DDN, I'm just a trolling you all!

[Whipstitch]

He doesn't need to be a particularly competent weasel, necessarily. I mean, it's the ttrpg industry--that sucker is small and almost comically inbred. Misplaced loyalties wouldn't be surprising at all, and given how many people have been fired over the last few years I wouldn't be surprised if everyone who has survived have developed an internal policy of no gainsaying just out of sheer self-defense.

[Voss]

@Insomniac. What's wrong with AD&D wildshape?

You get terribly bad results. AD&D animals suck, they're barely level appropriate at low levels, and not at all at higher levels.

The only reason WoW wasn't paying gigantic licensing fees to WotC for a few years is that someone at TSR decided they didn't want a RTS game built around D&D, turned it down, and Warcraft #1 got it's own branding..

I have no idea where you're getting this stuff. The Warcraft franchise was established years before World of Warcraft happened, and the original RTS was pitched to Games Workshop as a Warhammer Fantasy game. They said no, so Blizzard filed off the serial numbers and added more guns, bombs and airships.

WoW has no real connection to D&D at all, over than aping previous MMOs (like everquest) and MUDs that drew on earlier computer games that drew on D&D for inspiration (and blah, blah, Tolkien and Howard and stuff). There is absolutely no reason why WoW would be at all obligated to turn over even a cent to WotC.

[tussock]

@Games Workshop, my bad, wires crossed, will consider checking facts slightly more often. One day.

@AD&D bad results. That was the point. Saved you from being a bear in combat, let you get on and be a Druid with your fire seeds and flame blade and entangling grass and called lightning and all that Druidy shit instead. But was still super useful for exploring and getting from A to B no matter the terrain.

Handy that you're not a better Fighter than the Fighter, if one cares about such things.

[Cyberzombie]

@AD&D bad results. That was the point. Saved you from being a bear in combat, let you get on and be a Druid with your fire seeds and flame blade and entangling grass and called lightning and all that Druidy shit instead. But was still super useful for exploring and getting from A to B no matter the terrain.

I always preferred that wildshape to the current one. A druid is a primary caster, he doesn't need a super-powered class ability like 3E wildshape. It'd be one thing if he was devoted solely to shapechanging, like the Master of Many Forms PrC, but the druid's schtick is supposed to be casting spells. It's fine if turning into animals is mostly useful for non-combat applications. Bears and wolves still need to be able to bite people, but the levels you get those things don't need to make them useful level-appropriate combat forms.

[codeGlaze]

@AD&D bad results. That was the point. Saved you from being a bear in combat, let you get on and be a Druid with your fire seeds and flame blade and entangling grass and called lightning and all that Druidy shit instead. But was still super useful for exploring and getting from A to B no matter the terrain.

I always preferred that wildshape to the current one. A druid is a primary caster, he doesn't need a super-powered class ability like 3E wildshape. It'd be one thing if he was devoted solely to shapechanging, like the Master of Many Forms PrC, but the druid's schtick is supposed to be casting spells. It's fine if turning into animals is mostly useful for non-combat applications. Bears and wolves still need to be able to bite people, but the levels you get those things don't need to make them useful level-appropriate combat forms.

That's where I think the "old" build of 5e Druid seems to have had it right.

There was one path that focused on bear-shaping and mauling (like WoW droods) and another path that focused on magicky magic. Or... at least that's what it seemed to be from the description. I didn't get very far in the middle-to-later test docs before losing interest.

[Voss]

@AD&D bad results. That was the point. Saved you from being a bear in combat, let you get on and be a Druid with your fire seeds and flame blade and entangling grass and called lightning and all that Druidy shit instead. But was still super useful for exploring and getting from A to B no matter the terrain.

I always preferred that wildshape to the current one. A druid is a primary caster, he doesn't need a super-powered class ability like 3E wildshape. It'd be one thing if he was devoted solely to shapechanging, like the Master of Many Forms PrC, but the druid's schtick is supposed to be casting spells. It's fine if turning into animals is mostly useful for non-combat applications. Bears and wolves still need to be able to bite people, but the levels you get those things don't need to make them useful level-appropriate combat forms.

