« first day (4340 days earlier)      last day (50 days later) » 

1:04 AM
5
Q: How does the Oath of the Crown paladin's Divine Allegiance feature interact with features that cause instadeath if the target's reduced to 0 HP?

SeptemberOath of the Crown paladins have the 7th-level feature Divine Allegiance (SCAG, p. 133). If someone within 5 feet of the paladin takes damage, Divine Allegiance lets the paladin use their reaction to take that damage instead. What if this damage is from an attack that kills the target if they're r...

 
 
1 hour later…
2:19 AM
1
Q: Do you have hit points while dead?

Premier BromanovThere are a few effects in D&D 5e that cause a creature to die without regard to its hit points. One of them is the exhaustion condition, which has the effect of "Death" on a character that suffers level 6 of exhaustion. Another is the spell Power Word: Kill, which causes a creature to "die insta...

 
 
8 hours later…
10:09 AM
Sandman is making me want to play Mage: the Awakening, but heavily modified 😕
I'll have to reread the book to figure out what if anything would need changing
 
10:26 AM
@JohnP Well I think that's more than I could ever ask. That might be a good answer.
@Shalvenay Very high diplomacy checks
Also, hello people! I'm admittedly no more as active around here as I would like but, sadly, days only have 24 hours in them and I'm already not sleeping enough :|
It's nice to see known names here in the chat
 
11:21 AM
@Zachiel tell me about it... I know what feeling
 
12:02 PM
Also, since when I started playing Pathfinder, looking for immediate answers in a Discord channel directly while I play is sadly more useful than posting the questions here :(
Also, most of my questions nowadays are opinion-based
 
 
1 hour later…
1:19 PM
@Zachiel but then you can post self-answers here
Also, I've heard of GMs rule something, then check here and comeback the next session saying "I ruled XYZ that time, but checking online it should have been ABC"
 
1:49 PM
I ended up reading through my Urban Shadows quickstart...
 
@ThomasMarkov I am beginning to disagree with the accepted answer here. I find Mearls' tweet to be more helpful in one of the other answers. In the case of a wyvern, it has a choice (in its multi attacks) to do bite + stinger or claw + stinger or claw + bite. Last night I had the Wyvern attack with its stinger and attempt to grapple with its claws (grapple is a special attack. The grapple was successful
The wyvern had about 15' of move left so it took of with the cleric. The players were good with that. (opposed check). While I understand the "multiattack isn't the same as PC extra attack" distinction, from a verisimilitude point a grab with the claws in lieu of a damaging attack seems to be balanced. (And it fits Mearls' point on "case by case, be careful"). Worked out well. The bard, of course, jumped up (as able to use his move to run up a rock,,,
... and touch/reach the cleric, and DD'd away with her. I am pretty sure that a DD will break a grapple, and it was a great cinematic move in any case. One angry wyvern came in pursuit the following turn ... hungry!
 
RAW the accepted answer seems right to me. On a gameplay/practical standpoint I feel like it would be more interesting if multiattacks allowed grapples and shoves though. At least in some situations where it doesn't give too large an advantage, that is.
 
2:30 PM
@AncientSwordRage ...cont'd and by making the social and political actions so codified, at least to me, those bits feel a little neutered... Like if you want to do something politically you need to figure it out. Whereas the powers for each playbook are no where near as fleshed out (at least in this version of the quickstart) so they feel limited in a different way
 
@KorvinStarmast I don’t know when I voted on that, but I downvoted every answer except this one.
 
@ThomasMarkov I like Phil Boncer's comment: It just makes simple sense that NPCs can pick up a different weapon and use it without having to file a "change of stat block" form in triplicate and get it notarized by the DM. OTOH, grapple requires a hand to grasp, so I would not generally allow a monster to grapple (whether with a Multi-attack or normal Attack action), unless it had hands or a limb that can grasp. Shove, I'd let the owlbear do as part of its multiattack
Sometimes, an overly RAW approach can cause one to not see the forest for the trees. I have fallen into that trap at least once ...
 
@KorvinStarmast yes, this seems like the right take.
 
