Annoying Game Questions You Want Answered

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:30 am

I'm going to look into a more faithful conversion of the original ToH (apparently the 3.0 update is less lethal), but I'm also looking at other dungeons and writing my own.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:29 am

How do you make a meatgrinder feel fun with player choice instead of ‘fun’ like gaming at a casino where the house wants you to die

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:42 am

Well, this isn't "instead" of, but you find players who think playing a meat grinder will be fun.

But also just fill it with stupid creative traps and actually put in some tension breaks.

Like, so far I've got an antechamber with a bridge that can only bare about 15 lbs, and a pressure plate that lets it bare more when loaded down; a room with a river people have to cross that also has a swarm of animated gauntlets and a cage that will trap them if they try to just run headlong through the open door; a room with a super obvious and easy to disarm antigrav trap that has to be used to actually exit the room because the door behind it is fake; a room with an invisible heat wall maze; culminating in a respite of a positive-energy giant bee hive that allows players to heal if they don't just charge in killing bees.

Like, if I just stuck to random corridors and rooms with traps pulled out of the DMG, yeah, it'd be boring, so you have to give people creative death traps.

Trill · Post by **Trill** » Sun Mar 18, 2018 4:46 pm

Since my Google-fu failed me I thought about just asking it here:
I remember there being a post on IMHO by IIRC Frank or AH about why exactly Adept Metamagics are so weak compared to those for Mages and why the Adept powers are overpriced.

Anyone know which one I mean?

Whiysper · Post by **Whiysper** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:38 am

There's a brief version with some suggested re-costs here:
http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=58685#58685

Trill · Post by **Trill** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:52 am

I know about that post
But there was a big one about how in early editions initiating for adepts was far more useful than for mages, so they gave mages better metamagics to compensate

I just can't find it

Whiysper · Post by **Whiysper** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:12 pm

Fair play. In that case, I don't recall either, although I do remember it! Hope someone with a better recollection can point you in the right direction

.

Iduno · Post by **Iduno** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 5:06 pm

Trill wrote:But there was a big one about how in early editions initiating for adepts was far more useful than for mages,

I know in 4th, adepts can choose to take an extra power point instead of a metamagic, which is pretty useful.

I don't know why they'd decide mages need a buff (unless JH is some sort of idiot), or why adepts not using metamagic means the mages need better ones, but that's what I remember. Also, because adepts use magic instead of being dirty technology-users, their powers got cheaper in 5th edition.

Trill · Post by **Trill** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 6:33 pm

IIRC it was because in 1e-3e initiation for a magician gave them one more MAG, which only set some target numbers, so values above 6, especially 7, were pretty useless. For adepts meanwhile initiation got them another PP which they could spend on more cool powers. So the developers said: both get metamagics, but since adepts gain more from pure initiation than mages do, well make the mage metamagics better than the adept ones

But the post I'm referring to was more elaborate and that's why I'd like to find it again

TiaC · Post by **TiaC** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 12:12 am

What would it do for 5e if I took every d20 roll, subtracted 7 from the DC and made it a d6?

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 1:51 am

It would make everything spectacularly more deterministic, and make Lucky even more of a god feat than it already is.

Cervantes · Post by **Cervantes** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:37 am

TiaC wrote:What would it do for 5e if I took every d20 roll, subtracted 7 from the DC and made it a d6?

you can just use 2d10 if ur jonesing for that shit

TiaC · Post by **TiaC** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 7:21 pm

The idea isn't to reduce variance, but to escape bounded accuracy.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:39 pm

Does anyone know of an extant random generator for D&D 3.x magic items that generates fully random items, including chance of intelligence and curse and glowy shit?

(it's for my casual meat grinder, the fact that randomly generating cursed and intelligent items is bad for a campaign isn't an issue here)

angelfromanotherpin · Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:16 pm

The donjon one does most of that, but it doesn't do intelligence (and associated traits) because there isn't a fixed rate for it, just <1%.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:28 pm

Huh, I didn't realize that included curses.

Hiram McDaniels · Post by **Hiram McDaniels** » Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:53 pm

Sorry if this has already been covered numerous times, but it is the annoying game questions thread...