That's where I think the "old" build of 5e Druid seems to have had it right.

There was one path that focused on bear-shaping and mauling (like WoW droods) and another path that focused on magicky magic. Or... at least that's what it seemed to be from the description. I didn't get very far in the middle-to-later test docs before losing interest.

That is how the current build is set up too. But the actual forms for the combat path are bad, but they also save you from putting assigning points to the physical stats- so in some respects you have more ways of exploiting the creation system. The caster druid gets to recharge spell slots (half his level) 1/day, and gets free 'prepared' spells (including some good spells that other druids just don't get, like blur*, silence, haste and stinking cloud), but has to assign points to dex and con, but the beast druid gets a few levels of being a level appropriate combatant, a lot of levels (particularly 13+) where they aren't (especially since magic items explicitly give them no bonus in animal form, in the previous version, passive bonuses worked), , but is still a perfectly competent full caster all the time (except in animal form).

It is a weird setup, and at low levels, the animal druid can game really hard. But over time that goes away, and real benefit of wildshape (being a bird, horse or fish for travel and convenience) is available to both versions

*yeah, 5e blur is actually good. Anything that uses sight has disadvantage on attack rolls against you, for up to 10 minutes.

[Insomniac]

Negatives and plus effects are big.

I think something having disadvantage (roll twice, take worst) is about -3 behind? It is even better because it dramatically increases rolls below 10 and some other funky stuff.
I think it is just mechanically better than making them -3 to hit but I'm probably wrong.

In 3.5 and Pathfinder that is pretty much chump change but modifiers are almost nowhere to be found. With Bounded Accuracy, everything in the Bestiary has a single digit plus modifier to hit, like +6.

I'm not sold on this Bounded Accuracy thing.

[tussock]

I think something having disadvantage (roll twice, take worst) is about -3 behind?

More like -5 for typical base success rates, which is huge.

0.6 => 0.36 (-5, -40% hits, comparative +67%)
0.5 => 0.25 (-5, -50% hits, comparative +100%)

That's about where most monsters are. Them hitting half as often is nearly as good as you hitting twice as often (ideally, often not really). Happily, if you also have a nice AC, they're going

0.4 => 0.16 (-5, -60% hits, comparative +150%)
0.3 => 0.09 (-4, -70% hits, comparative +233%)

Which is the best thing EVAR. You'll note the trend. Advantage on attack is less good, because you're already hitting a lot and so only increase your successes by the normal rate of your failures.

0.7 => 0.91 (+4, comparative +30%)

Obviously getting 30% more hits compared to your opponent is less good than getting 150% more hits. Shows why Dex has always been an awesome stat.

I'm not sold on this Bounded Accuracy thing.

It gives them very little room to make any mistakes with the math. If you optimise a tiny bit better than they expected, there's nowhere to go.

[Insomniac]

I'm not sold on this Bounded Accuracy thing.

It gives them very little room to make any mistakes with the math. If you optimise a tiny bit better than they expected, there's nowhere to go.

The thing that worries me about Bounded Accuracy is...

I don't trust 'em to keep it Bounded. I think it will be whoopsie daisying all over the place, kinda like that math on the Blur (had no idea it was that advantageous, eheesh).

Spell/Feat/Equipment of Unbounded Accuracy...

Get Advantage/Give Advantage on Yadda Yadda Yadda.

Well, there goes the neighborhood!

Also, I know this is silly, but I think the numbers are too small.
It isn't fun. I want to wave my big Number-Dick and feel really
S-M-R-T SMART that I'm dropping big DCs and attacking for +I Hit Everything.

Even if mathematically attacking at +33 against AC 43 is exactly the same 50/50 chance or so to hit a guy as +13 against AC 23 is, what sounds cooler? What gives you the satisfaction of seeing your character getting more power and advancing and "leveling" up? Right now
Martials kind of have the same attacks that a low BAB 3.5 guy has accidentally. This edition doesn't have enough Numbers Porn.

