So I cracked open my roommate's 3.5 PHB yesterday while I was idling waiting for my session to begin. Went to the section on Weapons.
I gotta say, I kind of love the variety of weapons to choose from, but just staring at that page, not only with the sheer variety of properties the weapons had, but also the text blurbs that each had additional properties associated with each weapon, it sounds like an utter nightmare.
Like, I've got my probability calculator, and I can plug all that stuff in and spin it into a workable "okay, for your character, this is the weapon you should choose".
((Pathfinder 2e plug: keep the variance, drop the ad-hoc: all weapons use standardized Traits that give them their various bonuses and properties - and they're all roughly balanced))
Axes usually have Sweep so they gain a bonus if you attack different enemies on one turn, Swords usually have Versatile P so you can do piercing or slashing, Picks have Deadly [die] so they have especially dangerous crits, etc
@Xirema Yep. 3.x/PF heavily emphasized system mastery. Lots of obscure options and hidden rules. That's why 5e was built to be approachable to newcomers (at least by comparison).
Hah, yeah. I'm playing 5e after a years-long break and I love how intuitive a lot of it feels. Relatively balanced (for the casual player, at least) too.
Yeah - though when it comes down to it, most of the traits you got in PF didn't matter. Yeah, Glaive-Guisarme is straight up better than a Glaive (adds the Brace property and a special thing)... but no one uses Brace
@NautArch In response to all the comments that are degrading my question I posted about room with I will say this. I am not necessarily asking for myself but for others that might come here for my answer. If a room has odd shapes to it and doesn't have a clear "short" side then what would we do? How would you explain to people that consider the width is the dimension going across their field of view that they are wrong?
A complete answer that would address those instead of just saying "oh it's the short side" would be good.
I mean, in my campaigns, if the height of the ceiling matters, I just specify it as a separate dimension, and if the text doesn't tell me what it is, I just make it up on the spot.
Important: the height of the room is only relevant when it's relevant, if no one's flying or climbing walls, you can generally just let players theater-of-the-mind the height of the room, and you don't have to tell them how you know what the height is
@Xirema I had thought maybe this was an x-y problem. But if it's the list below, then it's just "things i might be interested in doing" and not really height dependent.
@Eternallord66 Still, I don't understand how "shortest" isn't clear. You give me a room with any given set of dimensions and I can pick the shortest dimension.
@Eternallord66 If you're not the DM, you provide the direction given in the answer to them and they explain that the shortest dimension in the room determines the height of the room.
If they're unclear as to what is the shortest dimension, then they can ask the table for help.
Like, I get a kid having difficulty with geometry, but the DM is ostensibly someone who can just declare "the room is 30' tall", and it doesn't really matter how the DM came to that determination.
@NautArch Without looking at the question, I'm imagining an irregular hexagon of a room, with wall lengths 50', 50', 20', 50', 50', 20'. Perhaps a "length" of 80', a (large) width of 40', but actually a geometric min width of 35' as measured perpendicular to a 50' side?
@nitsua60 Sure, but going by the answer provided, that would be 20'. WOuldn't it? Or am i misunderstanding the answer? THe question also was pretty clear in the room dimensions before the recent 'irregular size' edit as well. If there's a room like that in the module, then that should be the focus of the question.
And if someone's asking something specific about every room, it should probably become part of what the GM just describes upon entering a room (like most give notable features, entrances/exits, and things that are moving, and other stuff on prompt)
Players aren't [in theory] supposed to read the module, and in this context, the module is the only source providing a heuristic for how high the room should be.
If a room has a specific height, that's something the DM needs to call out. If they want the players to just assume based on the dimensions they call out, then they need to explicitly say that.
If this is ultimately about more than room dimensions and really about a character that's eager to flex their uniqueness and explore in 3d space then that's absolutely up to them and the DM to resolve - probably by letting them shine once or twice and then "put it away until it's needed".
There's no general-purpose rule that can be given to all players that says "okay, given these widthXlength dimensions of a room, here's what you should believe the height is". Or rather, the answer is always, always, always, "Ask your DM."
@nitsua60 From a math and module guidance perspective, can you answer how you'd determine width as shortest side for that hexagon? Actually interested and not being snarky :)
If the DM wants to say at the beginning of a campaign/session/whatever "okay, if I call out a room as being x by y feet, always treat y as the height", they're free to do so.
I'm thinking more and more that this could actually be an X-Y problem in any case; looking for a resolution to constant questions of room height, maybe?
Not all the rooms are square or rectangle. Some rooms don't have any flat walls. Some rooms have more than 4 walls. How would you find the width in those cases?
Like, I know I'm stating the obvious, but the job of being a DM requires decision-making, even when you're just following a script written for a campaign module.
And sometimes that Decision Making process is going to involve making decisions without any real guidelines being provided.
The module says if it doesn't say it would be at least the width of the room. What you people don't seem to understand is that the "width" is not always clear.
