Remove ads

Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

Reader mode
Arawn_Emrys said:
Even then it's still nerfed from prior editions. I really think they need to bring back longterm status ailments and other effects that last beyond long rests.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The really brutal effects increase exhaustion.
Fun features:
  • It starts by imposing disadvantage on ability checks.
  • At level 3 exhaustion this extends to attack rolls and saving throws, and this includes death saving throws.
  • It goes down by 1 level per long rest, so 1 per day naturally.
  • Greater restoration only reduces it by 1 level.
Poisons also pretty much universally impose the poisoned condition (disadvantage on attacks and ability checks) if you fail the save, with the exceptions being the ones that cause a single lump of damage. Resting has no effect on this condition.

Arawn_Emrys said:
It takes away from any idea pf having to think strategically if all you have to do is retreat a little and rest. NWN got panned for having that very feature. Going in unprepared should result in a total party wipe, a full retreat to a town, or clever strategy for dealing with the cards you've been dealt. ACTUAL strategy, not "per fight" but "managing my respurces to get through this whole place"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why? What value does forcing a single type of play add to the game? Note that I'm speaking as a DM who has come a few attacks away from a full party wipe in both of the last two combats I ran, and had characters knocked out in both.
The inclusion of short rests (and the various benefits thereof) help to enable players to do the Cool Thing their character is supposed to do more consistently, make it easier for DMs to balance sequential encounters, and helps player characters survive so the plot of the campaign can carry on. I can pretty easily force my players to choose between the options you presented - when I want to do so - without the game mechanics forcing me to punish the players.

Plus, frankly, whether or not short rests (and the related mechanics that reduce the need for healers or other specialized roles) are viable is very much DM- and situation-dependent; I'm in a campaign where, in the first session, I was told that if we tried to take a short rest at that point in time we'd be attacked by the bandits we were escaping.
 
Arawn_Emrys said:
It takes away from any idea pf having to think strategically if all you have to do is retreat a little and rest. NWN got panned for having that very feature. Going in unprepared should result in a total party wipe, a full retreat to a town, or clever strategy for dealing with the cards you've been dealt. ACTUAL strategy, not "per fight" but "managing my respurces to get through this whole place"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What I meant was that the game shouldn't punish the players for not taking all of the character archetypes for optimal balance, as long as the players themselves are aware of the limitations this imposes and are careful. My apologies for not communicating this properly, apparently.

There are very few lasting effects in 5e, which means that a healer-less party isn't completely screwed. As long as they know well enough to fall back when the situation gets to be more than they can handle, I don't see why they should be punished for it. Charging in blindly is going to get you killed regardless of the party's relative strength and balance, but fighting cautiously and tactically - taking advantage of the terrain's natural chokepoints, planning ambushes, retreating to rest and plan, and so on - should allow any group to prevail eventually.

My first group did that very thing. We were two fighters, a wizard, and a sorcerer - good in a straight-up fight, but otherwise limited. You want to know how we dealt with a castle full of Yuan-Ti and cultists? We picked away at them bit by bit. We chipped away at handfuls of their people at once, then retreated to heal up when we started getting hurt. We found the secret entrance into the back of their lair, then ambushed people as they came in. Took advantage of chokepoints and cover to avoid being shot to death and funnel them for AOE attacks.

We finished the adventure without anyone dying, and made the final boss trivial by collecting artifacts and sabotaging their plans in order to negate their advantages.
 
Strunkriidiisk said:
What I meant was that the game shouldn't punish the players for not taking all of the character archetypes for optimal balance, as long as the players themselves are aware of the limitations this imposes and are careful. My apologies for not communicating this properly, apparently.

There are very few lasting effects in 5e, which means that a healer-less party isn't completely screwed. As long as they know well enough to fall back when the situation gets to be more than they can handle, I don't see why they should be punished for it. Charging in blindly is going to get you killed regardless of the party's relative strength and balance, but fighting cautiously and tactically - taking advantage of the terrain's natural chokepoints, planning ambushes, retreating to rest and plan, and so on - should allow any group to prevail eventually.

My first group did that very thing. We were two fighters, a wizard, and a sorcerer - good in a straight-up fight, but otherwise limited. You want to know how we dealt with a castle full of Yuan-Ti and cultists? We picked away at them bit by bit. We chipped away at handfuls of their people at once, then retreated to heal up when we started getting hurt. We found the secret entrance into the back of their lair, then ambushed people as they came in. Took advantage of chokepoints and cover to avoid being shot to death and funnel them for AOE attacks.

We finished the adventure without anyone dying, and made the final boss trivial by collecting artifacts and sabotaging their plans in order to negate their advantages.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Once inside the enemy base stopping for a rest should have the entire place on high alert from then on, making stealth or ambush based tactics nigh impossible. And if they are part of a larger group, it should be rendered pointless by newly arrived reinforcements. A party without a healer should have to be loaded down with consumables to compensate.
 
Last edited:
Arawn_Emrys said:
A party without a healer should have to be loaded down with consumables to compensate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is an opinion.

It's not even a popular opinion these days.

Healer has never really mechanically worked as a primary role in most versions of D&D. In most it is secondary.

