - Barroom Brawling is a Combat Feat, not a Fighter Class ability. Same for Unarmed Strike and Brawler's Cunning, right? None of those are duplicating a Fighter Class ability, so they should work, right?

Relevant rules:

(bolded for emphasis)

Click to shrink...

If I recall correctly hybrid classes not being able to multiclass with their parent classes was a thing during ACG playtesting, but it was dropped as a result of it.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

If he's being driven by narrative convention, then he could always just pull the "I need you stronger" trope and declare that he's going away for a while, but he will be back "when you're ready..."

Or be off questing for whatever artifact he's going to need for the next legend he wants to reenact.



Medieval shields were mainly made of wood, sometimes with a thin layer of metal over it. A rifle will probably cut through ten of them. A .50 BMG definitely will.

You know those characters in wuxia films or anime who can cut down a tree in one swing of a sword or punch it so hard it explodes? That's the kind of thing that I figure a high-level D20 warrior should be capable of.

Click to shrink...

That's the monk. The fighter is based on the western hero. That means he wins by finding the weak point, or the right magic sword, or by calling on God to help (see paladin) he doesn't usually overpower the monster.

 

[The Imperator]

That's the monk. The fighter is based on the western hero. That means he wins by finding the weak point, or the right magic sword, or by calling on God to help (see paladin) he doesn't usually overpower the monster.

Click to shrink...

Beowulf is pretty much about overpowering monsters. As are many Celtic heroes IIRC.

 

[The Narrator]

That's the monk. The fighter is based on the western hero. That means he wins by finding the weak point, or the right magic sword, or by calling on God to help (see paladin) he doesn't usually overpower the monster.

Click to shrink...

Except that's what Beowulf did, and he's a western hero. He refused to use weapons and fought Grendel bare-handed to be sporting, and ripped its arm off.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Beowulf is pretty much about overpowering monsters. As are many Celtic heroes IIRC.

Click to shrink...

Think more Arthurian. They won by skill, or fate, or cunning, brute strength was not the archetype.

 

[The Narrator]

Think more Arthurian. They won by skill, or fate, or cunning, brute strength was not the archetype.

Click to shrink...

And yet, in most editions of D&D and 2E in particular, brute strength, usually enhanced by magic items like Gauntlets of Ogre Strength, was the only way to be an effective fighter.

Using Dexterity instead of Strength for melee attacks or gaining a damage bonus due to your skill with a weapon or fighting style (as represented by feats like Weapon Specialization and Power Attack) weren't introduced until 3E. Using Dex for damage or gaining bonuses to damage based on your level didn't appear until later D20 games.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

And yet, in most editions of D&D and 2E in particular, brute strength, usually enhanced by magic items like Gauntlets of Ogre Strength, was the only way to be an effective fighter.

Using Dexterity instead of Strength for melee attacks or gaining a damage bonus due to your skill with a weapon or fighting style (as represented by feats like Weapon Specialization and Power Attack) weren't introduced until 3E. Using Dex for damage or gaining bonuses to damage based on your level didn't appear until later D20 games.

Click to shrink...

Weapon specialization, and mastery/high mastery/grand mastery were introduced in 2e, and added not just bonuses to accuracy and damage, but more attacks per round as well. Unique weapon styles existed in 2nd as well, allowing things like a free parry per round, extra bonuses to attack, damage or to ac, better shield bonus vs ranged attacks, free additional unarmed attacks in addition to armed ones, etc...

 

[The Narrator]

Weapon specialization, and mastery/high mastery/grand mastery were introduced in 2e, and added not just bonuses to accuracy and damage, but more attacks per round as well. Unique weapon styles existed in 2nd as well, allowing things like a free parry per round, extra bonuses to attack, damage or to ac, better shield bonus vs ranged attacks, free additional unarmed attacks in addition to armed ones, etc...

Click to shrink...

I don't recall those at all. Were they in the core book?

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

I don't recall those at all. Were they in the core book?

Click to shrink...

Specialization was. It gave bonuses to attack, damage, and number of attacks per round. The others were introduced in later books, with racial weapon styles in the appropriate books and all the rest including the traditional styles (two weapon, two handed weapon, sword and board, mounted archery, one weapon + free hand) along with the higher levels of mastery in "Players Option: Combat and Tactics"

Edit: and other stuff like combat maneuvers (shield charge, etc...) were there as well. There were futher powers including a "I make one attack this round, but if it hits, save or die" in the High Level Handbook. This represented taking the time to find the weak point and line up that perfect strike. Like Bard on Smaug

Edit2: a high level fighter could also take an ability that let him raise his physical stats to a max of 22 temporarily by psyching himself up. 22 on a scale of 1-25 isn't bad.

