TRPG General Chat

GMNoob

16:00

@waxeagle @JoshuaAslanSmith Do these "odds" look right to you?
Shortsword(d6+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = %25
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) + SA(d6) (no advantage) = 20%
Rapier(d8+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = 40%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) (no SA available) = 10%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) + SA(d6) (advantage) = 5%

wax eagle

@Aaron new question then

Joshua Aslan Smith

I am like the worst person to ask this question

GMNoob

It's the odds that you will be able to use that attack

Joshua Aslan Smith

are you saying for how often that would come up?

GMNoob

yeah

erm switch the 25% with the 20%

Joshua Aslan Smith

16:01

yes?????

Aaron

@waxeagle Ok. Thanks your template is perfect.

Grubermensch

@GMNoob I am curious why you set Rapier(3) and Shortword(1) as two different possibilities. What is the circumstance that changes which you would choose?

GMNoob

@Grubermensch having the option to throw a dagger or not

Rapier is finesse, but not light

Grubermensch

Ah, so (1) is linked to (2)(4)(5)

GMNoob

The shortsword and dagger is the best damage, so you want that. But you might run out of daggers, so you'll just use the rapier instead

@Grubermensch yep

But sometimes you'll want to use the shortsword + cunning action instead of the dagger. And you don't have enough actions to switch it out for a rapier

wax eagle

16:04

@GMNoob I thought that was free

GMNoob

It's free for one object

wax eagle

gotcha

GMNoob

otherwise you need to use the use an object action

wait, is it the best damage? is d8+3*.60 < d6+3*.60 + d4*.60?

I wasn't taking into account the chance to miss with the dagger

Grubermensch

I think it's a little ambiguous whether changing to your dual-wield weapons is meant to require extra effort

GMNoob

@Grubermensch It's not if you are empty handed

But they don't want you to stow bow, wield shield every move

Aaron

16:07

I'm looking for an optional, 3rd party or well defined homebrew reputation for 3.5. I want to be able to track the impact of my player characters interactions with the environment, their access to important people etc as they level up and do things in the world. I want it to track:

1. Character overall reputation
2. Character Reputation with specific settlements (Obviously if they have visited and helped a town their reputation would be different there than another town where they are just known)

GMNoob

@Aaron looks good. But specify that you don't want factions.

Grubermensch

@GMNoob I suppose that makes sense. So you could drop the rapier to switch, but that would probably be counterproductive.

GMNoob

Cause I can see someone suggesting factions for the cities

Grubermensch

Or the shortsword, as it might be.

Aaron

Added to bottom:

Also Right now there are no Factions in play in the game. They might come into play at a later date though.

GMNoob

16:09

Though they did make donning and doffing a shield an action now.

Grubermensch

That's true.

Aaron

@GMNoob Factions would probably fit the city rep nicely actually because mechanically that is what they would be to a reputation system. I just wouldn't call it factions.

GMNoob

Ok readjusted percentages:
Shortsword(d6+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = %5
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) + SA(d6) (no advantage) = 20%
Rapier(d8+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = 40%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) (no SA available) = 30%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) + SA(d6) (advantage) = 5%

@Aaron Then remove that line :)

Aaron

I did

GMNoob

When I read the shield rules to my friend, he decided to make two dwarf fighters, Donn and Doff

wax eagle

16:17

@GMNoob nice

GMNoob

Basically I'm assuming every other turn you'll have advantage, and 70% of the time you'll have SA

wax eagle

@GMNoob sounds reasonable, tbh I foresee the rogue having advantage more, but that's reasonable for now

GMNoob

@waxeagle It's gonna depend on the DM. I can see many DMs saying "You just tricked them they won't fall for that again"

Also, hinderances

Is there a shortcut for calculating damage?

Grubermensch

Technically speaking you should also figure out what the likelihood of imposed disadvantage is.

GMNoob

I don't feel like doing the whole formula 20 times right now :(

Grubermensch

16:21

@GMNoob Each roll is independent, so you can just take the average on each of them and add them together?

