TRPG General Chat

@BESW Still can

@Rubiksmoose Still could

Just because the answer has been provided doesn't mean the question can't be improved

Absolutely.

But I'm not the person to do it because I don't know 5e well enough to leave a comment that's actually gonna be useful.

Help isn't help if it's coming from a place of ignorance about the thing being helped.

12:35 AM

@Rubiksmoose eh, the answer's out there. he commented on it. good enough.

David Coffron

1:07 AM

@Rubiksmoose Thanks

1:20 AM

Art: Commission for @teenager-ish of her Druid, Lady Bethrynna Galanodel

@BESW hehe, in costume I see :>

Rubiksmoose

@BESW that is really well done!

Wooow!

and yes -- it is quite nicely done

1:44 AM

Droood

hey there @WhatWizard

What Wizard

Hello there!

Did you see a Wizard?

What Wizard?

Over there! Him?

What Wizard??

The guy in the big hat! With the big stick!

What Wizard?!?

Ugh. Nevermind

What Wizard

A sort of who's on first scenario.

Every dollar of it.

1:52 AM

how're things going?

What Wizard

Things are going good for me. If you had intended to ask me. How are things here?

I recently played freebooters on the frontier which is really fun

I recently found a day-planner from high school. Skimming through it I found a notation one Saturday: "TFFV."
Boom.
The phrase "Tales from the Floating Vagabond" popped into my head. I have no idea what it is.
Quick searching reveals it's a SF RPG. I didn't read much (because I don't want to spoil it) and I **still** have zero recollection of it. Like maybe it's a planted note!

Point is: anyone here ever played Tales from the Floating Vagabond?

@WhatWizard alright

@nitsua60 that I have not.

@nitsua60 I was going to make a joke about the name but I lost it, and I have not

I never even heard of it till now

@trogdor Neither have I. Except, according to my contemporaneous memorialization, I have!

1:59 AM

Scary/probably-really-useful-from-an-evolutionary-standpoint how efficiently we forget.

2:53 AM

Here's a math question for any fluent DM's

oh?

If I am dual wielding, with no extra feats or abilities - I have a battleaxe (versatile) in one hand, and a handaxe in the other. Which should I apply my mods to, to get the most damage?

5e

You can't two weapon fight with a battleaxe

so, you should apply them to the battleaxe

I don't think it makes any difference. Also, your scenario is not possible.

The battleaxe is versatile, so it can be wielded in one hand

2:56 AM

It is not Light though

yes, but it is not light

Oh right. Yes

lol, I like that we chose different emphasises

That's why I was thinking of taking the Dual Wielder Feat

however, let's say you have the dual wielder feat

2:57 AM

oh, when you said I am duel wielding you meant you got the DW feat, ok

Yes. So that makes the situation viable, without changing anything

then I would apply the damage to the weapon with a higher damage die. alpha damage = better chance of killing whatever the thing is and being able to attack something else for the 1d6

@HellSaint No, actually lol. But applying the feat doesn't change anything, just makes the scenario viable lol

Oh haha

Yes, it just makes the scenario viable.

I agree with gg5 - in terms of DPR, it doesn't make any difference.

Yeah. Fair.

2:59 AM

which class, out of curiosity.

The problem is that if you would already kill with the first 1d8 hit, you wasted your damage on that overkill

Also @goodguy5 your second point makes sense too.

Barb.

So it only makes any difference when the enemy is low HP.

@HellSaint yes, but that is to say that it sometimes makes a mild difference.

Actually, nevermind, you can only apply the bonus damage to the first attack anyway

3:01 AM

@Ben barb dual wielder is fun

So the question is "When should I first attack with the 1d6 and when should I first attack with the 1d8"

I don't actually see why there is a difference anyway

My initial build is going to be Battleaxe/dual (no feat) handaxe, then possibly bump that up to dual battleaxe later

@HellSaint just always attack with the 1d8+bonus first

I want to try dual barb again with three levels of fighter (champion)

One way or the other, you either miss your attack, take out your target, or apply the bonus damage regardless of what you hit with

3:03 AM

@HellSaint Unless you take Martial Adept > Sweeping attack

@goodguy5 If the opponent you are going to hit has 1 HP it is actually better to hit it with the 1d6 + Bonus and hit the next with 1d8, instead of wasting the 1d8 on a dead monster.