And honestly, most people don't enjoy playing a bandaid.
 
The holy trinity is not a design that works well in rpgs and even in MMOs its kinda flawed as designs go. We need less of it, not more.

Also- people sure as hell didn't play a cleric to be the party healbot. The healing was a side benefit compared to shit like DMM buffgod tricks.
 
Sightedjt said:
The holy trinity is not a design that works well in rpgs and even in MMOs its kinda flawed as designs go. We need less of it, not more.

Also- people sure as hell didn't play a cleric to be the party healbot. The healing was a side benefit compared to shit like DMM buffgod tricks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's generally supposed to be 4 not 3. A party without a thief ahould be just as screwed as one with no priest. Honestly, the magic user is the one class that isn't really a necessity.
 
Arawn_Emrys said:
Right, because noone ever played a cleric in 3e?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Clerics aren't primarily healers.

Many people who played clerics in 3e played them primarily as Party buffers or self-buffed DPS. Healing was a secondary role.

Healing simply isn't an actual combat role in 3e, because damage scaling just bluntly outpaces healing scaling.




Edit: oh, mod, the doubling down.

No,no, no. Trap monkey isn't a combat role either, and *having* to devote part of your character to a side job is bad mechanical design.

As an option, it adds to the game, but making it a requirement is Bad Design.
 
Last edited:
Arawn_Emrys said:
Once inside the enemy base stopping for a rest should have the entire place on high alert from then on, making stealth or ambush based tactics nigh impossible. And if they are part of a larger group, it should be rendered pointless by newly arrived reinforcements. A party without a healer should have to be loaded down with consumables to compensate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Use clever strategy! No, not that strategy, that's not allowed! In fact, you should be punished for trying to use that strategy."
:rolleyes:

Arawn_Emrys said:
Right, because noone ever played a cleric in 3e?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Clerics aren't healbots. People playing classes that can heal doesn't mean they want to play a healer.

Arawn_Emrys said:
It's generally supposed to be 4 not 3. A party without a thief ahould be just as screwed as one with no priest. Honestly, the magic user is the one class that isn't really a necessity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why? Seriously, why? I want you to explain why you think a thief is required for every party.
 
Chloe Sullivan said:
No,no, no. Trap monkey isn't a combat role either, and *having* to devote part of your character to a side job is bad mechanical design.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Plus the best trap monkey in 3.5 were the Artificer and the Beguiler, i.e. primary caster with Int focus and trapfinding as a bonus.
Arawn_Emrys said:
It's generally supposed to be 4 not 3. A party without a thief ahould be just as screwed as one with no priest. Honestly, the magic user is the one class that isn't really a necessity.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fuck this mentality, trapfinding should be a feat at best, heving it as class feature is just niche protection.
 
I have played a healbot as well, one that in character wanted to be a healbot because she worshipped the nicer parts of Sarenrae and not the jihad parts.
 
Some games make playing healer fun. the original GuildWars for example. Not mainline D&D tho, IMO. Some of the psionic/martial adept stuff maybe.
 
I mean, when I play a healbot, I generally want to secondary support, but I also want direct heals/buffs. I was always super annoyed with 4e cause the Clerics spells are all like "melee attack the enemy, if you hit, hesl/buff" and it just wasn't what I wanted to do if I was healboting and discouraged me from playing healbots in 4e.

Basically, if I'm healbotting, I wanna healbot.
 
First session of the Lost Mine of Phandelver game I joined ran tonight. First session went extra long since character creation was finished up this session and a sixth player was added the day before. Fought through the Goblin Ambush and I had some terrible luck getting knocked out at the beginning since the DM gave out a free attack by the goblin I was fighting when I got a nat 1 which took off half my HP.

We took one of the ambushers prisoner and intended to dump him in a jail in Phandalin since no one wanted to execute him...only for him to escape because we kinda just ignored him and went about our business selling some supplies after being told there wasn't a jail and getting a room at the inn for the night.
 
Sydonai said:
Doesn't Binding also have some nice healing potential as well?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
yeah, but that's more in the line of usual "push button, receive bacon," you get from mainline spellcasting... As opposed to psionic "shared healing circuit" or martial "heal by smacking enemies".

Personally my favorite way to heal is probably the Prodigy's healing finisher - heal an amount based on how long you managed to run your combo. Not optimal, but definitely fun.
 
PF:
Alchemist, after getting scolded by the Cleric and Monk for laughing at an orc that was running away, on fire, after he set it on fire (and pissed on it hovering 30 ft up): You guys are giving these orcs way too much respect and honor. They are scum, and why are we burying them? Leave them like this, it's a good message"
[Herpderp being better derpderp]

Come upon a map with several red X's on them on the main tent, investigate, find halfling village, plundered and a home stuffed with little halfling corpses.

Should I "I told you so?" Y/N?
 
Havock said:
PF:
Alchemist, after getting scolded by the Cleric and Monk for laughing at an orc that was running away, on fire, after he set it on fire (and pissed on it hovering 30 ft up): You guys are giving these orcs way too much respect and honor. They are scum, and why are we burying them? Leave them like this, it's a good message"
[Herpderp being better derpderp]

Come upon a map with several red X's on them on the main tent, investigate, find halfling village, plundered and a home stuffed with little halfling corpses.