GMNoob

basically, the dice are consistent, it's the mod and hit percentage that changes

I need to get the average damage for levesl 1,5,10,15,20 (twice)

@Grubermensch I'm looking for a static substitution

Grubermensch

The best you can do is abstract the dice as their averages and then just multiply things.

GMNoob

@Grubermensch sounds like a job for excell then! :)

Grubermensch

Man I really want to build a simulator AI that could test these things in a more realistic manner.

It would be an interesting way to discover the optimal tactics for a party.

wax eagle

@GMNoob average of any die with an even number of faces is the die divided by 2 +.5

so a d6 is replaced by 3.5

GMNoob

16:28

@waxeagle right that part I have down

it's the 3.5+mod * tohit + 2.5 * tohit I wanted to factor out

+ 3.5 * #SA dice

wax eagle

@GMNoob to hit factors out actually

GMNoob

so its 7 + mod * t0hit + 3.5 * #SA?

wax eagle

x*y + z*y is y*(x+z)

GMNoob

and then 4.5 + 3.5* #SA?

wax eagle

@GMNoob yep

@GMNoob the to-hit has to be factored in with the SA too

because that's dependent on hitting

so it's (7+3.5*SA)* (hit chance- 1) then 2*(7+3.5*SA) * .05

GMNoob

16:32

Right!

Why 2* on the second half ,and why the -1? Why not just add the "extra" damage?

wax eagle

@GMNoob it accounts for the crit

but actually, the way crit damage is done in 5e...

GMNoob

yes, but the crit is just extra damage

with the same formula as befor

wax eagle

dmg * (hit chance + crit chance) is actually right

oh wait no that doesn't work

because mods aren't doubled

so yeah

GMNoob

dmg * hitchance + extraDmg * critchance no?

wax eagle

(hit chance - 5%)(weap+mod + 3.5*SA) + 10% * (weap+3.5*SA)

or yeah, you can factor that to:
(hit chance)*(weap + mod + 3.5*SA) + 5% * (weap + 3.5*SA)

the lack of maxing means the math is simpler

DampeS8N

16:40

Glad when I wrote my dice roller for dampes8n.com I made the die an object that does all of these things. $D6 = new die(6); $D6->max(); $D6->average(); $D6->roll(); so on.

Also a dice object that accepts new die() objects into it and does all the things on that.

Baka-Mastermind

Is KRyan here? 8)

wax eagle

@Baka-Mastermind he is not pingable, no

Baka-Mastermind

Okay XD

wax eagle

if you drop a comment on one of his posts he might pop in, he does frequent here from time to time

GMNoob

Whats the math for AC 11 vs d20+5 to %toHit?

I can do it by hand but I need a formula for excel

wax eagle

16:46

@GMNoob you need a 6 so 75%

(tie goes to the roller in 5e...right?)

Aaron

@Baka-Mastermind He just commented on my post if you want to ping him on it and then delete your comment. rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44230/…

GMNoob

yeah tie goes to attacker

is that right, d20+11 vs AC 11 equals always hit?

yeah I guess it does :P

wax eagle

k, don't ask me to calculate to-hit for adv, I know the crit chance, but that's easy (39/400)

@GMNoob no, attacks always have a 5% miss chance

GMNoob

right..

wax eagle

but yeah, +11 vs AC 11 hits 95% of the time

(which makes me wonder how CR1 enemies are still going to be interesting)

DampeS8N

16:53

@waxeagle Are they supposed to be? They should be easily stomped to feel like you've become a badass.

wax eagle

@DampeS8N I'm not sure tbh. The statements they've made seem to indicate that a dozen or two CR 1 monsters should be an interesting fight for a ~L20 party....I haven't seen enough monsters or made enough characters to know yet though

Tuesday can't get here soon enough

Do we know what the max CR for monsters in the starter is yet?

DampeS8N

@waxeagle It could depend on other things, like what kind of attack they have. AC isn't the only thing to target. And just cause they die fast, doesn't mean they can't be interesting.

wax eagle

@DampeS8N true. we'll definitely have to see

GMNoob

@waxeagle 5?