But that's porbably a little outside the scope of the initial scenario haha

Obviously the optimal choice here would be to hit the other enemy first with 1d8+bonus and THEN the one with 1 HP with 1d6

^

But you might not know that he is going to die instantly.

3:04 AM

Yeah

Anyway, to be honest, it only makes a difference in some really edge scenarios hahaha

It's better to overflow damage onto a dead guy than to have to use both attacks on the same guy

imo, anyway

but yea, we're talking less than 10% of attacks where that extra 4-6 damage matters

So, following this conversation, what I want to do, ideally, is take 3 levels of Fighter > Champion to get improved crit, then Martial adept > sweeping attack, to get "overflow" damage, and Dual Wielder feat so I can swing around 2 Battleaxes.

@Ben well, if that's the character you want to build, yes

Hahaha

I actually want to have a go at the Storm Barb from the UA

3:08 AM

I can never remember what barbs get at 17

ah, right. the last of their brutal critical

Yeah

4 ASIs... is that enough?

Half Orc Barb is brutal.

pun intended?

Indeed haha

3:10 AM

good

Path of the Storm Herald > Sea

But with that, you don't want to dual wield

Amendment: Battleaxe wielding Half-Orc Barb is brutal

@goodguy5 Why not?

because the storm herald thing uses your bonus action

@goodguy5 Oh yeah.

But it's not going to be a constant thing. So it might be Storm herald one turn, then second attack another turn... you know... keep things interesting

Maybe eventually just throw my axes and start giving people hugs...

I don't follow your rules of combat. Chaotic Neutral baby!

@Miniman I saw a youtube video about Golden Sun, had the Mars Djinni on the titlescreen and I thought "Oh cool Miniman's on youtube!"

3:15 AM

sure, but it seems like a lot of investment to split between two things

I'm ok with this. I like to have a bit of an "arsenal", if you will.

Probably one of the reasons why I don't like the Warlock class very much.

@Ben fluffytaur is fluffy :D

@Ben I try not to min-max too much, but you're hurting me lol

@goodguy5 To clarify - the idea is to be able to do something the situation calls for. E.g. in close combat, I can just swing away. If I move, and can't reach them, then can activate the aura, which also works if they're in cover. I don't really like the situation where I come to the situation where I have to end my turn without doing anything, cos I'm restricted by my abilities.

So no, I'm not going to be multi-classing like crazy, or taking multiple feats or anything like that.

But you can also activate the aura in melee distance and it does more damage... eventually

3:21 AM

Eventually. So in those situations, I can two-hand the battleaxe, leaving my bonus action free.

I can even open a fight by simply throwing a hand axe, for example, if I'm out of range for anything else

@goodguy5 And this can be useful in grapple situations.

I get being a jack of all trades and being versatile (zing), but you're just throwing features on the floor half the time.

but whatever makes you happy is none of my business.

But what if the enemy is resistant/immune to lightning? :P

Anyway haha. I'm looking forward to it.

at least you don't want to play the berserker

bleck

Oh, no. Agreed. Bleck haha

I don't know what to do to make that frenzy not feel like garbage

Maybe just purely remove the exhaustion mechanic entirely?

or make it effectively exhaustion

"after using this ability, you have disadvantage on ability checks until you complete a short or long rest"

3:26 AM

@goodguy5 Really? Let me tell you a story about my Gnome Druid, then.

Probably. I mean, it's meant to be a special feature, and some games don't even use the fatigue mechanic

@HellSaint oh geeze. yea?