I know I'm not alone. I wanna wave my Number-Dick around.
I wanna attack in the 30s and 40s, not in the teens, for Pete's sake.

[Voss]

Actually, bonuses in the teens at all only come at the extreme end of the system. (+5 stat, +6 proficiency, +3 magic item). If at any point the DM hands out a belt of giant strength beyond stone giant, the game actually skips a grove, because monster AC is actually literally between 8 and 18 in the bestiary, and a +18 to attack will not miss unless there is a '1s always miss clause.'

Meanwhile, AC 18 is trivially easy to get at level 1 for PCs, as it is simply chain mail and shield (or scale and shield and a dex bonus; light armor is rougher until you get a few stat increases). Which means, among other things, anything with a bonus beyond +1 needs to not exist at all (and maybe not even that- the flame blade with a lack of + bonus at all is actually a better design for the math they want), and belts of giant strength are honest-to-goodness game breakers.

Short version: they don't need to worry about breaking the math later, it already snaps under its own weight around level 10. Monster Ac averages around 14-15, and maxes at 18. Their attacks average around 4 or 5, and caps at +8 (except for Asmodeus Himself, at +10). At level 10, PCs are pushing +9 or 10 to hit, and can comfortably claim ACs around 21-23. Without including buffs, debuffs, temporary bonuses or anything but +1 weapons and armor.

[Krusk]

my big gripe with it is that there is no "This tall to ride" marker.

My fighter rolls a 19 on the die + mods and misses, I know we probably ought to run away. Bonded accuracy means I always have a chance to hit him, and won't realize how out classed I am.

Vice versa. Those kobolds can always hit me, so I never get to feel like anything but a rat slayer. There is no point where I can be confident and ignore the low level BS that I don't want to fight at high levels. "They need a nat 20 to hit you" is a fun situation to be in. It also lets me know not to bother expending any spells or /day things.

But also, from the last playtest i bothered reading it wasn't particularly hard to get over the relatively small "Sweet spot" range. If you do, you are super awesome immediately. I can also see crappy players managing to not make it into the range and never being any good.

Unrelated to bonded accuracy, but related to advantage/disadvantage. It seems super easy to consistently ensure you always have advantage and everyone always has disadvantage to you. Especially if you optimize towards it and others don't.

... that turned into a rant against the playtest in general apparently.

[Voss]

"They need a nat 20 to hit you" is a fun situation to be in.

Actually, this does happen. And it happens fairly fast. +1 plate and shield is AC 21. add +1 for being a mountain dwarf and +1 for the 'defense' trait of the warrior classes and you're at AC 23.* Suddenly a shitload of stuff is only hitting on a 20, and you're just getting started. Multi-class into another warrior type class for the ability to impose disadvantage 1/per round, or layer on some defensive spells that do the same- they have to reroll 20s to hit you.

*and add prayer. haste. Shield of faith. and other spells. There are limits, because of concentration and all that rot, but you can shove AC on a plate and shield guy (or 2) up around 25 without much effort, and impose disadvantage on attacks.**

You can really ignore the low level (and some not so low level creatures) while you are still IN the low levels.

**and to touch back on the horrible druid wildshape- while clerics and fighters and whatnot are doing this, the battle druid animal forms are capping at an AC of... 13. Not 13+ dex+ magic items, but actually 13. Yeah, the unbuffed armor guy is wandering into fights at AC 18 at level 1 (and this could actually be higher), and the level 10 battle druid is monster bait with his AC 13 cave bear form.

[Insomniac]

Monster AC is literally between 8 and 18 in the bestiary, and a +18 to attack will not miss unless there is a '1s always miss' clause.

AC 18 is trivially easy for PCs to get at level 1.

Anything with a bonus beyond +1 needs to not exist.
Belts of Giant Strength are game breakers.