Low CR monsters are supposed to be minions

Just there to die, and cause interferance

lisardggY

Level 10 - 11 XP: It's by design. Data shows campaigns stop at 10, we're trying to speed up 10+ a bit so groups can reach 20 in a campaign

Tweeted by mikemearls on July 10, 2014 at 4:57 PM

Interesting.

wax eagle

17:02

@lisardggY sorta makes sense

GMNoob

These numbers don't look right... Should a level 1 rogue be getting 19.5 damage vs ac 11?

wax eagle

@GMNoob with adv?

GMNoob

with all 5 attacks modified by percentage

wax eagle

ah

GMNoob

So, yes with adv and all SA

still doesn't sound right..

lisardggY

17:03

@waxeagle I tend to agree. I like low-level play, personally. I get why people would like high-level play. But mid-high levels could drag on, having the complexity of high-level play without the really high-level flair.

wax eagle

@GMNoob no

the largest percentage looks like the average should be:

4.5 + 3 + 3.5 = 11 with a hit rate of 65%

your extra damage for twf is only 1.5

and max avg is 20

or 21.5

GMNoob

Ok, I was adding the mod twice in two different formulas

14.5 sound right?

wax eagle

still too high

shoudn't be higher than 10

probably closer to 7 or 8

Grubermensch

Amidst reading this:

"Remember TSR’s old slogan? It was “Products of Your Imagination.” It wasn’t “Products of Your Obsession with Rules.” http://www.critical-hits.com/blog/2014/07/10/dd-breaking-is-bad/

Tweeted by Alphastream on July 10, 2014 at 4:30 PM

GMNoob

17:19

now that I've addded advantage it went up to 15 damage..

wax eagle

@GMNoob can I see the formula?

GMNoob

not going to be helpful... but =((M2*(H2+F2)*0.05)+(E2*(I2+F2)*0.2)+(M2*(J2+F2)*0.4)+(E2*(K2+F2)*0.3)+(M2*(L2+F‌2)*0.05))+((H2*0.05)+(I2*0.2)+(J2*0.4)+(K2*0.3)+(L2*0.05)*0.05)

wax eagle

maybe share the sheet then :)

Grubermensch

I wish you could supply variable names into spreadsheets. It would make things so much more legible.

wax eagle

@Grubermensch aye, but at that point its a programming language :)

Grubermensch

17:23

@waxeagle It's already a programming language. It's just hard to use.

wax eagle

@Grubermensch troof

GMNoob

drive.google.com/file/d/0B9743jkQd9NbYkxpYjJGTVhmUGM/…

Grubermensch

Also not Turing-complete, but that's not a necessary condition.

GMNoob

M2 = Advantage odds, E2 = normal to hit

H-L = 5 different attacks

F2 = Ability mod

wax eagle

@GMNoob yep

GMNoob

17:25

I got advantage odds from anydice here

anydice.com/program/4053

output 1

sharing the sheet didn't really help did it... ?

wax eagle

@GMNoob nope,

Grubermensch

I find it difficult to read. Your column headings don't match up in places. And also why are attacks set up separately?

GMNoob

copy pasting isn't working either

one sec

this should help

dropbox.com/s/rqqjch3vy6g2iij/rogueCalc.xlsx

There are 5 possible attacks as defined here:
1. Shortsword(d6+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = 5%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) +SA(d6) (no advantage) = 20%
Rapier(d8+mod) + cunning action + SA(d6) (advantage) = 40%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) (no SA available) = 30%
Shortsword(d6+mod) + dagger(d4) + SA(d6) (advantage) = 5%

wax eagle

what's your to-hit?

+5 and you need 11, so the d20 roll needs to be 6?

GMNoob

+5,6,9,10,11 at each milestone

Grubermensch

17:30

Oh I see what you mean there. I suggest calling them attack A,B,C,... so as to not imply sequence

wax eagle

you've got that right

I think you're right on

my damage estimates were low

GMNoob

K

wax eagle

wait no, hold on, SA might be factored twice

or not, is it already accounted for in the Attack 1-5 numbers?