@goodguy5 hrmm... that might be a bit much

@Ben howso? that's what exhaustion is, but specifically wording it that way removes the stacking component

you would no longer be able to kill yourself by frenzying twice a day for 6 days

@goodguy5 Oh well in that case, we're back at square 1 haha

3:28 AM

@HellSaint druids cheat ;) (not as much as they did in the 3.x days, though)

@goodguy5 Clarifying, it's "mine" in the sense it's from a player on my table (I'm DMing). Well, obviously, she has some suboptimal stats, as the +2 INT is not exactly helping alot. Then she went and got the spells based on THIS NAME SOUNDS CUTE.

We are playing a "Do whatever you want, the enemies will be adjusted to the difficulty level according to that", so we're not actually worried about that haha

@HellSaint haha perfect. and +2 int. bruh. that is op for druids! Gotta know that nature. and what if you take magic initiate and get wizard cantrips. gotta be available

Exhaustion Effects
Level - Effect
1 Disadvantage on Ability Checks
2 Speed halved
3 Disadvantage on Attack rolls and saving throws
4 Hit point maximum halved
5 Speed reduced to 0
6 Death

But one of our friends playing used to be a MinMaxer, he went crazy on this gnome haha

@goodguy5 Yeah. I'm aware of it. I just don't use it. More bookkeeping

so, just expressly saying that you have disadvantage on ability checks gives the same feel without "well, if I do this too much I die"

@HellSaint don't get me wrong, I can crunch numbers and break mechanics with the best of them, but I'm glad 5e curtailed a lot of that.

I like playing slightly suboptimal characters

one of my favorites was a halfling barbarian.
and another was an elf barbarian (was going to multiclass druid if I ever got high enough level)

3:33 AM

yeah, 5e cut down on the "IT'S A TRAP!" during character construction, which is good, and also made it so the gap between "this is serviceable but not optimal" and "this is top of the line minmaxed" isn't nearly as huge as it was in 3.5e

also, ssd removed my comment :-\

@goodguy5 elf barbarian is fun, I agree :D

firebolt for ranged engagements, rage for everything else

I imagined it as more of a battledancer from warhammer fantasy

Yeah, I can MinMax as well, but I don't want to.

@goodguy5 I inadvertently did that with a character from Dark Heresy. He had an ability that every level up, I could add armour to one part of my body. This got a little out of hand, especially with Space Marine Armour (or equivalent of) , that anyone standing behind him was considered to be "in cover"

3:36 AM

My favorite character is still my Divination Wizard - the Fortune Teller. I'd take portent and everything that could possible help me with changing dice rolls (e.g. Lucky feat)

I like the exercise of crunching numbers, but not so much playing them

It was actually strong as hell haha

that's pretty funny

a halfling as well?

It would depend on the campaign. For shorter ones (level 1-5 for example) I would take Variant Human to have the Lucky feat* asap and actually be able to play it

For longer ones, Halfling

@HellSaint Relevant

3:38 AM

Yeah I know that

I mean, rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120522/43856 - this answer is mine.

@HellSaint This was a test... You passed. cough

okay, so I roll something and I have portent stored.....

if I want to use lucky, can I portent the luck die?

> [...] After you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined

So yes. You roll a 14, think "hmm... that might not be good enough, I'll roll luck"

If that's what you were asking

no like...

so Portent:
You can replace any attack roll, saving throw, or ability check made by you or a creature that you can see with one of these foretelling rolls. You must choose to do so before the roll, and you can replace a roll in this way only once per turn.

To me that says you don't roll the dice. It just is the thing.

So, can you use lucky and Portent on the same turn?

I don't see why you would actually

Lucky is "your result sucks, roll one more", while portent is "I want to make sure my result is what I expect, so I'm stating the result right now."

3:46 AM

> Whenever you make an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can spend one luck point to roll an additional d20

Wait.

Never mind lol

@HellSaint I think you cannot do it at all, regardless of "why would you want to"

because lucky modifies an attack roll, portent replaces an attack roll.

