I have maybe a dozen fun items with larger blades someone might like to borrow for such a special occasion.. I dont recommend the dragon handled one, the grip is nasty and the gladius is dull, but a couple of the Katana are live steel and so is that Knights dagger, the ninjato is a stage piece. My bow has decent poundage but my wifes I wouldnt recommend...
I could equip a fair sized party or one ranger ... but you would have to be careful which ones you grabbed
WOW a LARP flash back to college days, I approve. The AD&D flash backs the forum have been giving me arent as pleasant
Some rules that can help: - Hardwire a phases mechanism into boss monsters, through some kind of parallel hp system. - Provide rules for piecework creatures that work well within the general framework of the edition. - Introduce rules for rewarding improvisation and using the opponent's skills against him within the framework of the edition; these rules should be particularly rewarding against boss monsters. - Provide rules for minion spawning as part of another monster. - Provide rules for hazards and traps spawning as part of another monster. - Provide numerous examples of challenges and bosses in the rules, and perhaps a random table with boss ideas.
Above all though I think the important thing is to have these rules inside the books. It's mostly a metagame thing, but I think it's important: if the rules are in the book, the players will expect them. This goes a long way to determine the mindset of players going through a boss battle. If they know improvisation is rewarded by the system, they'll improvise, for instance. If they know boss battles have all kinds of tricks, they'll be waiting for those tricks, rather than mindlessly bogging down the boss' hps one hit at a time...
Are you interested in an online 4E game on Sunday? Contact me with a PM!
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Some rules that can help: - Hardwire a phases mechanism into boss monsters, through some kind of parallel hp system. - Provide rules for piecework creatures that work well within the general framework of the edition. - Introduce rules for rewarding improvisation and using the opponent's skills against him within the framework of the edition; these rules should be particularly rewarding against boss monsters. - Provide rules for minion spawning as part of another monster. - Provide rules for hazards and traps spawning as part of another monster. - Provide numerous examples of challenges and bosses in the rules, and perhaps a random table with boss ideas.
Above all though I think the important thing is to have these rules inside the books. It's mostly a metagame thing, but I think it's important: if the rules are in the book, the players will expect them. This goes a long way to determine the mindset of players going through a boss battle. If they know improvisation is rewarded by the system, they'll improvise, for instance. If they know boss battles have all kinds of tricks, they'll be waiting for those tricks, rather than mindlessly bogging down the boss' hps one hit at a time...
I think one other big pices that should never be assumed is to know your players, and know the capabilities of their characters. That tower I spoke of has wrecked stairs, and mainly is engineered to be climbed by traversing wide spans and holes in the floor to get to the top; my players have either teleportation or good enough athletics that they should be able to find a way across those spans, and that's the way the tower was made, to cater to their specific abilities. Likewise, I know the player who plays the barbarian loves being reckless, so I gave the dragon an eliptical patern so it would fly close to the tower and then dip down, giving that player a chance to leap atop the dragon. That kind of thing not only creates the king of engagement in video games, but also in films.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- )
Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right. fun quotesShow
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?
Well, I need to start apologizing to about 50 players...
Wow, thats harsh!
Usually I just aim to kill the characters but to actually kill the players...
Well yeah, kill the characters, then when the players are mourning and weeping you come up behind them....
[Note: Nothing in this post (or any of my posts for that matter) are an admission of guilt.]
So who wants to start up a game, I'll DM!
Gives a new spin to the phrase, "killer DM."
I have a t-shirt that says, "GMs don't kill characters. No, wait, that's wrong - we do."
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling
Defenders: We ARE the wall!
I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D.
Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!
@Garthanos, Kalnaur, DoctorBadWolf, and Leichenreiter: I think we just have different play styles. That's cool. If you think 4e is the most awesome thing ever, that's sweet. It 'was' technically a masterpiece of combat rules and such. Very balanced. I can really appreciate some of the nifty innovations in the game.
