|
I looked through the 20 different CR4 monsters because I was thinking you could just re-skin one of them as a Greater Gargoyle and the stats are honestly all over the place. For AC, the Black Pudding is the lowest at 7, then the Helmed Horror has 20, and then the rest are scattered about between 11 to 17 with an average of 13.85 For HP, the Flameskull has 40, then the Weretiger has 120, and the average is about 75 The damage is going to be off because I didn't bother with looking up spells and abilities, but the Succubus/Incubus does the least at 6, while the Ettin tops out at 28 (two strikes of 2d8+5) I also found the rolled HP to be really weird: one creature uses d4s, most of them use d8s, but there's a few d10s and a single d12, and almost all of them have +x amounts that are worth multiple hit dice, but even those range from +12 to +44
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:Sweet I'll just run the encounter until the party loses enough HP that I feel like they've had fun and then have the monsters die. The advice I give you right now, I give in honesty and without any facetious attitude: I don't believe 5E is the game you are looking for. At the risk of sounding like "That guy", if you absolutely want to stick with DnD, I earnestly push you to give 4E another chance. More importantly, give it another chance while in the driver's seat. This is a suggestion built from reading every post you have made in this thread about every problem and everything you have stated you WANT to do with and get from a DnD game. This isn't a "4E is better than 5E" argument, this is simply an honest observation of what you are looking for in a DnD game and I can state with fourteen years of DnD experience (Playing AND running) that everything you are looking for you will find with no extra hassle in 4E; something that 5E, right now, will not provide.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Trip report: crits in 5e explicitly state that all damage dice for the attack are rolled twice. So eg. rogue sneak attack dice are doubled when a crit happens. I know 4e (at least as a base rule) just went with "crits are max dice damage", and 3e let you only roll 2x on the weapon type's damage dice and extra dice stayed at 1x (or at least that's my recollection of how we always played it). So I'm pretty sure it's a new thing at least as a core rule. Anyway, this new method led to an interesting situation in our HotDQ game this weekend (chapter 1 spoilers, yes, THAT fight) We got to the point where the party chose a champion to fight the half dragon in single combat and it ended up being the paladin. Now, maybe I mis-balanced this but I had doled out xp before this encounter and so the party had reached 2nd level for this. Anyway, the paladin came out of the gate with thunderous smite for a bonus action and divine smite attached to the hit. 3d8 +2d6 + str mod. Ouch, but for 2nd level it's still pretty in line for blowing your only 2 spell slots in one turn. Now, the result was a hit not a crit, but RAW that crit would have been 6d8 + 4d6 + str mod (!). In the context of that fight, the dragon dude is set up to be a huge favorite to finish the chapter on a dramatic note and sparking a fun rivalry that the party will get to revisit later. And that ended up happening, but the alpha strike our pally laid out took over 50% of his hp and with some variance on the subsequent rolls the dragon dude was nearly down himself when he finally dropped the pally. I wouldn't have minded him losing considering he wasn't as over-tuned due to the champion being 2nd level instead of first, but reflecting on it he very easily could have been one-shot if that attack rolled a crit. I mean, I guess I'm not really unhappy about how crits are played in 5e, it's more dangerous for everyone after all, but I imagine on some boss fights there might be a lot of builds that are prepared to deal an alpha-strike where you gain advantage and stack as many dice into the attack as you can into one hit. Paladins, at least to me at this point, seem the most poised to dish out those mega hits. EDIT: had the dice wrong for those abilities Bhaal fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I looked through the 20 different CR4 monsters because I was thinking you could just re-skin one of them as a Greater Gargoyle and the stats are honestly all over the place. Hit die is based on creature size- tiny is d4, small is d6, medium is d8, large is d10, huge is d12, gargantuan is d20. Bonus HP are equal to your Constitution modifier multiplied by your total number of hit dice. As far as I can tell, a creature's total number of hit dice is entirely arbitrary and seems only designed to boost up HP totals to a broad-but-presently-undefined HP bracket per CR. Proficiency bonus is based on CR, but saves/skills are determined arbitrarily, as are ability scores. Some creatures get to double their proficiency bonus to certain skills because of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