I think you can use the luck point to roll an additional d20 - but you are still doing an attack roll - and then use portent to replace the final result

@goodguy5 Lucky replaces an attack roll with another potential attack roll

The problem is that what you are doing is just losing a luck point there haha

incoming new meta, diviner 2, champion 4, barbarian 14

crit #allday

CTWind

3:50 AM

Lucky's description implies it modifies an attack roll to add an extra dice that you can then choose from, but that singular extra dice is not itself an attack roll/saving throw/ability check- it's part of one, but not one itself. Portent replaces an entire attack roll/saving throw/ability check, and has to be chosen ahead of rolling for that.

So I think you couldn't portent the extra lucky dice.

and @HellSaint the way I was originally thinking is that you roll your dice
Then before you roll lucky, you declare portent on your lucky die.

But as ctwind says, you can't I think

I wouldn't allow it at my table, regardless

I would consider allowing lucky to be used when determining your portent dice at the beginning of the day, though.... (I know it's now allowed by RAW)

anyway, it's been a long hour and I'm going to bed

o/

@goodguy5 that way I agree that you can't as the additional roll is not a new attack roll.

Lol, I've just learned that Elves don't need to rest for 8 hours any more, it seems it changed on 2017

@HellSaint 2017?

A: Is 4 hours long enough for a long rest for Elves and Warforged?

59

Post August 2017 Update This was updated during a later sage advice: Q: Does the Trance trait allow an elf to finish a long rest in 4 hours? A: If an elf meditates during a long rest (as described in the Trance trait), the elf finishes the rest after only 4 hours. A meditating e...

Nobody actually reads these Erratas. Lul.

4:04 AM

Hm. Ok. I've always played it like that.

That being said, my chronological memory has always been radically unreliable

"Umm... I think last week?" [actually referring to something that occurred 2 years ago]

I'd played like that from 2015 to 2016, when a player showed the answer that the elf still had to rest for complete 8 hours to me and I was like "welp okay". Now I've been playing wrong since the errata lul

Haha

4:38 AM

Okay, I'm answering this question rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121183/… and now this is a "I didn't bother reading the section" situation.

@HellSaint That's 1/4... at best?

And that's me just comparing stats with the table

Unless they're intending on making this a pack animal - like a "swarm" or something...

The overall CR would account for that, but none of the other stats make up for it

The Atk Bonus is high, so it ends up being a CR 2 in offense with a 1/4 in defense

Right, yeah

Do you average it to get the overall CR? In which case that would be CR 1

DMG says average and round up, which would be CR2, but it was probably intended in the X.5 case, not X.125

1.125 is probably 1 indeed

Yeah

That seems better per creature

4:50 AM

I honestly don't know how he got to CR3 with these stats.

He would have to double the HP, take away the vulnerability and double the damage to get closer to CR3

Probably like you said - didn't bother reading the appropriate section

It's big, but even just skimming it (for the second time) there is a lot of useful info in there

5:29 AM

Btw I do agree with @mxyzplk - designer-reasons seems to be a tag for people mostly curious, not for people having an actual problem. House-ruling/homebrewing questions can be answered without designer's intent through expertise of the community, imho.

Going to Sydneeeey! Woo!

Unrelated. Lol

8:03 AM

@BESW Monty Python, especially the Flying Circus, is also rife with Briticisms (both language and culture in general) that are practically impossible to understand for normal watchers of modern non-Britain. The films are far more general-audience, but I think anyone wanting to teach people the wonders of the Pythons through Flying Circus should at least think twice.

True, but tangential?

The whole Monty Python meme thing tends to accompany "let's watch some Flying Circus so you'll get these jokes too!" by my experience, which is why that sprung to mind

Ahah.

I tried showing Flying Circus to my friends once and then I realized it... wasn't a good idea :D

Personally I think the skits are much better suited to their style than the films, but I agree they're also probably a little more esoteric.

8:07 AM

I think the films are largely redeemed by Graham Chapman's performance. He does the whole straight man thing incredibly well.

...although, his apparent confusion with the goings-on is partially explained by the rather grim real-world circumstance of him being drunk through the filming of the Holy Grail

The films are structurally unsound because they keep trying to break into a more traditional film-style storytelling mode but Python knows they're at their strongest with the absurdist shorts.

