Umm, in my last session my level one party encountered a band of orcs. I went through both my magic missile spells, one of them empowered to do maximum damage, and I only killed one Orc. Granted, my first casting was split my missile between three different orcs (as they all were already damaged by a fire trap) but didn't kill a single one despite the fact that they were each already hurt. My second cast used my daily feat to empower them and two missiles hit one Orc and killed him, and one...
View full commentUmm, in my last session my level one party encountered a band of orcs. I went through both my magic missile spells, one of them empowered to do maximum damage, and I only killed one Orc. Granted, my first casting was split my missile between three different orcs (as they all were already damaged by a fire trap) but didn't kill a single one despite the fact that they were each already hurt. My second cast used my daily feat to empower them and two missiles hit one Orc and killed him, and one missile hit another Orc, and he still survived. After a short rest, I have one first level spell back, the fighter and rogue in the party have not lost any ability to do anything. This was just a random encounter on our way to a town (it was one Orc per party member) and it was our first encounter for the adventuring day. So I don't want to hear any nonsense about the uber power of magic missiles over other classes. Thank you.
Also, not a complaint, I am having fun playing my wizard, at least so far.
Maybe what they should do is have "classic" advancement, which is more of what we are used to and then "official advancement" for use in dnd encounters and living campaigns, as i suspect that's what is behind this move any way. Then people can chose. That could work but it involves not singling out the fast track approach as the default or "right" way to play. I know this for sure, it will fail miserable in its goal of attracting old school players back into the fold if they read that the...
View full commentMaybe what they should do is have "classic" advancement, which is more of what we are used to and then "official advancement" for use in dnd encounters and living campaigns, as i suspect that's what is behind this move any way. Then people can chose. That could work but it involves not singling out the fast track approach as the default or "right" way to play.
I know this for sure, it will fail miserable in its goal of attracting old school players back into the fold if they read that the default game is level every other session as it suggests the game was designed to again he something comlpleatly foreign to what they grew up with. As I said, I myself have been in games that house ruled quicker leveling tracks, and they were fun. But to define DnD as that kind of play won't go over well in winning people back.
Facts about Ghouls: A ghoul is a (folkloric) monster associated with graveyards and consuming human flesh. In fiction, these creatures dwell in cemeteries and other uninhabited places. The oldest surviving literature that mention ghouls is One Thousand and One Nights. The term was first used in English literature in 1786, in William Beckford's Orientalist novel Vathek, which describes the ghūl of meddle eastern folklore. Ghoul is from the Arabic ghul, from ghala "to seize". Marc Cramer...
A ghoul is a (folkloric) monster associated with graveyards and consuming human flesh. In fiction, these creatures dwell in cemeteries and other uninhabited places. The oldest surviving literature that mention ghouls is One Thousand and One Nights. The term was first used in English literature in 1786, in William Beckford's Orientalist novel Vathek, which describes the ghūl of meddle eastern folklore.
Ghoul is from the Arabic ghul, from ghala "to seize". Marc Cramer and others believe the term to be etymologically related to Gallu, a Mesopotamian demon.
In ancient meddle-eastern folklore, the ghūl dwells in burial grounds and other uninhabited places. The ghul is a fiendish type of Genie believed to be sired by Iblis.
A ghoul is a desert-dwelling shapeshifting demon that can assume the guise of an animal especially a hyena. It lures unwary people into the desert wastes or abandoned places to slay and devour them. The creature also preys on young children, drinks blood, steals coins, and eats the dead, taking the form of the person most recently eaten.
females are called ghouleh and the plural is ghilan. In colloquial Arabic, the term is sometimes used to describe a greedy or gluttonous individual.
I like most of what you've presented, but if you're looking for a definitive description of ghouls, you could do worse than reviewing your H.P. Lovecraft. "The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath" taught me everything I know about ghouls. You have their ancient combination of bestial hunger and human intelligence, as well as the implications of their grim, subterranean society.
I never liked Kobolds as reptiles, I always preferred the dog people from 2e. Otherwise to barrow from Palladium, I like the idea that kobolds are smart, very smart. I'm fine with the other two.
View full commentI never liked Kobolds as reptiles, I always preferred the dog people from 2e. Otherwise to barrow from Palladium, I like the idea that kobolds are smart, very smart.