LightWarden posted:Hit die is based on creature size- tiny is d4, small is d6, medium is d8, large is d10, huge is d12, gargantuan is d20. Bonus HP are equal to your Constitution modifier multiplied by your total number of hit dice. As far as I can tell, a creature's total number of hit dice is entirely arbitrary and seems only designed to boost up HP totals to a broad-but-presently-undefined HP bracket per CR. Proficiency bonus is based on CR, but saves/skills are determined arbitrarily, as are ability scores. Some creatures get to double their proficiency bonus to certain skills because of reasons. This is essentially how it worked in 3E, except now it's got even more arbitrary variance. 3E would often end up with undead with twice or three times their CR worth of hit dice to make up for the fact that they had wizard BAB for some reason, no Con modifier, and were vulnerable to turning. Nothing makes sense at all, it's just about how the designer felt that morning when he was statting up the monster and trying to make the original verisimilitude assumptions made by the system jive with what they wanted to actually see in play. Total mess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:This is essentially how it worked in 3E, except now it's got even more arbitrary variance. 3E would often end up with undead with twice or three times their CR worth of hit dice to make up for the fact that they had wizard BAB for some reason, no Con modifier, and were vulnerable to turning. Nothing makes sense at all, it's just about how the designer felt that morning when he was statting up the monster and trying to make the original verisimilitude assumptions made by the system jive with what they wanted to actually see in play. Total mess. Building zombies using player creation rules really is the stupidest loving thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Vorpal Cat posted:Building anything using player creation rules really is the stupidest loving thing. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Building Monster is supposed to be in the DMG. But that is far off at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Building Monster is supposed to be in the DMG. But that is far off at the moment. I have to admit every time someone brings up the fact that the DMG/MM/PH are being released so far apart I boggle for a minute or two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:I have to admit every time someone brings up the fact that the DMG/MM/PH are being released so far apart I boggle for a minute or two. I personally find it better then what 4e did which was delay all 3 books until they were all ready.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:I have to admit every time someone brings up the fact that the DMG/MM/PH are being released so far apart I boggle for a minute or two. Same. It seems like such a bizarre set of circumstances. I mean I'm probably going to burn out on this game before the game is even out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I personally find it better then what 4e did which was delay all 3 books until they were all ready. You really think the MM was ready? We've the worst of all worlds here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:I personally find it better then what 4e did which was delay all 3 books until they were all ready. How come? Isn't having all the reading material for running a game released together a good thing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Bhaal posted:Anyway, this new method led to an interesting situation in our HotDQ game this weekend (chapter 1 spoilers, yes, THAT fight) That is exactly what happened in our HODQ game in episode 3. With the GWF feat thrown in. The paladin crit for 67(!). And thanks to a divination wizard with a 20 on their portent, they knew the crit was coming and loaded up everything they could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:How come? Isn't having all the reading material for running a game released together a good thing? You just need to follow these four simple steps to understand why you're wrong: (1) Start with the assumption that the next release of a playtest packet / preview ruleset / free ruleset / beginner ruleset / actual rulebook will fix everything that's wrong with the game. Make sure you let everyone know, because they might not realise this is true. (2) Ignore all flaws currently in the rules because they'll be fixed soon (see (1)). This will require you to make mental notes about what to do when X broken thing happens. (3) When a rule is not fixed in the next release of <whatever>, keep doing whatever you did in (2). Assume that's what the rule actually says. Keep this up until you start believing it. (4) When people say a rule is hosed, you could pretend that it really says something else or that your "interpretation" (2) is what was really meant, but people will call you a loving idiot if you do this so it's really best to keep repeating (1). Congratulations, you are now enjoying D&D wait for the Next book. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
The original AD&D was released one book a year (MM in 1978, PHB in 1979, DMG in 1980). Mearls is just trying to bring back that old classic D&D "feel".