GMNoob

It's calculated into each attack except for attack 4

wax eagle

k, then it's good

GMNoob

17:32

Rogues do more damage than I thought!

wax eagle

@GMNoob ok, it's not as high as you've got it. trying to find the mistake in your math

I'm calculating the average for each attack, and I'm getting 11-13

GMNoob

each attack column is only the dice

the d4 is 2'5 or 1.5?

wax eagle

@GMNoob 2.5

GMNoob

did the dropbox link work?

wax eagle

yes, going to quickly craft my own sheet though cuz I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the way your sheet is laid out right now

GMNoob

17:47

There must be too much crit damage

wax eagle

@GMNoob not sure. Like I said, checking in a different layout

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/… here's where I'm working

GMNoob

Found the problem

The 0.05 was only being multiplied on the last crit number instead of all of them

wax eagle

@GMNoob gotcha

that would do it

@GMNoob btw crit w/adv is .0975

GMNoob

8.943175
12.375
21.375
29.07
34.525

wax eagle

that's more in line with expectations

also says fighter is your damage machine

avg damage is 10

with the expanded crits

GMNoob

17:52

10 for what?

wax eagle

@GMNoob combined

GMNoob

can't wait to compare paladins and fighters

wax eagle

9.99

GMNoob

Ah, k

wax eagle

no wait, I had the numbers wrong on one. 9.17 total with the crits factored right

actually we should factor TWF differently for the rogue

because that second attack matters a lot if they miss the first

GMNoob

17:56

Huh?

wax eagle

@GMNoob here's the thing. if a rogue misses with their first attack with adv, but hits with the second (and still have adv), they get to apply SA on the second attack

GMNoob

doesn't it factor?

wax eagle

so you take your miss chance for the first attack, multiply it by the hit chance of the second, and add that much SA damage in.

@GMNoob nope

now, because this rogue is wicked accurate with this DC, it doesn't matter much

GMNoob

I see

wax eagle

that's going to become a hugely valuable thing at high levels and against tough enemies thogh

GMNoob

17:59

That's in addition to the sa allready calculated in?

wax eagle

@GMNoob yes

its honestly a negligible amount, but it's an interesting thing

and again, matters a lot more when the miss chance is higher

TRiG

18:33

►

wax eagle

cool

Grubermensch

@TRiG I've always felt the draw of pool-based rolling systems was scooping up that ginormous pile of dice you can barely fit in hands and throwin 'em down. Gotta have that feel.

Matt

18:50

How many attacks can a level 20 fighter make in a turn using two weapon fighting in dnd 5e

wax eagle

@Matt 5

unless he uses an action surge, then its 9

Grubermensch

@waxeagle But he can only do that twice.

wax eagle

@Grubermensch right

Metool

So all attacks a creature makes are at the same bonus, right?

wax eagle

@Metool yes

Matt

18:52

Ya

wax eagle

A L20 fighter should have +11 to hit

(really, pretty much all the characters are going to have +11 to hit at L20)

provided they are attacking with their main stat

and they take it to 20, which probably makes sense for most characters

Matt

So if two weapon fighting requires the use of a bonus action to make the offhand attack dose that mean the fighters extra attack also gives him an extra bonus action?

wax eagle

@Matt nope

you get 1. that's it

so the TWF attack progression is:

2, 3, 4, 5

whereas the other fighters go:

1, 2, 3, 4

We were trying to figure out whether or not GWF was better than TWF as you leveled, and TWF wins in the early levels, but loses in the later ones

Grubermensch

@waxeagle If they keep the Great Weapon Master feat as it is in the playtest, that would often be an extra attack if you're fighting a mass of enemies.

Matt

Ahhh, ok that's good to know

Grubermensch

18:58

Really powerful if combined with the Champion crit range boost

Matt

Extremely

Although i don't think I will ever play a champion. Passive powers just seem kinda boring to me.

Grubermensch

Oh, definitely. But they'd make good NPCs.

