|
1 year ago ::
May 26, 2012 - 11:48PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2007
|
Mechanically the condition of intoxicated has a super strong DR (a much needed boost for wizard defence) balanced by a DA penalty on attack rolls.
Except ... magic doesn't make attack rolls for most spells. Those who suffer from spells instead make saving throws where any drunken goofiness wouldn't apply. If you really still need damage there is always magic missle (which of course you can cast in melee because what do you care about yet another DA if you dont make attacks?).
Just curious how many drunken mages are rolling around in games now?
Guess thats why wizards need high INT scores, they need a lot of extra brain cells as backup for the ones they are killing off with each rum soaked bender.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 26, 2012 - 11:58PM
#2
|
|
|
If one of my players tried to do that, I would have them roleplay it (I would also accept them actually being drunk, as long as they're not too obnoxious). If they don't mind acting (or being) drunk all night, I'm ok with them playing an alchoholic wizard. I actually think it's a fun character concept. 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:00AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
If one of my players tried to do that, I would have them roleplay it (I would also accept them actually being drunk, as long as they're not too obnoxious). If they don't mind acting (or being) drunk all night, I'm ok with them playing an alchoholic wizard. I actually think it's a fun character concept.
I'm with this guy. It wouldn't bother me at all, and is potentially very funny.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:03AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
you could get a problem with magic missile when all oponents get free mirror image. 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 12:45AM
#5
|
|
|
I hope the intoxicated condition was put in there just to see how people reacted to a perks/flaws system and not as an actual plan.
Because its a perk/flaw that looks like it was given absolutely ZERO consideration for balance.
Character optimization is a group decision not an individual one.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 1:37AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
It's a fun concept, and I like that it's viable.
I dislike, however, that drunken fighting is mechanically way better than sober fighting.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 2:23AM
#7
|
|
|
It's a fun concept, and I like that it's viable.
I dislike, however, that drunken fighting is mechanically way better than sober fighting.
I'll admit I haven't gotten the chance to playtest it yet (we're doing that on Monday) but to me disadvantage looks really harsh, I don't think it's really all that worth it. Except, of course, to wizards, who don't have to make attack rolls if they don't want to.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 3:09AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
It's a fun concept, and I like that it's viable.
I dislike, however, that drunken fighting is mechanically way better than sober fighting.
I'll admit I haven't gotten the chance to playtest it yet (we're doing that on Monday) but to me disadvantage looks really harsh, I don't think it's really all that worth it. Except, of course, to wizards, who don't have to make attack rolls if they don't want to.
Right, I meant to wizards specifically. I haven't played with drunkeness much yet either, just some quick number crunching on my side. Negating 3.5 damage average on every attack is quite good though. Disadvantage is at worst -5, but at an average (assuming that any required value from 1 to 20 is equally likely) you're 16.625% less likely to succeed with disadvantage, aka it's a -3.325 penalty. In practice since your target numbers will probably be closer to the center I reckon the average in actual play will wind up being about a -4. Since a defender doesn't actually have any way to defend the party short of killing the enemy before he walks up to the squishier party members, chances are going in sober will still be better than going in drunk.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 3:15AM
#9
|
|
|
It's a fun concept, and I like that it's viable.
I dislike, however, that drunken fighting is mechanically way better than sober fighting.
I'll admit I haven't gotten the chance to playtest it yet (we're doing that on Monday) but to me disadvantage looks really harsh, I don't think it's really all that worth it. Except, of course, to wizards, who don't have to make attack rolls if they don't want to.
Right, I meant to wizards specifically. I haven't played with drunkeness much yet either, just some quick number crunching on my side. Negating 3.5 damage average on every attack is quite good though. Disadvantage is at worst -5, but at an average (assuming that any required value from 1 to 20 is equally likely) you're 16.625% less likely to succeed with disadvantage, aka it's a -3.325 penalty. In practice since your target numbers will probably be closer to the center I reckon the average in actual play will wind up being about a -4. Since a defender doesn't actually have any way to defend the party short of killing the enemy before he walks up to the squishier party members, chances are going in sober will still be better than going in drunk.
The value of the penalty from disadvantage is entirely dependent on the target number, so AC and attack bonus are both going to factor in. It's kind of tough to say if the DR is worth the loss in accuracy since it's a highly dynamic penalty. But yeah, wizards should totally drink all the time.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 4:05AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
The value of the penalty from disadvantage is entirely dependent on the target number, so AC and attack bonus are both going to factor in. It's kind of tough to say if the DR is worth the loss in accuracy since it's a highly dynamic penalty.
Well, AC and attack bonus really just lower or raise the number you need to roll. But it is indeed very dependant on circumstance. That's why I did the math based on range of potential values and then went for a rough eyeballing of more likely values. If you want deeper analysis, here's this: anydice.com/program/1223
But yeah, wizards should totally drink all the time.
Indeed. On general principle even, regardless of the mechanics involved.
|
|
|