Edit3 because thread is slow moving: fighters could also take an ability that said "I put off this negative effect until later" or "I don't actually die from HP loss until the fighr is over or until I fail a con check. There was also abilities that let them make an item they chose unbreakable, and allowed them to track it if stolen or to turn any lesser item of the same basic type into a replacement for it. They could also do the same with a mount, such that if it was killed an identical one would become available without cost within a few days.

 

[The Narrator]

Huh. Interesting. Sort of a precursor to the eventual development of feats in later editions, then.

Still, most D20 system games, especially D&D, do prize raw strength (and magic items) far more than skill when it comes to combat.

Going back to your earlier statement...

That's the monk. The fighter is based on the western hero. That means he wins by finding the weak point, or the right magic sword, or by calling on God to help (see paladin) he doesn't usually overpower the monster.

Click to shrink...

I find this argument dubious. Those wuxia and anime characters don't generally have superhuman brute strength, but superhuman skill that lets them do what they do. Speed and awareness were prized more than muscle. Western heroes were more likely to just be ridiculously strong, like Conan and Beowulf and Samson. Which is the niche that the Fighter classes in D&D are usually pushed into by the game designers: Mighty Glaciers with poor mobility, tanking hits instead of dodging them, high strength and brute force. The first three editions based defense primarily on equipment with little consideration for the idea of a swordsman being harder to hit through their skill with a blade or situational awareness.

It's always been one of my biggest gripes with D&D as a whole. Not having some sort of level-based bonus to defense or damage and instead making them equipment-dependent makes being a swordsman all about being rich instead of about being badass, and that takes a lot of the fun out of it. (It also forces players to steal everything that isn't nailed down to stay relevant, which can really ruin the characterization and storytelling.)

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Huh. Interesting. Sort of a precursor to the eventual development of feats in later editions, then.

Still, most D20 system games, especially D&D, do prize raw strength (and magic items) far more than skill when it comes to combat.

Going back to your earlier statement...

I find this argument dubious. Those wuxia and anime characters don't generally have superhuman brute strength, but superhuman skill that lets them do what they do. Speed and awareness were prized more than muscle. Western heroes were more likely to just be ridiculously strong, like Conan and Beowulf and Samson. Which is the niche that the Fighter classes in D&D are usually pushed into by the game designers: Mighty Glaciers with poor mobility, tanking hits instead of dodging them, high strength and brute force. The first three editions based defense primarily on equipment with little consideration for the idea of a swordsman being harder to hit through their skill with a blade or situational awareness.

It's always been one of my biggest gripes with D&D as a whole. Not having some sort of level-based bonus to defense or damage and instead making them equipment-dependent makes being a swordsman all about being rich instead of about being badass, and that takes a lot of the fun out of it. (It also forces players to steal everything that isn't nailed down to stay relevant, which can really ruin the characterization and storytelling.)

Click to shrink...

2e you really couldn't buy the gear. It didn't even have prices. I mean I suppose you could go to an archmage and negotiate a custom crafted item with him directly, but then it would be as much a reward for the roleplay and charisma use as it would be a purchase.

 

[The Narrator]

2e you really couldn't buy the gear. It didn't even have prices. I mean I suppose you could go to an archmage and negotiate a custom crafted item with him directly, but then it would be as much a reward for the roleplay and charisma use as it would be a purchase.

Click to shrink...

True, but that just makes the looting aspect even more unavoidable, because you have to get the gear by stealing it from dead people.

(Magic items didn't have prices, but I distinctly remember being able to pay extra for high-craftsmanship weapons that did bonus attack and damage in 2E, which is basically the same as buying a +1 or +2 weapon....)

 

[Drachyench]

I find this argument dubious. Those wuxia and anime characters don't generally have superhuman brute strength, but superhuman skill that lets them do what they do. Speed and awareness were prized more than muscle. Western heroes were more likely to just be ridiculously strong, like Conan and Beowulf and Samson.

Click to shrink...

Raw strength was common among western heroes, yes, but so too was skill or other talents: Askeladden, Odysseus, Nathaniel Bumpo, Jack (ALA Jack and the Beanstalk). This also extends to various Middle Eastern heroes such as Aladdin, too. Sinbad of all people is given as an example of an archetypical Fighter in the AD&D 2E PHB.

 

[Nicholai]

2e you really couldn't buy the gear. It didn't even have prices. I mean I suppose you could go to an archmage and negotiate a custom crafted item with him directly, but then it would be as much a reward for the roleplay and charisma use as it would be a purchase.