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Yep, and it would have been thoroughly impossible to play AD&D without the DMG. Not "hard", not "wait and see if that's fixed", impossible. I guess you could use it as a collection of houserules for your B/X game or start figuring out how you were going to convert everything, but playing the actual game wasn't something you could do without the PHB and DMG. Strangely, the MM wasn't that important because the DM had a list of all monsters and their combat stats, but pretty much all the information about how to do everything other than build a character is in the DMG (but you couldn't even do that with just the PHB). Let's look at the very first PHB page with actual rules on it, which is page 9, in the very first paragraph, which is titled Character Abilities. quote:...The range of these abilities is between 3 and 18. The premise of the game is that each player character is above average - at least in some respects - and has superior potential. Furthermore, it is essential to the character's survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics. Each ability score is determined by random number generation. The referee has several methods of how this random number generation should be accomplished suggested to him or her in the DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE. The Dungeon Master will inform you as to which method you may use to determine your characters abilities. That's all it says about how to roll your scores. There's similar passages with a similar lack of rules about other completely unimportant stuff like how to figure out if an attack hits. There's no Thac0 in AD&D, there's no "1d20+mods, beat AC" there's tables to roll on, those tables are in the DMG. Monsters use a different one from most PCs, too. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
FMguru posted:The original AD&D was released one book a year (MM in 1978, PHB in 1979, DMG in 1980). Mearls is just trying to bring back that old classic D&D "feel". Or if you were in the secret playtest and saw the emails you'd know Mearls can't turn in his homework on time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Yep, and it would have been thoroughly impossible to play AD&D without the DMG. Not "hard", not "wait and see if that's fixed", impossible. I guess you could use it as a collection of houserules for your B/X game or start figuring out how you were going to convert everything, but playing the actual game wasn't something you could do without the PHB and DMG. Strangely, the MM wasn't that important because the DM had a list of all monsters and their combat stats, but pretty much all the information about how to do everything other than build a character is in the DMG (but you couldn't even do that with just the PHB).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Yep, and it would have been thoroughly impossible to play AD&D without the DMG. Not "hard", not "wait and see if that's fixed", impossible. I guess you could use it as a collection of houserules for your B/X game Which was the best way to use the AD&D rules. Especially given that Gygax invented AD&D to cut Arneson out of the royalties (and even went to court over it).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:"extra rules for Basic/Original" is exactly how lots of us did it. neonchameleon posted:Which was the best way to use the AD&D rules. Especially given that Gygax invented AD&D to cut Arneson out of the royalties (and even went to court over it). That's more or less how I did it too, yes. My point was that AD&D wasn't even a playable game until the DMG was released. If you look at AD&D as though the original idea was to have a couple of books of optional/advanced rules for b/x and then it turned into its own thing ("hey... if I release this as a whole game I get to keep all the money"), then the way the DMG is laid out looks a lot less... poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
quote:How come? Isn't having all the reading material for running a game released together a good thing? if they release together its because they are stockpiling books and not releasing them so they can do it all at once. if they release separately, they get to advertise each individual release as a separate thing and keep the buzz going.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
quote:I'm kind of sold on the flyer idea, too. But maybe after taking half damage, the flyer has to take at least a full move towards the ground, and can no longer gain altitude.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:
Or maybe, just maybe, rulebooks that are dependant on each developed can be developed together? As in, you develop a solid core game, flesh out out about evenly, then ship everything at once. Or maybe even abandon the outdated PHB/MM/DMG model entirely! Once the first book is in people's hands, it's pencils down. Your homework should be done by now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
moths posted:Or maybe even abandon the outdated PHB/MM/DMG model entirely! It's not like D&D would even be the first RPG to do this if they did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
True, but then it wouldn't "feel like D&D" and DMs would cry about players seeing magic items or monster stats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
