The Gaming Den

Yeah, that's kind of where I wound up thinking about whether allowing spellcasters if I said they could just be 1st level. Druids, clerics and sorcerers quite easy to explain in the game premise. Wizards and bards are harder to explain, but I explicitly allow for "you made it out, but got dragged back home for some reason," so basically if someone wanted to be a wizard, it means they dropped out of college and went home. So now I'm basically just trying to decide whether I want them to be level 0 or 1, and wondering what other people about the subject.

And this is explicitly a one shot. It might become an ongoing campaign, but if I start them at level 0, they will gain their full first level at the conclusion of the one shot plot.

a wizard could also be someone self taught in secret -- "You stole old sage Tom's books? When Tom died, Didn't elder Greg tell us his house was dangerous and locked it up?"

"I didn't steal anything, and well he didn't lock the kitchen window. The books were already open on the kitchen table, I didn't think reading would do anyone any harm, right? And look at this cantrip I can do 2/day! Only took me three years of nights crawling through the kitchen window."

From experience, level 1 5e characters feel quite delicate: everyone is scared of taking 1-2 hits. I recommend starting at level 1 so you can pull more stuff straight from the monster manual without figuring out an appropriate CR.

If you want things to feel particularly gritty, stretch out the rest schedule a bit. I like overnight for a short rest and two nights for a long rest.

Well, what about a modified first level, so something like-

Characters do not receive the following class features at game start:

• Barbarian: 1 use of Rage
• Bard: 1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)
• Cleric: 1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)
• Druid: 1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)
• Fighter: Second Wind
• Monk: No bonus attack from Martial Arts
• Paladin: Divine Sense cannot locate auras
• Ranger: Favored Enemy
• Rogue: One Expertise
• Sorcerer: 1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)
• Warlock: 1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)
• Wizard:1st level spells ("0" slots, meaning rituals can still be used)

If you're going to let them have class abilities, just let them be 1st level.

Ok, so last night I had a dream in which a barbarian had to rid a hardware store of a gorgon, and as reflections don't turn you to stone had a magician cast an illusion spell to make a periscope so they could see it without being killed.

Is that a thing that should work? If the illusion is in the mind, I'd say not, but if it's like a hologram and would show up on camera it should. But then you can make telescopes. And giant magnifying glasses to burn enemies with sunlight, or sunlight at all to burn vampires and possibly laser beams and stuff and it gets a bit silly.

I think in 3e it would only work if the illusion was a Shadow and able to have real effects; otherwise what the periscope showed would be determined by the imagination of the caster and not by the light entering the imaginary aperture.

Why did you decide that reflected images don't have power?

From a physics perspective, the light that enters your eyes from seeing a Gorgon is reflected light. How is it reflecting off the Gorgon then off a mirror different than reflecting directly? If the mirror 'absorbs' the magical petrification effect (ie, it is not reflected while light is) then why doesn't wearing a glass goggle block line of effect?

I know that Perseus is described as using the reflected image in his shield, but it isn't clear that he is getting a DIRECT look like you would with a real mirror. Perhaps he was taking a risk and if he had locked eyes with the reflection, that alone would have been enough.

That said, I would argue that illusions don't reflect light. Best case, the caster tries to create what appears to be a reflected image. Since it is dependent on the caster's actions, if he can't see the gorgon, he can't accurately reproduce an image of what the gorgon is doing.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:58 pm

Why did you decide that reflected images don't have power?

Presumably for the same reason that moonlight doesn't hurt vampires, even though it's just reflected sunlight.

Whatever Jr. wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:34 pm

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:58 pm

Why did you decide that reflected images don't have power?

Presumably for the same reason that moonlight doesn't hurt vampires, even though it's just reflected sunlight.

There is definitely a difference in intensity of sunlight reflected from the moon versus what is received directly.

XKCD explains why you can't generate fire from moonlight. But you CAN generate fire using a mirror reflecting sunlight. Source

The moon reflects a heck of a lot of lot considering it's a ball of rock. If it was an actual mirror, we'd be in real trouble.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:12 pm

The moon reflects a heck of a lot of lot considering it's a ball of rock. If it was an actual mirror, we'd be in real trouble.

A mirror moon would be a pretty cool campaign setting detail though.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:58 pm

I know that Perseus is described as using the reflected image in his shield, but it isn't clear that he is getting a DIRECT look like you would with a real mirror. Perhaps he was taking a risk and if he had locked eyes with the reflection, that alone would have been enough.

Why muck about with a mirror or shield reflection if it doesn't help, then?

But, ok, if the reflection is just as bad, that answers that question.

Well, in game terms, a poor reflection could have provided a bonus on the save. Since Perseus would have used a Bronze shield the reflected image would be notably worse than silver sprayed in an atoms-thick layer against a glass pane.

A better mirror would have provided a smaller bonus - or maybe none at all.

Hello,

Has anyone ever adapted the Tome items to the Eberron setting ?

The wide accessibility of magic items doesn't merge well with the high entry price of Lesser Magic Items, so I'm inclined to allow for the creation of both Tome items and normal magic items.

Any thoughts ?

Be well you all.

And why the hell is a Handy Haversack a Medium magic item whereas it's only 2.000 GP in 3.5 ???

Maybe to give you more chances to get one because everyone needs it.

erik wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:09 pm

Maybe to give you more chances to get one because everyone needs it.

I could be wrong, but I think the complaint is that they should be a Lesser Item in Book of Gears, and thus way MORE likely to be obtained.

Red Rob, by making them a Medium item puts them at a "cost" of 16k where they can't be wished, and are therefore something you can't get until level 8 or 9, and even this comes at the cost of not getting a Medium item which you are more likely to want in it's place.

Handy Haversack as an item that costs 2k in 3.5 should much better fit as a Lesser Item that anyone can wish up as many as they want of and people can theoretically get at level 2-4 for the first time.

allanlerouge wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 24, 2021 6:48 am

And why the hell is a Handy Haversack a Medium magic item whereas it's only 2.000 GP in 3.5 ???

I would guess that the author intended that the haversack be used according to its pre-3.5 nerfing (or forgot that it had been nerfed). The 3e version made retrieving items from it a free action, which is a significant enough action advantage to be moved up a tier.

Kaelik wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:56 pm

erik wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:09 pm

Maybe to give you more chances to get one because everyone needs it.

I could be wrong, but I think the complaint is that they should be a Lesser Item in Book of Gears, and thus way MORE likely to be obtained.

Doh. I foolishly made the assumption it was listed as Medium *in addition to* Lesser. Even though I had no reason to assume such a thing other than that would be nice.

(I was imagining a complaint that a table for random Medium magic items also contained HHH thus depriving adventurers of an actual Medium item when rolled).

Hello all,

My contention was indeed with making a 2.000 GP item a Medium instead of Lesser Magic Item. For what it does, it's overkill in my opinion.

And after comparison, it is the 3.5 version, not the 3.0. Getting an item is a move action.

Ah, well, I'll put it in Lesser ...

I believe Red Rob "disappeared" most lesser items that would have a drastic and obvious effect on the economy if spammed.

Oh, nice catch there, didn't think about the economy effects... Though spamming Haversacks could do some damage to the economy, but so would spamming resources and stuff, so I'm not sure it hold.

Dungeons & Dragons & Pathfinder & So On tend to have a grid based combat system with push pull and opportunity attacks, then say "Forced movement doesn't provoke OA's"

So does D&D5e actually 'break' if forced movement does provoke OA's, or does it become more fun

Does 5e even have attacks of opportunity?

Yes.