|
Gau posted:I am having great difficulty pan-frying a steak to a good, solid rare. Does anyone have any tips? Ignore everyone else. Use any pan that's oven safe and isn't non-stick. Stick it in the oven at 500 degrees for about fifteen to twenty minutes. Take it out and put it on the burner on high. Salt the top of the steak and flip it onto the pan for two minutes. Salt the top and flip it over. After a minute, put if back in the overn for another two minutes. Take it out, put it on a plate, rest it for five minutes, and eat it. Then go roll up a barbarian and play 4th.
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
The issue with expertise dice is the same issue there's been with maneuvers in every edition other than 4th - when your choice is between "Do X" and "Do more damage", "Do X" is never the right tactical choice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 06:18
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:So instead I'll ask about hamburgers. I don't have a grill or anything, just some skillets (one cast iron, one not) and an electric stove, but I love me some hamburgers. The problem I have is that my efforts at cooking hamburgers always wind up being kind of lousy. Either they end up overcooking and turning dry and tough or they end up cooking too quickly on the outsides and getting burnt and blackened. http://aht.seriouseats.com/archives/2012/09/the-burger-lab-smashed-burgers-vs-smashing-burgers.html Please ignore anyone telling you to add egg and poo poo to a burger. That is a meatloaf sandwich. MadRhetoric posted:Unless you're a wizard: "Do more damage" is never the right tactical choice when your X is "end the encounter". If Fighters got the same "Save or gently caress You" maneuvers as Wizards got spells, I would be entirely content. Well, no, I wouldn't, but it'd be better than all the 3x variants and probably better than whatever we're getting in Next. quote:Both sides of this axiom are still true in 4e to certain extents: if you are a Striker, "Do more damage" is always the right decision. Unless you're a Warlock, then "Do X" is better than your damage until Paragon. Or you have something like the Rogue's Knockout. I shouldn't have said "Do more damage", I should have said "Do damage", because 90% of the time with maneuvers that was the choice you had to make, and I'm suspicious of Next doing any different.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
Lady Gaga posted:As I'm wont to say, every die rolled, every number added, every table consulted, represents an interference between the player and the interactive story that forms the very core of D&D. These are failures. I don't necessarily disagree with this idea, but if it's truly what you believe regarding RPGs, then probably D&D is not for you. Minimizing die rolls and table consulting has never been a thing in D&D - quite the opposite, in fact.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 06:23
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I think it's important to remember that D&D is just a brand. Brands are whatever the brand's owner chooses to define them as. The public can accept or reject the brand, but they don't get to decide if something is 'Coke' enough, or 'McDonald's' enough. How long will it take for someone to start referring to 4th edition as New Coke
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:But see my first post on the topic about what made WoW Warcraft. It wasn't JUST that blizzard put the name on it, but also that it shared the trappings and setting with the previous games. The mechanics were very different and could have been more different still without compromising the brand. My point is that it's not the mechanics that make the game D&D. Obviously they couldn't release Dresden Files RPG and put a D&D label on it and call it D&D. They need to keep the setting - the mechanics could change entirely. If you're asking what they absolutely need to keep at a bare minimum, I'd say they need to have Roleplaying (duh), Magic, Dragons, Dungeons, classic fantasy weaponry like swords and axes, Gods, Elves, Dwarves, Goblins, and some assortment of other fantasy races and monsters. Y'know, fantasy stuff - D&D is a fantasy RPG. I suppose if they kept all but a couple of those, that'd be fine too. I feel like the existence and widespread popularity of Darksun is sort of problematic for this theory.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:This was sort of the big divide that hit D&D between 2->3. 3.x doesn't have too many options. 3.x has too many options that are poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:The warlord is a combination of Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, Obi-wan Kenobi, and Mr. Miyagi. I have many favorite D&D characters, but I have to admit the warforged warlord named R Lee Armory probably makes the top 5.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
A thing both of my current 4e DMs have started doing is as soon as we attack a given defense on a given enemy, the number for that defense immediately goes up on the DM screen, so after that we know immediately if we hit or not. Saves some time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 09:04
|
|
|
Ewen Cluney posted:Anyone have any tips on how to cook veggies? There are a variety of ways to cook vegetables since there are about a million varieties of vegetables. But if you're ever in doubt, a good default is to put them in a pan, cover them with 1-2 tablespoons of a neutral oil and some salt, and roast 40-70 minutes at around 400 degrees.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
If I were designing 5th edition, I would make 4th, with the following modifications - 1) No feats. 2) At every level, you get one combat power and one utility power. Combat powers follow pretty much the same progression as regular 4th. Utility powers are much more freeform, and none of them have any concrete combat application. Thoughts?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