Okay, here's the 'however'. I just happen to have a slightly different play style (I think). I'm not saying mine is better, in fact, yours probably is. It sounds like you love the game for what it is, and I think that's epic. I like my games for the 'story'. Maybe I'm weird and crazy and the only person on earth who thinks that. However, if WotC 'is' looking for the advice of players such as myself, it's just to please include the 'story' elements for those of us who really do play the game for those elements.
I'd even be happy with two versions of 5e. One for those who like the 'crunchy' stuff and one for the 'insane storyteller whackos' (me). If that's not an option, I'll gracefully accept it. WotC will do what they must do. There will be many, many people happy with the new edition. I hope I'm one of them. If I'm not, I'll just keep playing the way I enjoy (maybe keep working on my own RPG, Challenger, which is free) and then we can all have fun gaming the way we want to. What's better than that?
I enjoy the balance of 4e because it makes the storytelling easier and more satisfying for me and my group, and allows for more varied and unique characters than any previous edition, yet doesn't require nearly as much work on the DM's part to keep everyting in line.
I'm not sure it's a matter of playstyle.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
@Garthanos, Kalnaur, DoctorBadWolf, and Leichenreiter: I think we just have different play styles. That's cool. If you think 4e is the most awesome thing ever, that's sweet. It 'was' technically a masterpiece of combat rules and such. Very balanced. I can really appreciate some of the nifty innovations in the game.
Okay, here's the 'however'. I just happen to have a slightly different play style (I think). I'm not saying mine is better, in fact, yours probably is. It sounds like you love the game for what it is, and I think that's epic. I like my games for the 'story'. Maybe I'm weird and crazy and the only person on earth who thinks that. However, if WotC 'is' looking for the advice of players such as myself, it's just to please include the 'story' elements for those of us who really do play the game for those elements.
I'd even be happy with two versions of 5e. One for those who like the 'crunchy' stuff and one for the 'insane storyteller whackos' (me). If that's not an option, I'll gracefully accept it. WotC will do what they must do. There will be many, many people happy with the new edition. I hope I'm one of them. If I'm not, I'll just keep playing the way I enjoy (maybe keep working on my own RPG, Challenger, which is free) and then we can all have fun gaming the way we want to. What's better than that?
I enjoy the balance of 4e because it makes the storytelling easier and more satisfying for me and my group, and allows for more varied and unique characters than any previous edition, yet doesn't require nearly as much work on the DM's part to keep everyting in line.
I'm not sure it's a matter of playstyle.
That's exactly my point. Why put more work on the DM?
Some rules that can help: - Hardwire a phases mechanism into boss monsters, through some kind of parallel hp system. - Provide rules for piecework creatures that work well within the general framework of the edition. - Introduce rules for rewarding improvisation and using the opponent's skills against him within the framework of the edition; these rules should be particularly rewarding against boss monsters. - Provide rules for minion spawning as part of another monster. - Provide rules for hazards and traps spawning as part of another monster. - Provide numerous examples of challenges and bosses in the rules, and perhaps a random table with boss ideas.
Above all though I think the important thing is to have these rules inside the books. It's mostly a metagame thing, but I think it's important: if the rules are in the book, the players will expect them. This goes a long way to determine the mindset of players going through a boss battle. If they know improvisation is rewarded by the system, they'll improvise, for instance. If they know boss battles have all kinds of tricks, they'll be waiting for those tricks, rather than mindlessly bogging down the boss' hps one hit at a time...
This feels like computer game logic, which is something I find quite repellent in a TTRPG. For everything that's in this list, I'd replace it with:
• Do what is dramatically appropriate to enhance the story, the challenge, the characters and the spectacle. Make it memorable. I personally don't need this level of crunch.
I'm not sure it's a matter of playstyle.
Yes it most definitely is a matter of playstyle.