The math snaps under its own weight around level 10. Monster AC averages around 14-15, and maxes at 18. Their attacks average around 4 or 5, and caps at +8 (except for Asmodeus Himself, at +10). At level 10, PCs are pushing +9 or 10 to hit, and can comfortably claim ACs around 21-23. Without including buffs, debuffs, temporary bonuses or anything but +1 weapons and armor.

So when he's talking about "fixing the math" in the next few months before it drops he means a total overhaul to the system because for at least half the game it doesn't even mechanically work?

We're right back into 4E but in a Bizarro Zone where there is going to be official "errata" for the whole Monster Manual right now except in the opposite direction. Boost monster defenses, offenses, everything.

[Voss]

Monster AC is literally between 8 and 18 in the bestiary, and a +18 to attack will not miss unless there is a '1s always miss' clause.

AC 18 is trivially easy for PCs to get at level 1.

Anything with a bonus beyond +1 needs to not exist.
Belts of Giant Strength are game breakers.

The math snaps under its own weight around level 10. Monster AC averages around 14-15, and maxes at 18. Their attacks average around 4 or 5, and caps at +8 (except for Asmodeus Himself, at +10). At level 10, PCs are pushing +9 or 10 to hit, and can comfortably claim ACs around 21-23. Without including buffs, debuffs, temporary bonuses or anything but +1 weapons and armor.

So when he's talking about "fixing the math" in the next few months before it drops he means a total overhaul to the system because for at least half the game it doesn't even mechanically work?

Probably not, to be honest. He's going to complain vociferously that people are just power gaming a perfectly viable system, and it only breaks if 'certain players' are trying to make it bad for everyone.

From a dev and fanboy point of view, it works because the math is tilted in such a way that players win, and for the levels that people actually play at, the tilt is 'acceptable.' Belts of giant strength may just vanish from the item list, because they really fuck the math up (and its painfully apparent with the bonuses involved).

We're right back into 4E but in a Bizarro Zone where there is going to be official "errata" for the whole Monster Manual right now except in the opposite direction. Boost monster defenses, offenses, everything.

They may well tweak monsters before publication (there is certainly time for that), and honestly they were skipped and not revised for several playtest iterations, so they're honestly due another revision if they're at all working on stuff.

[shadzar]

let's look back a year to what was said from 2008/9 in the 4E preview book:

. http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=295456#295456 .

The game is about killing things and taking their stuff, not traipsing through faerie rings and talking to the little people.

now let's look at yesterday:

. http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx ... d/20131030 .
Trick or Treat?
By James Wyatt

It includes those mundane mechanics of moving around in the D&D world, but more importantly, it describes the wonder-filled activity of uncovering the secrets of an ancient or mysterious environment, whether it’s an ancient dungeon, dusty ruins, or a savage wilderness. Exploration includes the following kinds of activities:

[*]Investigating strange dungeon or natural features (fountains, pools, statues, and so on)

natural features...like faerie rings maybe?!?!?!?!?!?!

I spent a lot of time looking at rules and adventures from the early days of D&D and thinking about how the game handled exploration back then.

only this week, and you wonder why the disconnect and failure of 4th edition happened because you didn't understand the main part of the game. also why 3rd fails because it too misses all that because nobody was really looking at what D&D IS at the time, just too busy fucking changing it?

I don’t want to talk about monsters this week.

really in a column called:

Wandering Monsters Archive | 10/30/2013

We ALL know why you dont want to, because no fucking body on the planet agrees with anything you have done with the column and think you are a bigger retard than Mike Mearls. and that is NOT an easy task to accomplish!

you don't understand the game, and never did, so you only now realize things about "exploration" being a part of it, since you were brought in at the bible-thumper to quell the other bible-thumpers in the Jack Chick era and say that fighting fictional monsters in a fighting fighting game was ok. now you fail to understand the point of your fucking column by gong on about something that IS NOT A MONSTER.

the way you talk later in the article makes me think you want "exploration" to appear AS a monster, and its "rules" should be placed in the Monster Manual.