Matt

True

I'm actually rather impressed by 5e so far

The balance between martial classes and spell casters is actually pretty decent

RobertF

So 5e fixes the linear fighter/quadratic wizard issue (if it even needed fixing)?

What have power players done in the past - start out as a fighter up to 5th -10th level, then multiclass as a magic-user to gain spellcasting powers?

Grubermensch

19:14

It's going to be hard to tell how that goes without seeing the items available to martial characters.

But I think if you consider how the damage-dealing cantrips are handled, it looks a lot more even there.

DampeS8N

So I was inspired by The Bronze Coin's remarkably kinky members to create a D6-Lite variant Google Docs publishes documents oddly. Junk at the bottom is a character sheet on the actual doc.

2

RobertF

Your kinky member?

DampeS8N

@RobertF No comment.

Grubermensch

If you play with feats, and the feats are similar to those in the playtest, that also opens up the possibility for a martial character to know a spell or two.

DampeS8N

Interesting fact: there are apparently no Erotic themed RPGs that aren't made by/for 14 year olds. Like for example, FATAL.

David L

19:24

Heh. For erotic RP, might as well just use Exalted. It essentially assumes that sex will happen. Probably often. It has a Martial Arts style and a half that rely on it. (and a style that works perfectly with BDSM, that I didn't count above...)

DampeS8N

@DavidL This is a pretty common opinion on the internets.

Grubermensch

They do have an entire first-party book devoted to the subject.

David L

nearly. They had a preview for it, but then never printed the book. (It might help to understand the preview of the book was released on April 1st T_T)

...unless there was one in First Edition. I didn't play it, I'm afraid.

DampeS8N

While not typically first party, there are sexually themed books for quite a few games. But they are generally very juvenile. There are few games/books that aim to support the structure of erotic stories, rather than giving you rules for specific acts.

David L

There is the "Book of Blue Magic" intended for 3.5 and fully Pathfinder compatible that specifically discusses the uses of magic in the bedroom in a typical DnD world.

However, while some of it is rather tastefully written, other parts are not.... I'm thinking of the second level lubrication spell they added :D

DampeS8N

19:30

@DavidL That's exactly the type of thing I mean. The "Erotic" books out there for RPGs are just overtly sexual, they aren't actually sexy.

They don't really support erotic play, they just let to stick whoozits in whatzits.

Grubermensch

@DavidL Hmm so it was. I had thought it was a complete book.

David L

it has some unknown wizard's name attached to it, like some 3e spells still carried some legendary wizards' names on them from some of the greatest campaign settings... and it has a long description of WHY he developed an improved version of "grease" sigh it was hilarious, sure, but it wasn't remotely sexy.

@DampeS8N My assumption is that no rule will ever be sexy, and so they simply leave those parts of the game entirely up to player description. After all, rules are meant to be used - writing in the rules for actually doing the deed is a tacit disapproval of letting the scene "fade to black", and no one wants to go there.

DampeS8N

So with the D6-Lite thing above I'm gonna try to build a framework for placing characters into a situation, develop sexual tension, and basically collaboratively roleplay erotic fiction.

David L

omg you included a strip variant.

DampeS8N

To that goal, I've eliminated the GM role.

@DavidL :)

David L

19:35

I assume a star is like a "+1" on other parts of the internet, right? I starred your game link. I wish I could do so again :P

....I can't actually PLAY the strip variant, or the game in general, but I wholeheartedly approve.

DampeS8N

@DavidL It pins it over to the right. Basically it marks it as important or useful.

Grubermensch

Or entertaining.

Mostly entertaining.

DampeS8N

@Grubermensch Well, but strictly speaking it isn't supposed to be used for things that are just entertaining.

David L

it would be important to me if my gaming group was a place we could actually play it, does that count?

DampeS8N

@DavidL Absolutely!

I made it public and posted it here because i think people could make use of it. If nothing else it popularizes D6-Lite which is a fantastic system for starting totally ad-hoc games from nothing but a single d6.