The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules. -Gary Gygax
Some rules that can help: - Hardwire a phases mechanism into boss monsters, through some kind of parallel hp system. - Provide rules for piecework creatures that work well within the general framework of the edition. - Introduce rules for rewarding improvisation and using the opponent's skills against him within the framework of the edition; these rules should be particularly rewarding against boss monsters. - Provide rules for minion spawning as part of another monster. - Provide rules for hazards and traps spawning as part of another monster. - Provide numerous examples of challenges and bosses in the rules, and perhaps a random table with boss ideas.
Above all though I think the important thing is to have these rules inside the books. It's mostly a metagame thing, but I think it's important: if the rules are in the book, the players will expect them. This goes a long way to determine the mindset of players going through a boss battle. If they know improvisation is rewarded by the system, they'll improvise, for instance. If they know boss battles have all kinds of tricks, they'll be waiting for those tricks, rather than mindlessly bogging down the boss' hps one hit at a time...
This feels like computer game logic, which is something I find quite repellent in a TTRPG. For everything that's in this list, I'd replace it with:
• Do what is dramatically appropriate to enhance the story, the challenge, the characters and the spectacle. Make it memorable. I personally don't need this level of crunch.
I'm not sure it's a matter of playstyle.
Yes it most definitely is a matter of playstyle.
You may be able to wing it like that but starting DMs are not going to be able to do that, so some guidelines or optional rules for creating memorable enemies would be very helpful...
@Garthanos, Kalnaur, DoctorBadWolf, and Leichenreiter: I think we just have different play styles. That's cool. If you think 4e is the most awesome thing ever, that's sweet. It 'was' technically a masterpiece of combat rules and such. Very balanced. I can really appreciate some of the nifty innovations in the game.
Okay, here's the 'however'. I just happen to have a slightly different play style (I think). I'm not saying mine is better, in fact, yours probably is. It sounds like you love the game for what it is, and I think that's epic. I like my games for the 'story'. Maybe I'm weird and crazy and the only person on earth who thinks that. However, if WotC 'is' looking for the advice of players such as myself, it's just to please include the 'story' elements for those of us who really do play the game for those elements.
I'd even be happy with two versions of 5e. One for those who like the 'crunchy' stuff and one for the 'insane storyteller whackos' (me). If that's not an option, I'll gracefully accept it. WotC will do what they must do. There will be many, many people happy with the new edition. I hope I'm one of them. If I'm not, I'll just keep playing the way I enjoy (maybe keep working on my own RPG, Challenger, which is free) and then we can all have fun gaming the way we want to. What's better than that?
I enjoy the balance of 4e because it makes the storytelling easier and more satisfying for me and my group, and allows for more varied and unique characters than any previous edition, yet doesn't require nearly as much work on the DM's part to keep everyting in line.
I'm not sure it's a matter of playstyle.
Yes, it is. I, who care littlle about combat and nothing about balance, feel much more free in storytelling in a game that is not obsessed with balance. I just can do what I want. All I need to do is to agree with my players if I'm the master, or with master and players if I'm a player, to see what kind of adventur is going to be. Mor combat centered? Then I'll have an optimized character. Is the adventure more focused on storytelling? I'll take my cool bard, or some other pg I love, care little about all the balance and character optimization stuff, maybe even play a under par character, but I'll have even more fun. As a dm, I just do not care what sort of pg I have. They are not optimized? I'll go with the story. They are all powerfull? I'll go with the story and I'll be an evil dm. Some are optimized and some not? Than I have no problem, I'll trhow in whatever I feel like and try not to hit too much the unoptimized one. I once played an unoptimized bard in a team with overpowered character. Did it harm my fun? Not at all. Sure, I was useless in fighting, but it became the funny, ridiculos moment, when I laughed all the time. So yes, it is a matter of playstyle.
The problem isn't that some characters are optomized. It's that whole swaths of characters representing some of the most basic fantasy tropes are largely irrelevant at higher levels.