I do love the absurdist shorts

great name for a band too

Helwar

all i've seen from Python is the knights of the square table (or at least it's title is translated to something like that in spanish) and one where an office building turns into some kind of pirate ship navigating the city. Both great, IMO :)

@Helwar The Crimson Insurance Company is rather cute, yep! The first one sounds like it could be the Holy Grail

The Finnish name of Monty Python and the Holy Grail translates to The crazy world of Monty Python. One always gets weird looks from troooo faaaans when using that

I also think Python occupies an overinflated position in American subculture just because so many of us don't know it's part of a larger cultural oeuvre, so it seems more unique outside of its context.

8:16 AM

@BESW I do like it, but I agree that there is a huge following that I cannot explain just,.... from seeing it

As a British person, and too young to appreciate either at their height, I have to say, I've always much preferred Black Adder.

Blackadder Final Scene (The making of)

Black Adder had some really great moments

@Tiggerous Did you know the ending of Blackadder Goes Forth was a rather tricky production? Yet it turned out awesome. It's a masterpiece of post-production

►

I'll take some Red Dwarf with a side of The Prisoner, please.

@kviiri I think I had seen that, but it's worth a rewatch. I still remember watching that episode at school in a history lesson, and not everyone knowing what was coming. Still moistens my eyes every time.

In terms of more modern British comedies, I'm in favour of the IT Crowd, Detectorists and The Wrong Mans.

I'm that history geek who understands the historical and societal references made in British comedy better than most here. I always have to fight the urge to explain every joke to my peers

8:32 AM

Well, if you're bored and you haven't seen them, those are three more contemporary Bristish comedies that I'd recommend.

Helwar

@kviiri depending on the situation and if the explanation feels condescending or not.... I would like that :)

I watched the IT crowd, I found it funny because my father (who is a rather serious man and also has been in the IT biz since the 1970's) said it's not funny because they do too little actual IT stuff :D

(I know The Prisoner isn't a comedy per se, but it's definitely a very British, very absurdist series with some really funny moments between the confusion and horror.)

Oh, Black Books is a good British sitcom.

I could never manage to sit through The Office, not my sort of thing at all. I can't stand awkward humour, it just makes me feel terribly awkward myself.

Black Books is definitely good too :)

@Tiggerous Same.

8:36 AM

do you just mean the Brittish Office or also the American version?

I definitely didn't like the British one, but to be fair I just didn't get a lot of the jokes in it

Helwar

@Tiggerous me too

The American version looks to be quite different to me. More of an emphasis on slapstick. But I haven't actually seen either.

Oh, Yes, Minister. Terrifyingly hilarious.

Yes, Prime Minister was good too, but not as good.

Some crows(?) are teasing the Estonia eagle

Yes, Minister was great, I have especially fond memories of the scene discussing government policy on 'smoking'.

8:45 AM

Me and my big brother used to like Men behaving badly a lot. I wonder if it has stood the test of time

It was very popular at the time, it's not one that people talk about a lot now though. I was slightly too young to appreciate it when it first aired.

And then there's Keeping up Appearances! It gets regular re-runs here. When I was in school, our English teacher used it as a teaching instrument on both the language and the class anxiety some people have in Britain

(the latter wasn't strictly on her turf but she never minded teaching us extra)

Only Fools and Horses still has a large cultural following here. I do like it, but it's not amongst my personal favourites.

> Hacker: We're talking of 100,000 deaths a year.
Sir Humphrey: Yes, but cigarette taxes pay for a third of the cost of the National Health service. We're saving many more lives than we otherwise could, because of those smokers who voluntary lay down their lives for their friends. Smokers are national benefactors.
Hacker: [...] It says here, smoking related diseases cost the National Health Service £165 million a year.
Sir Humphrey: Yes but we've been in to that, it has been shown that if those extra 100,000 people had lived to a ripe old age, it would have cost us even more in pensions and…

2

@BESW That's the one :)

8:55 AM

@BESW I love the obviously hypocritical logic there

@Tiggerous I find it less awkward humor and more "laugh at idiots" humor

Which I can understand also wouldn't be everyone's thing

But considering the biggest idiot is an office manager,...I feel like some of us need that kind of humor

It's too bad I did most of my watching of it before I had any office jobs

@trogdor Someday we will sit down and watch some Yes, Minister.