3:25 PM
@Zachiel I posted that as an answer with what I've found.
4 more votes...so close. :p
 
3:43 PM
@Zachiel woo hoo, a Zachiel sighting! Great to 'see' you again. 😊
 
I'm this famous? XD
 
@Zachiel yes!
 
@Zachiel well, sure.
 
I should have asked: "I'm this infamous?" :p
 
That too.
 
3:46 PM
Heh.
I'm still in all those living world games, even if one is on the verge of death with, like 4 active players one of which only logs to play with me
Don't be hasty, John. And 'grats for having been elected mod, since it's happened after my last visit i think
 
@Zachiel I didn't get elected mod on RPG, actually.
I'm a mod on Fitness and Martial Arts, and stepped down from Health. That site is a disaster.
 
4:08 PM
@JohnP I didn't realise health and fitness were different sites?
 
@AncientSwordRage It started as Health, then morphed to Medical Sciences, and it was supposed to be a professional type site but suffers from the same reason that Nutrition never made it and is mostly banned as a topic on cooking, fitness, etc. Just so many bad questions and misconceptions
 
@JohnP that's something I see elsewhere too
Like on Islam, there's a lot of badly formed questions and plenty of people who act as self-appointed experts (without admitting they're laymen)... What makes it so bad, is that when an only slightly badly formed question is asked or an answer is given by a knowledge layman who is honest about that, it all can get swept up in the same way
I think when the infrastructure already exists for experts (there's lots of sites like islamqa that act the same way islam.se does, for example), there's no incentive for the experts to take part, so the site is left to rot in many ways
 
AH, just like on programming sites then XD
 
@Zachiel All my programming experience is like my RPG experience. Archaic and dated, but useful from time to time >.<
 
@Zachiel depending on the langauge, yes
Stackoverflow has the same issue
It's why there was the 'Just use jQuery' problem for so long.
 
4:23 PM
There's no more?
 
4:33 PM
@Zachiel sadly, no Diplomacy to be had on the char in question (they are short skill points as-is)
also good seeing you @Zachiel, been some time
 
 
1 hour later…
1
Q: Who does Hellish Rebuke target when Warding Bond has been cast?

RR95When casting Hellish Rebuke is the creature that receives the damage the one that cast the Warding Bond or the one that attacked the creature that cast the Warding Bond? Both could be said to have damaged you since the damage could not exist without both of them. Warding Bond is the spell that ac...

 
6:58 PM
@ThomasMarkov Looking forward to when we get D&D One S
 
7:11 PM
The new playtest contains a glossary defining game terms.
 
It's a bunch of (proposed) rules changes, no? (Some are just "oops, this should've been in the PHB too)
 
@Someone_Evil This first document overhauls races and backgrounds.
And I'm kinda into it.
 
7:35 PM
@ThomasMarkov that sounds interesting, even
 
@ThomasMarkov I was skeptical until I heard you say this
 
Natural 20s automatically succeed now on ability checks and saving throws.
@AncientSwordRage Level 1 ASIs are now background dependent instead of race dependent
Also every background has a feat packaged with it.
Bringing a lot more crunch to backgrounds.
I like the idea.
 
@ThomasMarkov The only reason I'm unbothered by this is because, at most levels of play, a natural 20 not succeeding at a roll is unheard of.
Especially because of DM Rule 0 ("Do not call for a dice roll if success is guaranteed or impossible")
But on principle it does bug me.
 
@Xirema lololol this is exactly how I feel
 
@Xirema This got codified actually
> The DM determines whether a d20 Test is
warranted in any given circumstance. To be
warranted, a d20 Test must have a target
number no less than 5 and no greater than 30
I think that as written means that if you get an AC of 30 (not impossible) creatures no longer get to make an attack against you. Or at least other players?
 
7:45 PM
@Someone_Evil Yup, I thought about asking that as the first site question, but felt is was a little premature.
We dont have the combat playtest yet.
 
Replacing background unique features with Feats is objectively a good decision, to the point that I feel silly that I never considered that to begin with.
 
@Xirema The background feats are also not quite as powerful as the current feats.
 