What are the Den's opinions on systems where either one side of the GM screen or the other rolls all the dice? Like games where the players roll for attack and defense vs. static TN's and the game master just narrates the outcome?

I'm of different minds on the subject. I definitely don't like systems where only the GM rolls dice because I feel players should have more of a hand in their own destiny or at least that of their characters.

I'm more on the side of systems where the players get to roll the dice because it encourages them to remain engaged on their off turns, and it keeps the GM honest. However, making players roll damage against themselves seems a little sadistic.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:25 am

If it's a very focused sort of game that does a particular genre then I'm fine with one side doing all the rolling. If it's suppose to be kitchen sink then the game needs to support PC's fighting PC's and NPC's built the same way as PC's.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:29 pm

Agree with OgreBattle. If PCs fight against each other, it can't be as simple as 'PCs make all rolls' because then it is unclear which PC should make rolls in that situation.

I've found that players prefer to make their own attack/damage rolls. They also like to believe they have a chance to 'resist' effects. If given a choice between 'attacker rolls to overcome resistance' and 'defender rolls to resist attack', players tend to prefer to roll to resist - consequently, they cede the resist check to team monster against their own attacks.

Mathematically, there isn't a difference between the attacker rolling to overcome a static resistance (like 3.x Spell Resistance) or the defender rolling to resist the attack (like 3.x Will Saves), but it all comes down to 'feels'.

Some of this is probably based on expectation. Players don't seem to object to team monster rolling to overcome their AC (static value), but they do object to team monster rolling to overcome their Willpower (if given a static value).

Ultimately, a mix that isn't entirely logical makes the most sense. In general, giving rolls to the attacker speeds up play (because they're engaged taking their turn). I'd go with attacker rolls everything if players didn't have emotional responses that DEMAND they get to roll to 'save themselves'. If a player fails a saving throw, they feel they had a chance to do SOMETHING as opposed to being told 'the beholder rolls a natural 20 on his disintegrate ray - you're dust'.

Mord · Post by **Mord** » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:12 pm

Since you need 2 rolls to resolve a typical attack action (one to hit, one to soak) it appeals to me to have the attacker do one and the defender do the other. This also has the pro-engagement feature where if someone does a multi-target attack everybody at the table gets to roll. I've been thinking about an "attacker rolls damage (or other magnitude of effect as appropriate), defender(s) roll to dodge" system.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:47 am

Defender rolling soak can also double for activating counter/reaction abilities

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:48 am

OgreBattle wrote:Defender rolling soak can also double for activating counter/reaction abilities

This, but rolling dodge instead of soak makes the counter/reactions more plausible. It just makes more sense to have an ability that lets you move after a successful dodge roll or counterattack after a successful parry roll than to do either of those things after a successful soak roll. Also, it has the useful property that unattended inanimate objects only ever have static defenses, since they don't have a dodge score to roll with.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Thu Mar 29, 2018 6:51 pm

What systems are good for a mystery/investigation campaign? Should it just be any rules-lite system with hopes that the DM is good at structuring the adventure? I know GUMSHOE was designed for it, but I've not heard it actually described as good.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Thu Mar 29, 2018 7:16 pm

virgil wrote:What systems are good for a mystery/investigation campaign? Should it just be any rules-lite system with hopes that the DM is good at structuring the adventure? I know GUMSHOE was designed for it, but I've not heard it actually described as good.

As for the rules-lite part, I imagine it has a lot to do with how much you want the players solving mysteries vs the PCs. The more you rely on the players, I think the more you need a GM who knows how to leave clues around.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:39 am

virgil wrote:What systems are good for a mystery/investigation campaign? Should it just be any rules-lite system with hopes that the DM is good at structuring the adventure? I know GUMSHOE was designed for it, but I've not heard it actually described as good.

I've had fun with Fate Core for tracking spies and uncovering assassins. Mystery stories often have out of the box thinking, rules lite abstraction helps with players describing a neat "AHA!" moment. It generally involved the most handsome PC selling his body to a gay government official