Metool

19:39

@DampeS8N "Star this message as useful / interesting for the transcript"

David L

Given that a) we have a recently-turned-13-year-old in the group, and that b) he's still more mature than half the players, and c) the group is all straight men, with possibly one bisexual exception, neither variant of the game would play well at our table :D

interesting works <3 my star shall stand!

DampeS8N

But yeah, rules aren't really sexy. So I've tried to have as few as possible. I'm taking a "medium is the message" approach to the design.

David L

I noticed. I am somewhat dismayed by the fact that combat rules still come before sexy rules. You might consider changing their order if you want them to be perceived differently...

DampeS8N

@DavidL I'll rework the language once I figure out the right words. But try to consider the combat being used more for BDSM.

David L

the fact that it starts with combat rules, then goes to sexy rules leads me to believe the game is intended for "caveman romance", which I will not disgrace this chat by describing in any more detail than that. Putting the scene rules first and leaving combat as a barely-remembered endnote should help portray the image you want better.

BDSM "combat", however, is perfect. ^_^ I know someone who probably wants to play your game already, even though he doesn't know it exists...

DampeS8N

19:45

@DavidL That seems fair. The order as it sits is just the order D6-Lite is in with new stuff added afterwards.

David L

makes sense.

it's probably just my screwed up head that said "combat, then sex? Wait, what?" anyway.

Aaron

@DampeS8N Starting Deathmarch 5. Any ETA on when the random quests will be ready?

DampeS8N

@DavidL reload it.

David L

It's all good ^_^

DampeS8N

@Aaron No ETA unfortunately. As the other things in my life boom and bust that will determine when I have time to work on Level Up. I am still working on it when I can, though.

Aaron

19:50

@DampeS8N I am assuming the kinky doc you linked to is nsfw?

DampeS8N

@Aaron actually, it is safe for work.

Aaron

@DampeS8N ok

@DampeS8N The bronze coin one?

DampeS8N

We've said much less work safe things in here than are in there.

@Aaron yep

Aaron

@DampeS8N Ah. We have had some interesting conversations in here.

DampeS8N

@Aaron I just mean in relation to the doc. The most NSFW thing in it is the word Erotic.

I just moved the Meta Rules to the top, I think they are top-level important.

Despite what you may have heard, Safety is Sexy.

Aaron

19:56

Knowing you have a safe word lets you. Let go. In a way you wouldn't if it wasn't there. Right?

David L

Indeed.

No need to shyly tiptoe into the waters when you know a strong, sexy lifeguard is waiting to save you if needed. Dive into the deep end :D

DampeS8N

@Aaron It removes confusion. A lot of kink play centers on giving up or taking control, being ignored when saying No is sometimes part of that. Having another word that isn't overloaded depending on context is important in those contexts. Typically that word is Safeword. It used to be A safeword, but people typically just use Safeword now.

Aaron

@DampeS8N Really? I did not know there was a common Safeword

DampeS8N

Banana was popular. So was Schoolbus.

Aaron

I always thought it was something dependent on the couple/group

Matt

20:00

@Grubermensch Well according to one of the daily dnd legends and lore posts their is going to be a fighter sub class that uses combat magic. How they are going to make this different from what you could get from multi-classing or feats I have know idea.

DampeS8N

Having a standard is good, and people already were using the word safeword to describe the word so it became the word

wax eagle

@RobertF maybe? jury is definitely still out.

David L

in situations where you may not know or have arrangements with every member of the group, a standard is definitely a good idea.

DampeS8N

That way instead of thinking "Ok, what are we using as the safeword again..." you are already primed with Safeword, so it is even safer than using some other word.

wax eagle

We need two major things, firstly the full Fighter list of options, the Basic fighter is pretty passive and makes his living stacking attacks. The Basic Wizard is far more active and makes his living on big single attacks (a la the rogue and cleric)

DampeS8N

20:02

@DavidL If you do not know or have arrangements with a group, you are doing kink play wrong. But yes.

David L

did I somehow accidentally ignore someone? I seem to only be getting half of the conversation that wax eagle is in.