Back later, off to a office departmental meeting (literally).

Lol

@Tiggerous hehehehe

@BESW A Finnish newspaper actually compiled some numbers and concluded that at present tax rates, an "optimal taxpayer" does indeed smoke cigarettes.

Of course, numbers are always subject to multiple evaluations in the real world...

There's a good anti-smoking campaign: "Quit smoking to screw the Man!"

9:02 AM

It's weird to think of cigarettes as some form of voluntary partial human sacrifice

lol

that isn't how I think of it at all

I think of it as an addictive substance. one that most of the people who use it actually want to quit

I also don't understand why they put such ridiculous amounts of horrible toxic #$&#$ in it

Small sample size, but none of my smoker friends have expressed any desire in quitting. Although I'm glad when they do anyway

I know a woman who's been trying to quit for longer than I've been alive.

eg. my grandmother-in-commonlaw always stops when she has health complications, whether for a week or a month or a year, but has always started it again afterwards

@BESW yeah,... my point made right there

@kviiri but even if fully half of the people who smoke want to quit but can't, that is a huge problem even if the other half couldn't care less

9:11 AM

@trogdor yeah

and I doubt the lines are drawn that fairly at all

9:25 AM

> Bernard: I'll just say, 'The Minister has asked me to thank you for your letter' and something like 'The matter is under consideration', or even 'under active consideration'.
Hacker: What's the difference?
Bernard: Well, 'under consideration' means we've lost the file, 'under active consideration' means we're trying to find it.

@BESW Haha :D

lol

> Sir Humphrey: If you want to be really sure that the Minister doesn't accept it, you must say the decision is "courageous".
Bernard: And that's worse than "controversial"?
Sir Humphrey: Oh, yes! "Controversial" only means "this will lose you votes". "Courageous" means "this will lose you the election"!

(The premise of Yes, Minister is that a well-meaning but ultimately self-serving minister is being led by the nose by his senior advisors, who do everything they can to make sure that his presence doesn't interfere with running the government the way they see fit.)

> Sir Humphrey: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to know. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents; they could be captured and tortured.
Bernard: [shocked] You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey: [seriously] By the BBC, Bernard.

doppelgreener

Fantastic :D

The eagle has hatched!

@SirCinnamon

tv.eenet.ee/merikotkas.html watch it and weep

9:40 AM

@BESW lol

> Bernard: And as you know the letters JB are the highest honour in the Commonwealth.
Hacker: JB?
Sir Humphrey: Jailed by the British. Gandhi, Nkrumah, Makarios, Ben Gurion, Kenyatta, Nehru, Mugabe, the list of world leaders is endless, and contains several of our students.

doppelgreener

10:00 AM

@BESW [ponder] that would be a good activist title

Geoff Smith, JB

(sometimes)

lol

> Hacker: (reading a speech written for him) "We shall of course be reviewing a wide range of options over the whole field of government expenditures." Bernard, this doesn't say anything.
Bernard: Oh, thank you, Prime Minister.
Hacker: It's completely lacking impact.
Bernard: You're too kind, Prime Minster.

lol

10:18 AM

One last one.

> Bernard: The fact that you needed to know was not known at the time that the now known need to know was known, and therefore those that needed to advise and inform the Home Secretary perhaps felt that the information that he needed as to whether to inform the highest authority of the known information was not yet known, and therefore there was no authority for the authority to be informed because the need to know was not, at that time, known or needed.

aaahhhh smell that fresh fresh bureaucracy

So, I have a question, that I'm undecided on posting here or on reddit. It's a good question that I'm genuinely interested in, but I'm not sure if I can phrase it in a way that's 'Stack appropriate'.