Should I "I told you so?" Y/N?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I confess, I'm not getting the told-you-so. I get the feeling that the party engaging in these shenenigans would cheerfully do the same to the halflings if the town stiffed them on an adventuring contract and tried to force the issue.

And more than that, if the implication is that the orcs are doing this...then yeah, the point there is that "Humanoids of the wrong shape, size, and coloration aren't really people." is a widely-held belief. It doesn't prove the alchemist wrong. You wanna prove the alchemist wrong, have the party meet a helpful missionary paladin orc going off to preach to his brethren who can offer them some aid and information on an unrelated quest, and let them chew on that (or, hey, decide that their previous quest is boring and holy orc is entertaining, and follow him around for a while providing color commentary).

---

Speaking of paladins, my sometime GM who ran a PF conversion of Tomb of Horrors also ran a conversion of Jacob's Well!

The plot of the module is that a sladdi (an extraplanar creature that, at least for the purposes of the module, remarkably resembles a xenomorph in its chestburstery, lurk-and-kill-things-for-food-to-grow-up-and-become-a-murder-machine sense) has infiltrated a fort in the middle of a winter storm, and is picking off people, and the (small, low-level) party needs to respond through the fear and paranoia.

Sadly for the adventure, however, I brought a Paladin-a-like built from the Path of War rules. That meant that not only did I have a 60' Detect Evil at will, but I also got to roll-twice-take-highest on my perception rolls, which meant that I inadvertently brought the one character type capable of trivializing the hunt for the creature. But aside from that, it was a very fun and atmospheric horror-esque romp.
 
Robert Liguori said:
The plot of the module is that a sladdi (an extraplanar creature that, at least for the purposes of the module, remarkably resembles a xenomorph in its chestburstery, lurk-and-kill-things-for-food-to-grow-up-and-become-a-murder-machine sense) has infiltrated a fort in the middle of a winter storm, and is picking off people, and the (small, low-level) party needs to respond through the fear and paranoia.

Sadly for the adventure, however, I brought a Paladin-a-like built from the Path of War rules. That meant that not only did I have a 60' Detect Evil at will, but I also got to roll-twice-take-highest on my perception rolls, which meant that I inadvertently brought the one character type capable of trivializing the hunt for the creature. But aside from that, it was a very fun and atmospheric horror-esque romp.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
...Um
Aren't Slaadi usually not Evil?
And capable of pretty good shape-shifting?
 
Sydonai said:
...Um
Aren't Slaadi usually not Evil?
And capable of pretty good shape-shifting?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Like I said, for the purposes of the module, since I thought that Sladdi were all CN all the time (except some weirdness around the black and white ones, but I might be misremembering). It might have been a weird 2e or older thing, but it was definitely a giant frog-monster that laid eggs in people that hatched into little lurkery tadpoles, who lurked, picked off people who wandered off, and ate them.
 
Robert Liguori said:
Like I said, for the purposes of the module, since I thought that Sladdi were all CN all the time (except some weirdness around the black and white ones, but I might be misremembering). It might have been a weird 2e or older thing, but it was definitely a giant frog-monster that laid eggs in people that hatched into little lurkery tadpoles, who lurked, picked off people who wandered off, and ate them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Basically the Grey Slaadi have an "evolution" thing they do where they turn into Death Slaadi, they become Evil at or just before that happening.
But those types of Slaad IIRC also have not-inconsiderable Sorcerer casting levels and SLAs.

Also Slaadi can have other Alignments, it's just that it's as rare as other Alignment-focused Outsiders having divergent Alignments.
 
Last edited:
Sydonai said:
I dunno, is this something that you would do to the Orcs?
Because it certainly sounds like it.

The point is; Be better than your enemies, don't sink to their level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Having fun while blasting the scum off the earth? That's not something my alchemist would ever do :V
It kinda helps (or doesn't?) that he doesn't really see maraudin greenskins as "real people", just some senseless menace to the world (they are the ones invading after all) that he can blow up and try out stuff on.

I mean, if they stopped being invading, mass-murdering dicks, there wouldn't be an issue. Probably.

@Robert Liguori The alchemist is yours truly: The rest of the party is on the no-fun allowed train, what with two LN (Cleric and Monk) members carrying a lot of vote, the Bloodrager being too nice and the Wizard being too polite :p
(I normally play on the good side of things, so it's kind of fun to play someone with a teflon-coated moral compass for a change* :V)

* Though not so much evil as "combat pragmatist" and "well-intentioned extremist".
 
Sydonai said:
...Um
Aren't Slaadi usually not Evil?
And capable of pretty good shape-shifting?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sure, but the thing is that Slaadi are more Chaotic in a similar sense (albeit diametrically opposed) as how Modrons are Lawful - that is to say, their mindsets are utterly alien, and Slaadi are unpredictable.

Nothing says a Slaad could not have simply decided it wanted to go on a spawning binge. Or it could have any other reason , including none at all.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top