|
LFK posted:Something I'm not quite sure of, though, is that if my Con goes up do I get back-pay on the hit points? Yea, they mention it under the constitution heading I'm pretty sure.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
LFK posted:Aside from the 10-11, 12-13, 15-16, 19-20 clumps (lol, wtf?) it's basically 4e's guidelines, just presented in a less clear and less coherent manner. Is this using actual numbers from the available materials? What do the different colors represent? Does this assume Monsters only use At-Will abilities? EDIT: Oh are the colors to make it easy to see when Monster DPR is roughly equal to total HP?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
LFK posted:Aside from the 10-11, 12-13, 15-16, 19-20 clumps (lol, wtf?) it's basically 4e's guidelines, just presented in a less clear and less coherent manner. Neat chart. Monster dpr looks to be totally bonkers. Also: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Misandu posted:Is this using actual numbers from the available materials? What do the different colors represent? Does this assume Monsters only use At-Will abilities? It's extrapolated from the Starter Set numbers. Anything above CR 8 is suspect, but since PC toughness doesn't really surge in the same way as their damage output or ability to respond to damage, I feel somewhat safe assuming it holds steady. I did a bunch of comparisons and found that at-will output damage was pretty reliably ~65% of a median characters' HP (1d8+2) at every level I had data for except level 1. This doesn't reflect any changes in to-hit or AC/Saves, though, so I think the numbers are accurate-ish, but it's not a pure reflection of how hazardous monsters are relative to PC level. I also didn't factor in burst damage because I don't have enough monsters to compare. And, yes, the colour coding is there to show when DPR is roughly equal to total HP, so you can see that against a level 5 party a CR 9 creature has high enough expected DPR to knock out PCs with d10's or less every round.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
LFK posted:One thing I think I screwed up: this is my "should" chart, not my "is" chart. The only difference is that this is what CR 1 DPR should be, not what it is. In reality CR 1 DPR is 10. Though if you lump all CR ≤1 creatures together the average is pretty close to 7. Interesting, I'd be interested in the comparison chart. AKA, expected DPR of a 4 man iconic party (Rogue, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric) assuming normal use of daily resources etc, and see if this math even matches up. Basically, PCs can take so many hits, monsters can take so many hits. Does this math actually match up to provide a useful metric? Are all fights supposed to last 2-3 rounds? Exactly HOW terrible is it to take an action to NOT deal damage in combat, especially at higher level? At what point does inflated monster HP make save-or-die spells the optimum thing to cast?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Got the terrain base cut out, marked and the room bases cut out. This way I can put the rooms down one at a time and keep them out of sight until the players are actually near them. Next up is cutting the floor areas out and placing the tiles in them.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:Interesting, I'd be interested in the comparison chart. AKA, expected DPR of a 4 man iconic party (Rogue, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric) assuming normal use of daily resources etc, and see if this math even matches up. Basically, PCs can take so many hits, monsters can take so many hits. Does this math actually match up to provide a useful metric? Are all fights supposed to last 2-3 rounds? Exactly HOW terrible is it to take an action to NOT deal damage in combat, especially at higher level? At what point does inflated monster HP make save-or-die spells the optimum thing to cast? Well we will have to see some more monsters to tell I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Quadratic_Wizard posted:Neat chart. Monster dpr looks to be totally bonkers. Also: Because they couldn't just say your HP is [whatever you roll each level]+[level*CON mod] 
P.d0t fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Jul 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Because they couldn't just say your HP is [whatever you roll each level]+[level*CON mod] Yeah, that block of text could easily be about, ah, four times shorter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Attribute damage is back?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
moths posted:Attribute damage is back? It's all back baby.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Because they couldn't just say your HP is [whatever you roll each level]+[level*CON mod] This is easily the thing I hate the most about most rpgs in general. With some effort, one could make an easy to read stat block for nearly everything in the game. It could allow someone to just glance and obtain all relevant information with little involvement. Instead, we get a form of writing which was designed with the expectation of high reader involvement..
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Covok posted:This is easily the thing I hate the most about most rpgs in general. With some effort, one could make an easy to read stat block for nearly everything in the game. It could allow someone to just glance and obtain all relevant information with little involvement. Instead, we get a form of writing which was designed with the expectation of high reader involvement.. The neat, concise presentation of 4e rules - especially powers - was often held against it by people who felt that everything being presented the same way meant that everything was the same.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:The neat, concise presentation of 4e rules - especially powers - was often held against it by people who felt that everything being presented the same way meant that everything was the same. Seriously, though, RPGs would be better off if they took a page from 4e's book re: clarity of rules. I mean, it certainly wasn't perfect (though they tightened the wording up every book release), but just having clearly denoted rules blocks (the layout of powers is unmatched in RPGs) and unambiguous statements, as well as removing intrusive fluff (there is no goddamn reason to use feet to measure distance if you only measure it in 5 ft. increments and mandate a grid), put it leagues ahead of any other RPG.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Sorry, wrong thread. Edit: I guess since I already posted. I don't feel presenting information in a uniform manner makes the information uniform. I feel clarity in a rules book should come first. Since most rule books are used as reference books, I feel this becomes even more important. Covok fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Jul 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Because they couldn't just say your HP is [whatever you roll each level]+[level*CON mod] You don't even need to sacrifice the "natural language" either! "Your Maximum Hit Points are equal to: [Die roll]+[level*CON mod]. If your Con score changes during the course of the game then your Hit Point maximum changes too, as though you had the new bonus from 1st level."