Either the DM needs to make a rule saying "if I describe a room like this, assume that about the height", or the DM needs to always manually specify the height.
@Eternallord66 The player could read the module text, but some would consider that cheating
The room is (probably) at least as tall as the objects inside the room. Beyond that, there's no way for a player to determine anything about in-game space without involving the DM.
Of note, D&D is meant to be cooperative, you can always ask the GM to always specify the height of a room or write a notecard with "HEIGHT?" on it that you hold up during room descriptions to ask what the height is preemptively
@Eternallord66 Hence my qualifier "I think". But more importantly, if this is meant to be advice for the perspective of a player, that should probably go in the question somewhere.
@Eternallord66 I think part of this discussion here (in chat) is also that the question you asked doesn't really appear to be the problem you're trying to solve, and we here at stack like to be helpful and solve the actual problem you're facing
@Eternallord66 I mean, your question is still framed as though it's from the perspective of a DM. You're not going to get useful responses if we're all operating under the impression that this was meant to be a DM's guide to working out the height of a room.
If what you need is advice for players making assumptions about how high a given room will be (which, like I said, is something players cannot do) that needs to be part of the question.
(for reference, I'm 90% sure the real problem you're trying to solve is "How can a player get the height of a room without having to prompt the GM?" where the answer is "ask the GM to describe it with every room or agree to a default size")
@Eternallord66 I think you're misunderstanding our attempt to help as bickering. And there is frustration on both sides because of the lack of understanding about the question.
If you say that the answer should apply to arbitrary non-example cases, there's the issue of "well, this answer doesn't apply if you have one room that's @-shaped" - is that a case that's necessary to answer?
If the only examples you give are rectangles, it's pretty well implied that rectangles are the target, so we don't need to worry about @-shaped or non-euclidian cubed-circular rooms where the width is an imaginary number
So I see the question says "For example", but for reference, folks here tend to be very literal about the body of the question you ask. If you want a general-case answer, that should be in the question body.
@NautArch As a DM, I'd blurt out something in the 20-40 range. Lower if I've been trying to create a claustrophobic feeling, higher if we're trying to communicate "grandiose." Mechanically, the only thing I'm worrying about at that range are (in increasing order of length-scale) reach/OAs, small AoEs, anything "ranged" is fine, call lightning.
@Eternallord66 I see that, but AFAIK, players generally aren't supposed to be reading the descriptions in the module book that are for the DM. That may be why everyone is assuming you are the DM.
As a math-person, I'm going to envision a pair of parallel plates "riding" the perimeter and call the "width" the smallest distance between them I get.
@Delioth @Eternallord66 Which is also how you approach learning the dimensions anyway. You as a player are told you enter a room. You then ask the DM to describe it for you and ask for the dimensions.
Because even if you sit down and do the geometry for the exact distance, the GM's probably not going to and will probably just throw out a number based on how the room fits into play (either based on stories or mechanics)
@Eternallord66 - BTW, I rolled back your edit. You can suggest it as a comment, but good practice dictates we don't add information to another person's answer.
@Xirema Just me referring to Gary Gygax generally throwing stuff into modules just to be a thorn to people asking him to clarify things. (TBF, the guy did include his home phone number in early publications saying "call with any questions." IIRC.)
I'm imagining a bunch of complaints at an early con about a competition module having an "unclear width of room F3" and the next year's module having that-shaped room.
Could actually be really interesting if the top of the two are just plain connected, but the middle junction has a thin wall, so an encounter starts at the top past a "dead end" but enemies break through the wall after a turn or two
@NautArch yeah, same same. FWIW that got a reject vote before being approved as well. The reason I rolled back Lord's addition is because it was a "this is the answer I want", which in that case should be posted as a self answer, not edited into another quesiton.
Last night during our LMoP session, the party got to the "Starry Cavern" part of the caves, and because I couldn't let a name like that go to waste on a visual metaphor, I decided that inexplicably, that room just opens up to an eerily convincing simulacrum of a star-filled sky.
No one in the party can Dispel Magic, so I don't have to decide what's behind it just yet, but that's a thing in the fiction of our setting now.
I.e. if the rules don't say what order 50% extra damage and 6 reduced damage happen in, you'd need a ruling. If the rules do say what order they happen in but the GM thinks that's stupid so reverses it, that's GM Fiat
@Delioth Probably this as well. Like, in my setting, I've half-way added the AL rule about characters whose racial features give flight capabilities, ruling that if you're a race that has an innate ability to fly, you can't use it until level 5.
That's DM fiat. There's no rule saying you should do that, nor a rule that's so poorly worded as to leave it ambiguous whether you should do that or not.
I personally believe it is all right to overrule a rule if you and your party agree that the rule is negatively affecting your sessions. I don't think it's alright to overrule something suddenly and without reason. To me that just seems like a d**k move especially if it's something as important as damage scaling.
the game is written a certain way to try and keep a cohesive game but when you just change something out of the blue you lose that cohesiveness and the players lose abit of trust in you.