I really feel pity for your son should he ever go anywhere and play D&D without you around to defend your stupidity that you raised him on and all the misgivings about fantasy and D&D that you taught him, because away from you and him spouting the tripe you have been dishing out is going to get his ass beat by someone, if for no other reason than by virtue of being James Wyatt's son.

you are one of the last remaining LW lackeys, and when you learn this, you will learn MANY things you did not understand up until now about D&D, and might finally understand the game, and where and how badly you have ben fucking it up all along while masturbating over your bible while writing and reading D&D material.

i will help you simplify that which you don't understand about D&D:

1. D&D is A game, that encompasses many ideas. there is no such thing as the ONE D&D WORLD. D&D at its core is generic, and those other things are for settings and campaigns created independently of the generic D&D core, either by the copyright holder, or the payers AS THEY PLAY THE GAME.

2. keep real world fucking religion out of D&D. demons and devils are fictional devices, not owned solely by Chritianity. jsut lose the connection

3. D&D designers are like those companies that make fancy iPhone and iPad covers. they are making accessories for other peoples product. in the case of D&D it is the players own imagination that is the product you are making accessories for, so you cannot make something so constrained that it no longer fits the product you are making something for.

when you learn these 3 things, then you will be able to have a modicum or respect form ANY gamer, until then, you will be just as fucked in the head as you have always been, and laughed at by everyone as you have always been. your padded and fake polls on the website that are answered by your paid advertisers to give the results you want arent fooling anybody. you want to learn how people play D&D, then stop the bullshit, sit in a game or a few dozen ran by people that run them at home away form the whole "family friendly" store atmosphere and learn how the game is really played, and how half-orcs being a product of rape isnt anything really big to worry about in the game. just remove the rape part and half-orcs still exist. stupid stories like that and those you create because you don't understand fiction is your problem. YOUr stupid stories are the problem. move over to the D&D novel division if you think you can do what Salvatore and Greenwood and Weis can do, and tell your stories there. but you arent even good enough to write niche stories like those for the thing you have spent the last part of your life working on so they wont sell. and you damn sure couldt write anything like say:
Eragon series
Twilight series
Harry Potter series
Hunger Game series
Song of Fire and Ice series
etc

YOUR STORIES AND IDEAS SUCK MORE COCKS THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BARRELS WORTH MENTIONED ON TGD SINCE IT BEGAN!

[deaddmwalking]

I really feel pity for your son should he ever go anywhere and play D&D without you around to defend your stupidity that you raised him on and all the misgivings about fantasy and D&D that you taught him, because away from you and him spouting the tripe you have been dishing out is going to get his ass beat by someone, if for no other reason than by virtue of being James Wyatt's son.

I would find it laugable the idea of a hard-core D&D nerd beating up ANYONE for 'heretical fantasy beliefs' if threatening someone's child(ren) weren't so deplorable.

[Voss]

I find it more and more difficult to resist liking James Wyatt, just on the basis of shadzar's rants about him. It makes him seem like a sane and reasonable guy with good ideas. It is sort of like Obama in a way. Nothing in his actual record impressed me, but the fact that Rush Limbaugh hated his guts seemed like a positive. shadzar is the Rush of rpg rants- except fewer people care what he has to say.

Also, given the failure of 4e, changing direction and doing something else seems like a blatantly good idea.

[RobbyPants]

shadzar is the Rush of rpg rants- except fewer people care what he has to say.
.

Thanks for that. Now I picture Shadzar as an overweight, old white guy angrily typing diatribes from a golden keyboard, all while aimlessly making crinkling paper noises.

[Voss]

You didn't already? That is spot on with what I picture, except probably stroking a 2nd edition PH or pictures of Moldavay or Gygax rather than crinkling paper.

[JonSetanta]

I played a session of Next yesterday that was mostly RP except for a single battle against an NPC of the same level, some rapier wielding Fighter that challenged my Mage at a party.