Here is some info toward a folklore accurate Goblin. Altho many nature spirits translate into English as “goblins”, most of the stories about the actual Goblin come from Britain during the Romantic Era, late 1800s. The D&D Goblin can match up well with the folklore, especially when a player race. • Typically: Very high Dexterity, high Intelligence, low Strength, low Charisma, very low Wisdom. Goblins are stealthy and surprisingly spry. They are knowledgeable and clever, but...
View full commentHere is some info toward a folklore accurate Goblin. Altho many nature spirits translate into English as “goblins”, most of the stories about the actual Goblin come from Britain during the Romantic Era, late 1800s.
The D&D Goblin can match up well with the folklore, especially when a player race.
• Typically: Very high Dexterity, high Intelligence, low Strength, low Charisma, very low Wisdom.
Goblins are stealthy and surprisingly spry. They are knowledgeable and clever, but tend to be oblivious to the obvious that is going on in front of them. They are capricious, cowardly, and difficult to take seriously. They are small, and their Strength suffers proportionally.
• The Goblins are fey, so a connection to magic is a given. They are knowledgeable about magic, and often use rituals.
• They have a vicious sense of humor, typically playing pranks that are mean, harmful, and fatal.
• They (most of them) hate Humans, and seek to destroy Humans in amusing ways.
• In physical appearance, they are small and grotesque. They lack toes, and find the sight of toes offensive and sickening.
• The Goblins see themselves as much more refined than Humans, which is humorous.
• Nocturnal with darkvision and sensitivity to sunlight.
• Goblins live in caves and mines, with a Goblin King, plus intrigues of the royal court.
• Goblins abduct children. This can be a good plot hook, especially for low-level adventures. The adventurers need to rescue the children before they suffer the ritual that traps them into goblinhood. This is how Goblins increase their numbers, especially as spouses, slaves, and armies.
• But the most interesting Goblin trait is ...
Singing and poetry (specifically rhymes?) repels Goblins, till out of earshot. This is a quirky and fun trait that can make encounters with Goblin vivid and memorable. A great way to lighten the mood while in the context of evil monsters. It is necessary to come up with a balanced mechanic to represent this, but an
In my opinion, there are a few things the wrong with this gnoll; a) the little braids near the ear, need to go, this is, in a sense, a bipedal, humanoid hyena, so the ear hair, looks unnatural, b) they need to look dumb, but not like Quasimodo, the hunchback thing is weird and awkward, it needs to look hyena like, so have their back straighter, but give them sloping shoulders, c) their knees do not ALWAYS have to be bent, they are humanoids, so give them something that says 'feral' without...
View full commentIn my opinion, there are a few things the wrong with this gnoll; a) the little braids near the ear, need to go, this is, in a sense, a bipedal, humanoid hyena, so the ear hair, looks unnatural, b) they need to look dumb, but not like Quasimodo, the hunchback thing is weird and awkward, it needs to look hyena like, so have their back straighter, but give them sloping shoulders, c) their knees do not ALWAYS have to be bent, they are humanoids, so give them something that says 'feral' without saying 'unevolved' or 'underdeveloped', d) they need to be muscular, but not so bulky, they're hunters, not lumbering oafs, so their necks do not have to bee 4 feet in circumference, and lastly, e) their faces need to be a tad more humanoid, they should be distinctly hyena like, but not so much it looks like someone cut out a hyena head and stuck it on a body.
The idea of subsystems being placed on top of the core system is very appealing to me. I have been a heavy user of house rules across my D&D experience (Basic Set through to 4e). What I think would be an outstanding add-on to D&D Next would be a generic set of guidelines that allows DMs to develop their own subsystems in a controlled and balanced way... I'm excited about the developments occurring with D&D and look forward to hearing about developments...despite truly enjoying...
View full commentThe idea of subsystems being placed on top of the core system is very appealing to me. I have been a heavy user of house rules across my D&D experience (Basic Set through to 4e). What I think would be an outstanding add-on to D&D Next would be a generic set of guidelines that allows DMs to develop their own subsystems in a controlled and balanced way...