Click to shrink...

2E also made creating magical items punishing - for Wizards. You could try to make a Sun Blade but the DM was encouraged to add a list of unique ingredients to the materials. So you would need a sword plus "the first drop of light to touch the peak of mount whoosit on the day of the summer equinox" or something equally hard to find.

Meanwhile Priests could just pray and see if their deity / pantheon liked them.

Still, every 2E game I played in the party did eventually go questing to find the pieces their Wizards needed to make magical items. Generally each player had a wish list of things they'd really, really like to have on their character. (Meanwhile the Wizards were "less than enthused" about being the manufacturing department for an entire adventuring party.)

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

2E also made creating magical items punishing - for Wizards. You could try to make a Sun Blade but the DM was encouraged to add a list of unique ingredients to the materials. So you would need a sword plus "the first drop of light to touch the peak of mount whoosit on the day of the summer equinox" or something equally hard to find.

Meanwhile Priests could just pray and see if their deity / pantheon liked them.

Still, every 2E game I played in the party did eventually go questing to find the pieces their Wizards needed to make magical items. Generally each player had a wish list of things they'd really, really like to have on their character. (Meanwhile the Wizards were "less than enthused" about being the manufacturing department for an entire adventuring party.)

Click to shrink...

In the 2e games I run, for unique items, I allow the players to research legends to find where one might be and turn finding it into a sidequest. But that's just me. I also have a story for it. That's not just a sunblade, that's the sword of King Haedrak the 1st, who lead a grand crusade against undeath.

 

[Talkkno]

My problem with fighters in D&D is while you when you level up you get better at fighting; outside that you don't really get any of the prowess you'd expect with superhuman strength and the raw physicality that the ability to fight a dragon head on would imply; ergo no jumping 50 feet in the air without magic items for example.

 

[Nicholai]

My problem with fighters has always been that they just get better at what they do. That's it. They get better at fighting in melee combat and not dying.

Everyone else gets flexibility. The Wizards and Clerics get the most of that but even a Thief gets to expand beyond what they do. First they just sneak, find, disarm traps, and steal stuff. Then they start getting the ability to use magical items that "belong" to other classes. (And so on and so forth.)

So short version - Fighters are a class on rails. They only get to do one thing. The other classes are motorcycles of various flavors. They can go more places, have more options. Some of them are off-road, heavy duty bikes and others are just the tiny things people use to scoot around town .. but they aren't stuck on rails.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

My problem with fighters has always been that they just get better at what they do. That's it. They get better at fighting in melee combat and not dying.

Everyone else gets flexibility. The Wizards and Clerics get the most of that but even a Thief gets to expand beyond what they do. First they just sneak, find, disarm traps, and steal stuff. Then they start getting the ability to use magical items that "belong" to other classes. (And so on and so forth.)

So short version - Fighters are a class on rails. They only get to do one thing. The other classes are motorcycles of various flavors. They can go more places, have more options. Some of them are off-road, heavy duty bikes and others are just the tiny things people use to scoot around town .. but they aren't stuck on rails.

Click to shrink...

Fighters get an army. And at higher levels they get option like Captivate:

Warriors with this skill have developed a strong personal presence that is attractive to members of their own races.

Even without a skill roll, children, members of the opposite sex, and other warriors tend to be friendly toward the character provided they are of the same race and their alignments are similar to that of the character. For purposes of this skill, alignments are similar when they share one common element: law, neutrality, chaos, good, or evil.

Friendly nonplayer characters tend to pay attention to the warrior and view what the warrior says or does in a favorable light as long as it is not obviously harmful or contrary to local customs. With a minimum of encouragement, a friendly NPC gives the warrior information, performs simple errands, makes introductions, and so on. The warrior is a celebrity in the friendly character's eyes.

The warrior can attempt a skill roll to make a suggestion (as the 3rd-level wizard spell) to a friendly NPC if the warrior can speak to the person privately for a few minutes. The NPC automatically obeys the suggestion if it does not involve risk, loss, or potential embarrassment; otherwise, a save vs. spell applies. If the warrior gives the NPC an appropriate gift of modest value or does a useful favor, the saving throw is made at a –4 penalty. If the saving throw succeeds, the NPC tries to flee from the warrior's presence. Each attempt to plant a suggestion reduces the warrior's base bravery score by two. Once the base bravery score falls to zero, the warrior's captivate skill is lost for the day.

If the warrior spends an extended period of time (a few hours or more) in personal contact with a single NPC who is susceptible to this skill, the DM can secretly roll a skill check. If the check succeeds, the NPC forms an attachment to the character and acts upon the attachment in some way