Aaron

@DampeS8N True. I guess it depends on if you are with people you are not normally with.

wax eagle

@DavidL oh no, i responded to an earlier comment. Chat can be threaded (and should be if you're replying to someone)

DampeS8N

@DavidL He's talking to someone who isn't actually in the room right now.

David L

@DampeS8N I have friends in various convention groups that tend to run things like "72-hour 'meetings'" and more... esoteric behaviors. Not knowing the group is part of the kink.

DampeS8N

20:04

@Aaron You should never assume anything if someone's life could be ruined or ended in an ambiguous situation. Always be explicit.

David L

and they do use set, convention-wide safewords (typically, Safeword) so that no matter what part of the convention you are in or who is there with you, EVERYONE knows the safe word.

Aaron

Wait.

DampeS8N

@Aaron Wait is a terrible safeword.

David L

ROFL

Aaron

I am surprised but not that there are conventions for this.

wax eagle

20:06

@DampeS8N as is ouch

Aaron

lol

Metool

I must away.

Aaron

See ya

Metool

@Aaron Poke me when this convo's over.

Grubermensch

@DampeS8N There's a threaded view? How do I turn this on?

wax eagle

20:07

@Grubermensch not really, you can mouse over the reply and see what it replies to

DampeS8N

@Grubermensch Jeez, If there is I have no idea...

David L

@Aaron I was thinking specifically of two of my friends who each have a single, very specific kink. Their conventions tend to be quite a bit different than mine.

DampeS8N

@Metool No, we'll stop talking about it. Don't want to make people uncomfortable!

Grubermensch

Ugh bwugh replied to wrong message because scroll.

wax eagle

aye, let's move that to the bar (or a new room), if it wants to continue

the bar

David L

20:08

eh, I've probably said all I know about the subject.

Matt

well then

wax eagle

going to spend tomorrow digging deep on wizard spells.

David L

And poor Matt is scrolling back going "wtl is all this?" :D hiya Matt.

wax eagle

So far it's the only character that actually has significant interesting build choices

and there are a lot of decision points

Matt

I found it interesting that the cleric and wizard no longer share a lot of the spells they used to.

wax eagle

20:11

@Matt yeah, Clerics can steal from the wizard list via domain spells, but thats only going to be a few

Matt

Personally, it's probably a good change.

wax eagle

I think so, they need to have distinct flavor, or conscious overlap (like feats or MCs)

the way I understand caster MC, you get your combined caster level of spell slots (so if your wiz 10, cleric 10, you get all the slots), and none of them are reserved for specific classes....but I'm not 100% sure there

Matt

ya

Grubermensch

@waxeagle I'm guessing this is one of the things due in the hotly-anticipated Chapter 6 of the Player's Handbook.

DampeS8N

@waxeagle I'd imagine if they do have fighter spells (for lack of a better term) then they probably will have the ability to NOT select a specific type of fighter variant. It is somewhat kludgy when you consider multi-classing anyway. So I bet fighters of all stripes will be able to dip into the fighter spells.

It would be a little bit of 4E's powers chocolate in the more old school peanut butter.

Grubermensch

20:14

@DampeS8N Or it could be a Martial Archetype itself.

wax eagle

@DampeS8N I would like that. I'm looking forward to seeing a maneuver based fighter like some of the early Playtest versions

cuz combat dice were cool

David L

so, I'm completely ignorant of anything DnD after the corebooks for 4e came out. All this talk of a new system has me interested. Can you give me a "probably" or "probably not": As a player who couldn't stand the sameness of characters in 4e and so left the system for Pathfinder, do you think I'd enjoy the new DnD system?

Grubermensch

@DavidL rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/41868/…

2

wax eagle

@DavidL probably? It looks a lot like 2e had a baby with 3.5 and named 4e the godparent

but you don't have to take my word for it /levar

2

^ that's v.1 of Basic D&D 5e. It includes the basic combat rules and character creation.

David L

thanks wax eagle ^_^ I may actually read it if I find time this Sunday, as it stands I'm out of time for today. Fare thee well and such.

Aaron

20:20

@Metool Ping

Cricket. Cricket.

Transcript for