I'm excited about the developments occurring with D&D and look forward to hearing about developments...despite truly enjoying each iteration of D&D, I have to admit that I am eager to see something that is more reflective of the simplicity of AD&D...
I can see the narrative combat module becoming a mainstay in my group, however, are there plans to include spell options? I would like to see the return of 3E meta-magic feats (i.e. Enlarge Spell) and this would be a perfect fit for them. As spellcaster declares if they want to "enlarge" a spell and take the appropriate modifier to their attack; this makes spells more dynamic in combat.
Uhg. Nuts! In the future I will endeavor to READ the published rules a little bit better before putting up posts. Sorry. The bit with the hobgoblins getting a +2 to AC rather than pcs attacking with disadvantage is right there in the "cover" section for half cover. Seems like I made the same call the developers would, but it creates a new, perhaps tougher, question. 5th ed still uses a form of the +/- system, not A/D exclusively. So what will the difference be between gaining a +/- to a...
View full commentUhg. Nuts! In the future I will endeavor to READ the published rules a little bit better before putting up posts. Sorry.
The bit with the hobgoblins getting a +2 to AC rather than pcs attacking with disadvantage is right there in the "cover" section for half cover. Seems like I made the same call the developers would, but it creates a new, perhaps tougher, question. 5th ed still uses a form of the +/- system, not A/D exclusively. So what will the difference be between gaining a +/- to a roll vs gaining A/D? Is it a more extreme situation than a +/-4 or 5? Or simply something more random than a straight +/- suggests? Example: Cover 1/2=+2AC, 3/4=+5AC, invisible=A/D. There is much back and forth between when one or the other is used. I can see where that could lead to confusion among the players/dm.
IDK guys. The more I read about and playtest with A/D system the more skeptical I become. I like the concept, but it was easier for me to just slap a +/-2 (or 4 or whatever) on the roll and go with it.
I like having some example unique items pre-made in the books. Especially some throw-backs and classics. But they're usually more of a jumping off point for me. I like to design my own items and I don't particularly care for rules (and a chapter thereof) to tell me how to do it "the right way". I generally disregard these rules and generate my ideas. My players enjoy the weapons, items, and artifact I create, and that's the important part. I work hard to make balanced items that don't break...
View full commentI like having some example unique items pre-made in the books. Especially some throw-backs and classics. But they're usually more of a jumping off point for me. I like to design my own items and I don't particularly care for rules (and a chapter thereof) to tell me how to do it "the right way". I generally disregard these rules and generate my ideas. My players enjoy the weapons, items, and artifact I create, and that's the important part. I work hard to make balanced items that don't break games. I give my players my own unique and personal parts of the game - often custom tailored for specific characters. I am not opposed to having guidelines, especially for newer DMs, but leave them at that, and drop the expectations for characters to upgrade their weapons like they do in console RPGs. It ruins the magic. No pun intended. Honestly.
I agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu. Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll. I also didn't...
View full commentI agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu.
Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll.
I also didn't quite like the way the skills were always tied to the same ability score. I liked World of Darkness system idea of combining skills with different abilities depending on the action performed. Think the episode in Terminator 2 when the machine cuts open his arm to remove the skin - that would be great example of Intimidate (CON) roll. Or scaring someone by punching a hole in a wall beside his head would be Intimidate (STR).
I think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice. But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic. First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types....
View full commentI think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice.
But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic.
First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types. It could be similar to any of the older systems, or like feats.
Second, the modifier would be the ability score modifier plus 1/2 the character's level or something similar. Yes, that means that somebody picking up the skill at 10th level would be as proficient as somebody who learned it at 1st level and is now 10th level. But for simplicity (and you could argue that a 10th level character could learn faster and more easily), this mechanic would work well.
Combining a question from another post, I do think that a 'skill feat' should be separate from choosing a 'combat feat'.
Although players in my campaigns learned that I don't always play to their strengths, and the environment is a powerful ally or enemy so they tended not to min/max on just combat abilities.
Except then You have to sacrifice your background and specialty choices just to approximate that class, rather than having an equal ability to explore different stories within the class as the Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard do. NO WAY.
View full commentExcept then You have to sacrifice your background and specialty choices just to approximate that class, rather than having an equal ability to explore different stories within the class as the Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard do.