Oh, I'm absolutely not saying that you should change damage ordering; it was just the first example that came to mind that doesn't need a whole bunch of extra framing to make sense to describe Fiat VS Ruling
And absolutely shouldn't be changed mid-campaign without lots of discussion (i.e. if you have a fire wizard who's feeling useless in all fights, or a fire wizard who's absolutely destroying all fights, or similar)
Giving all players an extra feat so they can flesh out their characters more is GM fiat, but few players will call it harmful (except maybe in 5e, where an extra feat can super-power some characters but be useless to others)
Sometimes a group finds that certain written rules, even when clear, don't really work for the game they want to play. Hence a DM fiat can help fix that.
@goodguy5 The usual implication of "house rule" is that it behaves like a rule: if we're in this situation again, we'll apply this procedure again. "Fiat" doesn't really suggest that.
@goodguy5 They're usually synonymous. Although from what I've seen, houserules tend to be additive (i.e. creating a new rule), whereas fiat tends to be subtractive (i.e., removing an existing rule). But that may vary depending on who you ask.
@Gwideon The fiat brand of cars may take offense to that :P
@MarkWells Almost like Fiat is what they do when they aren't sure and need to move on. Then it becomes house rule or not later once confirmed if that was the right or wrong call.
let em. fiat sucks :P fite me (jk, my only problem is when I see an "empty" space in the parking lot and it turns out that there's a Fiat hiding in there)
@Delioth On that subject, our Fighter is about to hit an average DPR of 30-ish reaching level 5 because they took Crossbow Expert, their level 4 ASI in dex, and are going to take Sharpshooter as the level 5 feat I'm offering each player for free. =3
IIRC, the counterargument is that they could be playing a hack (or otherwise similar system) that uses some of the official text, but is effectively a different game. So guessing edition would be incorrect, and therefore hasten the apocalypse
@Delioth At level 5 it's tipping towards the higher end of the scale.
Like, for context, a classical Level 20 GWF/GWM Strength-based Fighter deals, before involving the use of expendable resources, around 50-60DPR against an opponent whose AC is normal for their level (AC18-20).
For context, Pathfinder 2e Wizards probably have 20 AC around level 5 (10 + Trained=5+2 > 17, 14 Dex=+2 > 19, +1 fundamental armor rune > 20)
((calculation works for anyone unarmored, optimal armor+max dex will always be +5 total, or +6 total if you're using heavy armor; plus magic armor bonus))
@goodguy5 Yeah, in 2e your bonuses will stack up so that they very rarely hit - as in if they were hitting you on an 11 when you were level 1, they at best hit you on a 16 when you're level 6 (probably 17 due to magic armor; and you'll very often crit - as in if you were hitting on an 11 at level 1, at level 6 you at worst hit on a 6 and thus crit on a 16 (probably more like 5/15 or 3/13 depending on magic weapons, increased proficiency, and stat boost)
@Joshjurg Because I'm not allowing feats to be taken as ASIs. All ASIs are only stat bonuses, but feats are acquired one per tier of play at levels 5, 11, 17.
The Oathbow, a magic weapon from the DMG, allows you to choose a target as your Sworn Enemy:
When you use this weapon to make a ranged attack, you can, as a command phrase, say, "Swift death to you who have wronged me." The target of your attack becomes your sworn enemy until it dies or until...
@NautArch Yeah. My general experience is that people don't usually want more than one or two feats anyways, so if we get to later tiers, the second + third feats might be good excuses to pick up some less-used feats that wouldn't ever see play if all the ASIs are too valuable to justify anything other than a build-critical feat.
@NautArch What are such builds? I've never known any that needed more than three feats to do anything other than eek out a few extra DPR in corner cases.
@Xirema You don't need more than 3, but would be a bummer that a concept that could come online at the 2nd feat (level 8 if not vHuman or a fighter) is now Level 11.
Yeah, I'm not saying you can't do anything with them, but it's (probably) vastly easier to just learn JavaScript and throw together a few tools there to build a website than it is to code a full website in Scratch
I like to use scratch when I feel like coding but don't feel like dealing with complex syntax. it's kinda my relaxing language. I know what I can do with it and I know how to do it really easily so yeah for me it just allows me to put stuff together.
Modularity is great and that part of 5e is neat and nice; I'm just not a fan of how character building for 5e almost seems like WOTC decided "Players making choices breaks the game, so we'll only let them make a few choices over their career" rather than building a system that gives freedom to choose features while keeping the math close
(Really, you get... what, 10 choices in your character build?)
The Oathbow, a magic weapon from the DMG, allows you to choose a target as your Sworn Enemy:
When you use this weapon to make a ranged attack, you can, as a command phrase, say, "Swift death to you who have wronged me." The target of your attack becomes your sworn enemy until it dies or until...