I cast Scorching Ray and the fight was over.

[nockermensch]

shadzar is the Rush of rpg rants- except fewer people care what he has to say.
.

Thanks for that. Now I picture Shadzar as an overweight, old white guy angrily typing diatribes from a golden keyboard, all while aimlessly making crinkling paper noises.

And to think that all this vitriol is merely a fraction of what shad feels for Lorraine Williams.

[Voss]

I played a session of Next yesterday that was mostly RP except for a single battle against an NPC of the same level, some rapier wielding Fighter that challenged my Mage at a party.

I cast Scorching Ray and the fight was over.

What the hell level were you? Scorching ray does a grand total of 2d6 damage if you hit, with additional rays if you cast it as a spell of 3rd level or higher.

You had to be at least 3rd to cast it, so... what the fuck? I can't even parse this situation vs. the actual rules. Unless the fighter actually had a negative con modifier, his HP at level 3 should be 22, higher with a positive con. You do 2d6. At level 5, he has 34+ hp and you can potentially do 4d6. For every two levels past that, he gains at least 12 hp and you do 2d6 more damage, if you hit with each individual ray. At no point do you catch up.

[tussock]

I find it more and more difficult to resist liking James Wyatt, just on the basis of shadzar's rants about him.

You beat me to posting that, and yet Shadzar does manage to make a point or two.

For instance, his 1.2.3. is basically sound, if you translate it to ... putting a bunch of fiction into the core game and tying everything into it just leads to fucking up the different worldbooks (like 4e's Forgotten Realms) and making the game far less flexible for telling your own unique stories with.

That's a real problem. Sure, 3e was "back to the dungeon", and mechanically shuffled a bunch of stuff around, but it was open and fiction-lite enough to produce outstanding campaign settings that were fully consistent with previous editions, and left the mechanical side free to produce great variation (eventually even giving Fighters something to do at higher levels, give or take).

[JonSetanta]

What the hell level were you? Scorching ray does a grand total of 2d6 damage if you hit, with additional rays if you cast it as a spell of 3rd level or higher.

You had to be at least 3rd to cast it, so... what the fuck? I can't even parse this situation vs. the actual rules. Unless the fighter actually had a negative con modifier, his HP at level 3 should be 22, higher with a positive con. You do 2d6. At level 5, he has 34+ hp and you can potentially do 4d6. For every two levels past that, he gains at least 12 hp and you do 2d6 more damage, if you hit with each individual ray. At no point do you catch up.

Level 3.

The spell in Next deals 2d6 rays three at a time by level 3.

I rolled well.

[Voss]

What the hell level were you? Scorching ray does a grand total of 2d6 damage if you hit, with additional rays if you cast it as a spell of 3rd level or higher.

You had to be at least 3rd to cast it, so... what the fuck? I can't even parse this situation vs. the actual rules. Unless the fighter actually had a negative con modifier, his HP at level 3 should be 22, higher with a positive con. You do 2d6. At level 5, he has 34+ hp and you can potentially do 4d6. For every two levels past that, he gains at least 12 hp and you do 2d6 more damage, if you hit with each individual ray. At no point do you catch up.

Level 3.

The spell in Next deals 2d6 rays three at a time by level 3.

I rolled well.

Oh.

That was slightly embarassing- I somehow missed the opening line about three rays. The 2nd level evocations are less shitty than I thought, then. Acid arrow has a similar output, but some of it comes from the following round.

That makes the shitty scaling and crappy outputs on higher level evocations even more bizarre.


@tussock- I suppose its going to depend on how much we really see of this crap. If its unspoken backstory, I really don't give a crap. Even if it is a paragraph in the monster entry, I'm not sure how much I care. It is easily discarded and replaced with something else. And thats true if you want medusas to be default in greyhawk, 'traditional' in FR and your own snowflake in your special snowflake setting. D&D has always had some weird default assumptions in the background. Changing some of them might be nice.