I think in relation to paragraph 2 above, it would be awesome if a paladin had martial dice to use but instead of straight damage they could be used to provide effects based on deity choice. For example: I follow the edicts of a god of healing and as an option I can spend a martial die on a hit allowing the party member with the lowest HP to gain HP equal to a given modifier.
It is a very smart idea to be able to incorperate both styles of play (TotM/grid) into one game system. Not only do you find both types of encounters (2 guards/big final battle) and both types of players' tastes. But it would create a great amount of flexibility in the game itself. That is what our imagination can do, now D&D might do it as well. I love the fact that a DM or module would have the freedom to say "You know, they would probably post a pair of guards." and be able to run it quickly...
View full commentIt is a very smart idea to be able to incorperate both styles of play (TotM/grid) into one game system. Not only do you find both types of encounters (2 guards/big final battle) and both types of players' tastes. But it would create a great amount of flexibility in the game itself. That is what our imagination can do, now D&D might do it as well. I love the fact that a DM or module would have the freedom to say "You know, they would probably post a pair of guards." and be able to run it quickly and effectively. Many a time my old groups tried to take out the guards quietly and flubbed the delicate proceedure. He he... Adding to other, often unforseen, complications. The designers want the system to be able to run with anything that could happen. Sweet!
This is intriguing, and I have to admit, I haven't really given much thought as to whether or not a particular encounter warrants grid and minis (I'm a bit of a grognard). This will be interesting to see. I'm actually going to start trying more TotM style combats in my games for the smaller encounters.
I'm a big believer in "Getting to Yes." Present the options, all the options, to the players, and see what they latch onto. Then build a game around what they are playing. If they want to play a Tiefling, don't screw them over for wanting to play the Tiefling. Build a story that will accommodate that choice. If the player WANTS to have risks involved with the racial choice (because those risks could be a roleplaying MINE, like having to wear robes to disguise a devilish appearance), that's...
View full commentI'm a big believer in "Getting to Yes." Present the options, all the options, to the players, and see what they latch onto. Then build a game around what they are playing. If they want to play a Tiefling, don't screw them over for wanting to play the Tiefling. Build a story that will accommodate that choice. If the player WANTS to have risks involved with the racial choice (because those risks could be a roleplaying MINE, like having to wear robes to disguise a devilish appearance), that's in the DM's power to grant, but the DM shouldn't screw someone over because their idea of fun is different than the DM's. Of course, if the player becomes a problem to the group, that's an issue, but the most important role of the DM is making sure everyone can have their fun. And part of that means providing all the racial choices, "ICONIC D&D" or not.
My campaign is quasi-historical, so I'm constantly saying no to races I haven't already distorted history to accommodate. I don't care one way or another about the frequency designations, because it should vary greatly from setting to setting.
I feel that a character needs to have abilities that are consistent. Mounted combat won't be viable always - in fact, in my campaigns, characters have hardly bothered to explore it at all since you can't bring a horse 50% of the places you go. Also, by letting abilities depend on alignment, you make the game a whole lot less interesting when evil can be distinguished so easily from good as in previous editions. There should be no detect evil since such an ability means that I as a DM will...
View full commentI feel that a character needs to have abilities that are consistent. Mounted combat won't be viable always - in fact, in my campaigns, characters have hardly bothered to explore it at all since you can't bring a horse 50% of the places you go.
Also, by letting abilities depend on alignment, you make the game a whole lot less interesting when evil can be distinguished so easily from good as in previous editions. There should be no detect evil since such an ability means that I as a DM will always have to trick or fudge the rules when I want someone's alignment to be a surprise. With the traditional paladins, it never is, and it has always bothered me. Moreover, it cements alignments so much more firmly. I've rarely had a player paladin who has believed in turning evil instead of destroying it, yet of course this should be possible. It's just that when someone flares up as evil, they think they MUST kill him.
It would be awesome if a paladin had martial dice to use but instead of straight damage they could be used to provide effects based on deity choice. For example: I follow the edicts of a god of healing and as an option I can spend a martial die on a hit allowing the party member with the lowest HP to gain HP equal to a given modifier.
View full comment
I know this for sure, it will fail miserable in its goal of attracting old school players back into the fold if they read that the...
View full comment