Shoot.

I've been running LMOP for a group of six completely new players. And they're approaching the climactic fight with the BBEG. I naturally want to make sure that this fight is an exciting and memorable experience for them all. Because they're a larger player group, I've been rebalancing every encounter they come to, in order to make them an appropriate difficulty level...

And you want to know how to design a Landfill Methane Outreach Program-themed boss fight?

10:33 AM

...Anyway, the standard suggestion, from the encounter balancer I've been using is to either switch out the enemy for a similar, but more difficult one (i.e. Gray Ooze for Black Pudding) or to add extra mobs...

I should add Lost Mines of Phandelver Spoilers are to be found here...

Anyway, the BBEG is at base, one guy with a few neatish tricks and four minions. The suggestion of this balancer is simply to bump his HP up and add a couple of extra minions.

Besw. When do you sleep

My question would basically be, has anyone got any personal experience of running this encounter for larger groups, what did you do to make it exciting and memorable (lair actions, legendary resistancies etc.) and what would you reccomend I try to make it really exciting and memorable for my group?

@goodguy5 soon

XD

Jan 1 '16 at 13:59, by nitsua60

I've always assumed BESW is a team of four, working in shifts. One's always typing, one's farming links, one's running games, one's sleeping.

I know that that's a good question, that I'd be interested in people's answers to, but I'm not sure if I can express it in a stack friendly way. I'm happy to stick to reddit if not.

10:38 AM

@Tiggerous The only problem with that as a Stack question would be "exciting and memorable," but that's fixable by defining what those terms mean for your group.

To be honest, I'm surprised no one's asked something like it before, the amount of brand new DM's that LMOP must have brought here looking for advice over the last few years.

Is an encounter exciting/memorable if difficult choices were made? If the players were able to display great system mastery? If characters nearly died?

If you can nail down some more explicit qualities for answerers to latch onto, it'll work great on the Stack.

These are good questions - I'll muse on it but I think I know the right way to go on them.

@Tiggerous Do you expect the group size to be a problem in particular?

Well, only to the extent that it's more easy for large groups to just dog pile a BBEG in terms of turn order.

10:43 AM

(These are also questions that I find just generally help me improve as a GM, by more critically considering what works for my group. The Stack has been a great asset in pushing me toward that kind of self-reflection.)

And that, at base HP three normal hits could easily take this guy down.

OK, I think I'm resolved to write this up properly, as a question, over the next day or so.

Cool.

When making DnD encounters, I always try for encounters that are never just encounters, but doing that right is surprisingly hard

I mean I try to always have some tactical twist or an unusual objective, but the players don't always wind up using those

I want the BBEG to somehow feel categorically different to the other more standard tricky fights that they've been in. Simply homebrewing some lair actions and legendary resistancies may be the best way to do that (as they've never faced a boss wth either of those before), but I'd be interested to hear from people with personal experience of trying that, or something else.

hohenheim

Throw in an unexpected Deus ex Machina for the bad guy (or the characters if you're kind). They might not like it, but the will certainly remember it ^^.

10:57 AM

I like bosses that interact with their minions... [rummages for reference]

Kobold Quarterly 16 has an article about minions that offers various powers which trigger on the minion's death.

For example, a minion that prevents a small amount of damage to the boss if it dies when they're both hit by the same AoE.

Or a minion that gets stuck on the melee weapon used to kill it, hindering whoever landed the final blow.

Or a minion that can get killed by an ally to give the ally healing.

I like that. BBEGs are usually defined in fiction more by their influence over lesser bad guys than their own, personal power, so it makes sense to given them abilities relating to that.

Hmm - that's a good idea. In this case the minions are Spiders. Maybe they could shoot restrictive webbing at their killer as they die (advantage on the save if you kill it with a rtanged attack).

I'm also fond of the Footstool power: the minion falls prone as a move action and until it stands up any ally occupying that square gets +2 to attack rolls for having higher ground.