The Sin of Onan posted:Would you mind elaborating? I never played AD&D and this sounds pretty interesting. You got a certain number of "slots" for non-weapon proficiences at first level, and then gained more as you gained levels. The initial number was based on your class. Almost all of the "kits" in the "Complete X" series of books involved giving you bonus non-weapon proficiencies in addition to their other benefits. The proficiencies were associated with an attribute, and generally listed a number of things the proficiency allowed you to do with a "proficiency check", which meant applying a modifier to the associated skill and then rolling under that number on a d20. One of my favorite non-weapon proficiency related anecdotes involved the hunting skill. If you used it, the DM was supposed to roll a 10d100 to determine how many yards you were from prey, and then each successful proficiency check allowed you to get a specific number of yards closer to it (I want to say 100) without spooking it. The idea was that you would be able to close to decent bow range and be able to snipe a deer or something. The associated ability was Wisdom. I was playing in a campaign that had no rangers, but two Paladins. Out in the wilderness and low on food, one of them realized that he had the hunting proficiency, and an 18 Wisdom. So he proceeded to hunt deer with a broadsword.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
There was also a "Danger Sense" proficiency that I took while playing a Lizardman, which occasionally resulted in the DM rolling behind the screen and then looking over at me and saying "Lizard Sense... Tingling!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
The Sin of Onan posted:This sounds pretty rad, and also quite a good way to get your players thinking about their characters and their lives outside of beating up goblins. More people should do that. In every discussion of campaigns online, I realize that I've been tremendously fortunate in terms of DMs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 09:48
|
|
|
Many people want to play big, burly swordsmen because they personally couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. Many people want to play slick, smooth-talking charmers because they personally couldn't talk an alligator into biting them. If you dispense with social skills in favor of "just roleplay[ing] out conversations naturally" you've prevented them from being able to do so.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:My idea would be if you go through the effort of coming up with and acting out an intelligent and convincing attack YOU SUCCEED. If you can't be bothered, YOU ROLL DICE. Binary pass/fail. gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2013 08:51
|
|
|
Payndz posted:Has anyone ever played a game of D&D, of whatever edition, precisely to RAW? Pathfinder Society is fairly popular.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Someone tell me if I'm wrong, because I really don't want to watch 3.5 hours of interviews to find out: Is it true that Mearls was once asked what Next had to offer 4e fans, and his response was a befuddled approximation of "Well, you can play it, I guess?" iirc this was when he was running the Penny Arcade guys through some playtests and Gabe basically asked what it had to offer him as a guy who wasn't unsatisfied with 4th.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Mearls' thought process begins and ends with "The guys that post on ENworld are gonna think this is SO COOL."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
As a side-note on the "synergy" thing, in addition to 4e's Swordmage, Pathfinder's Magus is actually a decent example of this. It's a Fighter/Wizard that actually plays like a wizfightmagicguy as opposed to being a subpar fighter one round and a subpar wizard the next.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:It was a horrible, hosed up situation all around, and I can hardly fault anyone at WotC for letting the project drop after that. I can certainly fault them for making a virtual tabletop a big selling point of their new edition and then hiring a grand total of one guy to make it happen.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:I've had my team leader die mid-project. It was a really really lovely experience, because while we weren't exactly friends, we'd get beer and pizzas and play Quake after work and stuff. He didn't kill himself or anything, he slipped over at home, hit his head, and never woke up. It was a stupid random accident instead of a murder/suicide, but he was still dead. The project got finished, because one of the project manager's mantras was "what if you get hit by a bus, could people pick up your work". Yeah seriously, I am an IT guy. My department regularly has conversations regarding "What if X dies?" If your project goes tits up because one person vanishes, you have done a lovely job of planning.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:
In Actual Dying Earth Books, the greatest wizard in the entire loving world could memorize six (or seven, if you read that particular story) spells. Most really powerful wizards were limited to four. Coincidentally, 4 is also the number of Dailies a 20th level wizard would have in 4e.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:4e has too many barriers to entry (particularly for anyone new to RPGs, but also for anyone unfamiliar with 3.5, in my experience) and too many traps in the form of "do this or else your maths are hosed and you're gimped." You have a drastically different definition of "gimped" than I do.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:I had a first time RPG player (a goon) this weekend; suffice it to say, assumptions like "my warforged should have metal armor and a warhammer" gimped his attack bonus enough to make him useless. Unless your player is playing a wizard or something, a warforged with metal armor and a warhammer doesn't gimp his attack bonus. Is he a moron, or are you?