moths posted:True, but then it wouldn't "feel like D&D" and DMs would cry about players seeing magic items or monster stats. Wait, there's even a contingent of people that still insist that DM-ONLY material is a thing? I figured even most grows realized that wasn't really popular or desirable anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?323060-Should-magic-items-stay-out-of-the-next-PHB That url is basically a tl;dr of what it links to. Edit: it's funny because the arguments work better for putting wizard and cleric spells behind the DMG wall. moths fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
I can see part of the problem with magic items being in player material. It can lead to the 3rd edition problem (and 4th and pathfinder) of the "Magic item shop", or having builds that depend on receiving such and such item at a particular level. But really that's likely just a problem with the design of those games in general.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
moths posted:http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?323060-Should-magic-items-stay-out-of-the-next-PHB quote:The 3e DMG also had the Leadership feat and prestige classes. Frankly, I'd be happy if they threw a few spells in there too. Wouldn't it change the mentality of the game if Raise Dead were in the DMG? Gate? Maybe the whole variety of "ritual"-type spells?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:I can see part of the problem with magic items being in player material. It can lead to the 3rd edition problem (and 4th and pathfinder) of the "Magic item shop", or having builds that depend on receiving such and such item at a particular level. I don't really see how this changes just because the player has to look up the items in a different book.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
Because THOSE ARE DADDY'S BOOKS, HANDS OFF. This is explicitly who D&D is for now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
moths posted:Because THOSE ARE DADDY'S BOOKS, HANDS OFF. You mean when you go to the gaming store, they don't ask to see your DM card to ensure you're really allowed to handle those books?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
I usually show two forms of government issued ID and my RPGA card, but I'd prefer that to living in a world where player fraud "spoils the mystique" and erodes my DM power.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Even if magic items are the DM's sole loving decision, you should pay attention to what the players will find cool and try to put that in unless it's ridiculous by the standards of the campaign. It even says so in the AD&D DMG*. What kind of dickhole puts in a stack of stuff nobody wants? *Admittedly, it's buried in the paragraphs of dense prose that can be mostly summed up as "don't ever use the ~15% of this book devoted to randomly placing magic items", so it's easy to miss.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Even if magic items are the DM's sole loving decision, you should pay attention to what the players will find cool and try to put that in unless it's ridiculous by the standards of the campaign. It even says so in the AD&D DMG*. What kind of dickhole puts in a stack of stuff nobody wants? Absolutely, but part of the fun we used to have was our DM rolling on the massive random item tables from the four compendiums. A randomly rolled Deck of Many Things can throw a campaign in a completely different direction. Ditto for an Orb of Dragonkind. That sort of thing is awesome (to me, YMMV).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Absolutely, but part of the fun we used to have was our DM rolling on the massive random item tables from the four compendiums. A randomly rolled Deck of Many Things can throw a campaign in a completely different direction. Ditto for an Orb of Dragonkind. That sort of thing is awesome (to me, YMMV). I don't have a problem with random items if they're interesting, artifact-like things that can shape a game. It's a little silly for small things though, like when you keep rolling bows/knives/flails/etc. no one in the party wants so they just throw it in the loot wagon to sell later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Whatever one may think about Pathfinder, at least they had the good sense to release all the rules in one fat book. Remember that AD&D 1e was still only one step up from a dungeon-crawl, and the logistics of hauling away wagonloads of golden candlesticks and +1 daggers was basically touted as a game feature. Some groups love that sort of thing; Diablo and the like wouldn't be so popular if people didn't enjoy collecting and sifting through huge piles of garbage loot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
To be fair those games have evolved to where sifting through these piles had never been faster or easier. They work to make sure your time away from killing is minimized and time spent judging upgrades is also minimized.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
Ixjuvin posted:Whatever one may think about Pathfinder, at least they had the good sense to release all the rules in one fat book.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:57
|
|