Excellent for fighting novice Sith Lords.

@Tiggerous Or the space in which they die becomes sticky--difficult terrain, or requires a check to avoid getting stuck.

Magician

11:02 AM

Minions are spiders... What's the boss?

Hmm, that'd be tricky to enforce, we play fully Theatre of the Mind. I'll need to include that in the question...

There's also Moon The Ranger, which is a standard action that grants an enemy a free attack against the minion. If the enemy misses, or refuses to take the shot, the enemy takes -2 to all attacks until the minion is killed.

Then there's cool synergy stuff you could do, like this 4e encounter:

Jul 14 '16 at 21:59, by BESW

- Mad Ones are Skirmisher Minions with an Aura 2 that inflicts Vulnerable 15 Psychic on enemies.
- The Mumbler is an Elite Lurker with an Aura 5 that inflicts 1 Psychic on enemies who starts their turn in it.
- Shathrax is a Solo Lurker mind flayer who can use his opportunity attack action to teleport adjacent to someone who takes psychic damage.

The mind flayer was kind of a chump, but he teleported into your face at the beginning of your turn. Every turn. Staring at you. Daring you to provoke an opportunity attack.

So he was very memorable even though he wasn't much of a real threat.

Enemy abilities that interact like that are my absolute favorites! (well, player abilities that interact too)

I had another boss who sloughed off minions whenever you dealt a certain amount of damage.

So it started as a solo fight, but the more you damaged the boss, the more crowded the scene got.

Sometimes it's just a matter of flavor.

One of the more memorable villains in a campaign was just a generic necromancer, but I flavored him as someone who wanted to make friends.

So he was really upset when the party started beating up the friends he'd made.

Snipers and spotters is one (less-bossy) thing I like to use. Enemies include archers and one or more spotters that can grant huge temporary damage or accuracy boosts against targets they can see, with the catch that the players' initiative is between the spotter and the sniper so they can try to dodge it when they see it coming.

11:11 AM

Next time he showed up, he'd learned mind control so he could make the party be his friends.

@kviiri Oh, another cool thing for bosses is powers that set up other powers. Kind of "I'm charging my attack" stuff.

Like, he has an AoE that deals very little damage but knocks prone. And he has an AoE that deals massive damage to prone targets, but it's only charged up by the first attack.

That's a JRPG classic :)

You can also make a boss memorable just by giving them all the style points.

I had one villain who was immobilized in a stasis field while she powered up--for a thousand years. The party tried to ambush her before she came out of the field, and she used nothing but telekinesis to spank them and send them away.

When she finally got out of stasis (which had also rendered her invulnerable), the party was waiting with two armies.

All three eagles in eagle cam!

Anaphory

Baby eagle!

6

In my 4e game, I've decided I'll make the BBEG a spirit whose real threat is not in the physical strength of their incarnations, but the fact that they keep coming back after being slain. The BBEG is waging a war of attrition against the good guys. This way i can throw in the BBEG as an encounter many times and give the players some satisfaction of stalling it without them beating it being a problem.

11:24 AM

In an old 3.5 game I used the idea of Felix # from The Eyre Affair.

He was once the villain's best friend, who died in service of the evil plan.

So the villain kidnapped someone, brainwashed them to be his lackey, and put his friend's face on them.

And every time his lackey dies, the villain recovers the face and makes a new one.

The party met Felixes 6, 7, 8, and 9.

In Final Fantasy X, there's this magical space whale called Sin that is the main antagonist for most of the story. It destroys entire towns at a time, appearing seemingly randomly but the mainstream religion attributes it as being drawn towards mankind's pride, especially the use of machines.

Sin can be defeated, and has been defeated many times. But it always comes back some time later.

So the game is, naturally, about finding out why Sin keeps coming back, and how the cycle can be stopped. That's something I like.

11:48 AM

alright, at work, now I can participate

@goodguy5 Participate in the baby bird

link

tv.eenet.ee/merikotkas.html here, but the adults are still brooding to keep it warm so it's only occasionally visible