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:He made an artificer all on his own with the online builder, I showed him how to fix it. So because a guy you know said "I want my warforged to use metal armor and a warhammer, so I will make him a class which is proficient in neither of these", you consider it "easy" to gimp a character in 4e? I would be fascinated to hear which combat-focused RPGs you consider it "hard" to gimp a character in.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Splicer posted:A Warforged is a magic robot made of metal. "4e doesn't allow you to effectively make several simple character types that it really should" and "4e makes it easy to accidentally gimp your character" are two entirely different statements. The fact that somebody said "I want my warforged to use metal armor and a warhammer, so I will make him a class which is proficient in neither of these" is certainly a demonstration of the first, but it does not even come close to demonstrating the second, which is what the poster I was replying to initially stated and what I was in fact objecting to.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
A 17 in prime stat is also workable, but I do agree going 16 or lower is pretty problematic.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:e This is like how literally every culture in the world has made something that can be described as a dumpling.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Honestly, that looks like it'd probably be tasty (I mean, it's eggs with salt, pepper, butter, and chives) but texture-wise that's not really what I'd consider the perfect scrambled egg. I never thought I'd say this about a food but it looks too creamy. Perhaps it's my uncultured upbringing at work but I like my scrambled eggs with a bit more "tooth" to them. Everyone's own taste for scrambled eggs is different, but Ramsay's recipe is a really good one to do for practice every now and then because it gives you the ability to do creamy eggs for a number of other things like quiche.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 07:51
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:All that stuff was done away with without any thought put into why it was there in the first place. This didn't even work in the editions it started in because everybody just played elves.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
KillerQueen posted:Wasn't it a thing in 3.5 that if you were grappled or restrained you couldn't cast most spells without special feats? Yes, which is why after a certain level caster-caster fights were decided by who cast Evard's Black Tentacles first.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Mexican Deathgasm posted:I've always loved D&D because it's a toolbox that you can create your own world with, with easily adjusted rules. Ahahahhahahahhahahahahahahahahah.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:I'm saying that Next's probable success will rest entirely on how well it is marketed to older players (pre 4E players) and to new players. For older players, the kind of statements they have been making work well. Probably because they set out to figure out what ambiguous statements about the feel of D&D to make from the beginning - someone still playing 2E, and to a lesser extent still playing 3E or 3.5E, does not care about a more polished rules system. Someone still playing 2E in the year 2013 is not going to play D&D Next.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:You should; it's ENWorld. Mearls has been cozying up with Morrus since even before 5e was announced. fatherdog posted:I'm pretty sure Mearls' thought process begins and ends with "The guys that post on ENworld are gonna think this is SO COOL."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
moths posted:That's another thing, if I put olive oil in the pan it would turn the kitchen into a James Bond smokescreen. Pan got too drat hot. If your pan is hot enough to make olive oil smoke, it is too hot to be cooking eggs on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
goldjas posted:I still don't agree at all that combat in 4E was too long. You are basically alone on this. I adore 4e and think 4e tactical combat is the best combat system D&D has ever come up with, but even I agree that it sometimes takes way too long. quote:If you played a 3E combat without the casters SoDing or SoSing everything No one has ever done this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
Zhulik posted:That made me immediately think of Rope Trick, but apparently as of the most recent available playtest packet, it's a level 2 spell that lasts for an hour with no mention of duration scaling. Could this be the first mundane feature that cannot be replicated/obsoleted with a low-level spell? After all the emphasis on "Classic spells" in the surveys there's absolutely no way they're not bringing back Leomund's Tiny Hut and all the rest.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:4th edition threw that all out. Yeah I understand why, Fighters and Thieves are just boring in comparison but as I saw it the 4th edition solution to this was to make spellcasters equally boring. Make all of their combat spells just a bunch of numbers, make them advance linearly, make them really similar to all the other classes. None of this is true. Either you are basing your opinion on what someone else told you about 4th, or you're very bad at reading.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
Rutibex posted:You can tell me how varied and tactically interesting the Wizard in 4th edition is until you are blue in the face, but don't try and tell me that there was a place for my style of play in 4th edition. The meta "role" of the Wizard as DM-lite was entirely eliminated. All the fluff trappings are still there but it's not the same thing at all. This is what people mean when they say 4th edition "isn't D&D", for a person who has always played a Wizard it isn't the same game at all. fatherdog posted:None of this is true. Either you are basing your opinion on what someone else told you about 4th, or you're very bad at reading.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 03:49
|
|