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
IIRC even the pathfinder beginners box uses a lot of 4e-style formatting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
moths posted:Attribute damage is back?  Vampires and Stirges just reduce your max HP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:Good news! "Okay wait... my attack goes down, and my damage, and my strength save, and I don't qualify for my feats anymore..." EDIT: Less glib: how much stuff changes when you lose an Ability Score now? Mendrian fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jul 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:"Okay wait... my attack goes down, and my damage, and my strength save, and I don't qualify for my feats anymore..." Your to-hit, your damage, and your strength save. I don't think it effects feats in any way, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Motherfuckers. This is People's Exhibit A that bad ideas were implemented. I cannot wait for the Barbarian so we can go back to having three character sheets for regular, raging, and recovering.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Don't forget heavy armor's giving -10 ft speed when you don't meet the str prereqs, or if you're encumbered according to the variant rule for that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:Good news! What's this from, btw? Please tell me it's an early thing and there is not really stat damage. Please?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
lol at it's total immunity to fighters
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Stat damage Makes Sense and is an elegant representation overall. Now, as a mechanic as found in 3e and (probably) 5e, bleh, but I feel like if you're going to have stats you might as well also throw in stat damage and figure out a way to make it work. One nice way would be to have far fewer things dependent on calculations involving stats.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Oh for gently caress's sake. Secret Monster Manual circa 06/2014
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
zachol posted:Stat damage Makes Sense and is an elegant representation overall. You apply debuffs to attack and damage rolls - the derived numbers actually used in play - and leave the stats the gently caress alone. The game doesn't need yet more ways to bypass hit points. LongDarkNight posted:Secret Monster Manual circa 06/2014 e: and haha, one of these dudes means a peasant village dies and the entire world gets turned into shadows just like in 3e. dwarf74 fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Jul 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:lol at it's total immunity to fighters Nah, resistance is half damage. It's still a contributor of the Cleric & Wizard power hour by damaging the 'Dump Stat' that only affects Fighters and anyone dumb enough to use weapons without Finesse, but this is counterbalanced by __________ .
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Here's how you make it work. I guess "stat damage" in my mind occupies the same semantic area as "traps." Directly tying it into the combat minigame (attack, damage, hp) doesn't work all the way because you want it to have broader consequences. Like, ideally in my mind, stat damage would never happen in combat, it would just be those debuffs. But, out of combat, as a really persistent debuff when you have time to redo the calculations anyway, it's sort of attractive. But that assumes a playstyle where traps and resource management and other out of combat hassles are a major factor. Or, even, "stat damage" would have simplified modifiers that only apply in combat. Out of combat -1 to str mod is easy to represent, since generally you'd be directly rolling str (maybe with a proficiency bonus) anyway, an easy reminder to when to apply the -1. In combat it's more complex, so then the combat-only penalties apply.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
It's worth dollar sign XP, though! Think of the haul!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
jesus christ Well I guess it's a playtest but still. Or was this in the "things have lots of XP values, not just the same amount depending on CR" stage? Was that actually a stage or did I misinterpret something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:It's worth dollar sign XP, though! Think of the haul! is that a placeholder or what
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:is that a placeholder or what yes it's a placeholder
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
It's stealth isn't so great that it'll auto beat passive perception even in dim light/darkness vs PCs with decent wisdom and/or perception proficiency. They're hardly immune to fighters with such lovely health and low AC, even with resistance. A guy with a big weapon could maybe two shot them, definitely three shot. I'd think a few Shadows would be scarier against guys who dump strength, otherwise the stat reduction goes away after any rest. Might even be worth using Dodge against these guys if they have a chance to 3 shot you with no chance of healing besides Greater Restoration, a 5th level spell that PCs won't have til level 9.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
We don't balance the game for magic items and assume you'll never need them! *prints monsters that require magic items to kill*
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:We don't balance the game for magic items and assume you'll never need them! Ah yes, the Vault of the Dracolich Flesh Golem. Gooooood times.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Speaking of needing magic weapons to pierce resistances, the Magic Weapon spell got nerfed. Now its 1 hour max duration and concentration. Bonus action instead of proper action to cast now, though, so I guess the party wizard can maybe get one low with a cantrip for the rogue to finish off, then just let the fighter go to town while they hide so their concentration doesn't get disrupted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
RPZip posted:Your to-hit, your damage, and your strength save. I don't think it effects feats in any way, though. You might not qualify for some multiclassing though... interesting..
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
I think you guys are overacting to this. It does not last that long and is far more deadly to Wizards and the like due to the fact they have lower strength scores. Also it does not take magic to kill. Also Wizards are not that great in this edition. They are useful and good but they need support or they will get squished. Concentration also helps keep them balanced along with the fact that they have far fewer spells. Unlike in 3rd were 4 wizards would be the best party here all 4 classes would be the best party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
I have to assume that poster MonsterEnvy is under the effect of a Charm Person spell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 05:44
|
|