@ThomasMarkov Yeah, there's a few feats in my current campaign I level-gated (Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter, just to name examples, require at least 5 levels in a single class) because they're obviously more powerful than others, and I would not oppose them doing that as a general rule for feats in 5.5
> Faster Crafting. When you craft an item using a tool with which you have Tool Proficiency, the required crafting time is reduced by 20 percent
😬
So, uh.... Ya'll have plans for discrete crafting rules, then, right?
Because the only issued rules there are rounded to whole weeks, which is going to play funny with a specific number like "20%".
 
@Xirema Let's see, if you start crafting at the end of tonight's session, we'll say instead of finishing at the beginning of next week's session, you can finish the day before.
 
🙃
 
7:56 PM
@Someone_Evil To nitpick, I think they still get to make the attack. They just can't hit, by rule =D
 
hey there @nitsua60, how're things going?
 
@Shalvenay o/
Pretty well, after a weird couple of years. You?
 
@nitsua60 good seeing you around by the way :)
 
Nitsua!
 
@nitsua60 been up and down still but could definitely be much worse on the whole
 
7:58 PM
@JohnP Ahoy, mate.
@Shalvenay playing much?
 
@nitsua60 @KorvinStarmast is the swabbie. I'm a zoomie. :p
 
@nitsua60 mostly just persistent world stuff -- campaign I was running and campaign I was in as a player both fizzled for me (one due to a bit of an impedance mismatch, the other due to technical issues)
 
@JohnP I didn't know you'd served--sorry I missed that along the way.
 
Ah. Then it was a generic ahoy, not a service related ahoy.
In that case, ahoy.
 
@JohnP I was thinking more of Bell's phone-related "ahoy!" than being on deck =)
(Or maybe Monty Burns' 'ahoy')
I'm a little worried reading this document that we're going to get someone mass-replacing instances of "5e PHB" with "5e PHB (2014)" across the stack =/
 
8:04 PM
> There are now three main Spell lists in the game: Arcane, Divine, and Primal. In future Unearthed Arcana articles, we’ll show how Classes use these lists and how a Class or Subclass might gain Spells from another list
I don't hate this.
I think the implication is that the various classes associated with these lists are going to have a unified spell list.
Not sure if I want that, but I don't hate it.
 
@Xirema hmmmm not sure how I feel. Bards and Wizards having access to all the same spells seems incorrect.
 
I don't hate giving backgrounds some heft. I do hope that they realize that's a prompt to seriously beef up how they teach GMs, through their publications, how to run games and build worlds.
5
 
@ThomasMarkov Same effect, different mechanics.
 
we going with the tag when it comes up?
 
@nitsua60 I haven't read the document, but if WotC is changing that much, maybe they should just start calling it D&D 5.5e
 
8:10 PM
@ThomasMarkov Follows the dnd-next and pathfinder-2e format
 
@JoelHarmon It doesn't really seem to be backwards compatible
 
Not all of 3.5 was, either, but if you squinted then most of the big pieces looked the same.
 
But I do dig the direction they're aiming at.
 
@ThomasMarkov That's a good question. I think that definitely makes sense for the coming year-plus.
I'm a little hesitant by them saying One D&D is the "code name"... does that mean branding&marketing hasn't settled on that being "the" name they're going to use in 2024?
I'm totally in favor of their flipping the clauses in the long rest interruption sentence. Shall we mass-delete all the questions about whether it takes a full hour of combat to interrupt a rest? =P
 
> Each Background gives Tool Proficiency* with one tool
Is that new?
 
8:17 PM
@NautArch It is for the most part. They're clearly reusing the core terminology. It just sounds like they're revising a lot of character creation stuff.
@JohnP Sort of. Backgrounds always had the option of "2 Language or Tool Proficiencies", and they've simplified it down to "one of each".
 
@Xirema And how the basic d20 roll works.
 
@NautArch Well, the only radical change there is that nat 20s are now automatic successes, regardless of the roll.
 
@Xirema "[insert race] of Many Worlds"
 
I mean, the framework is largely lifted, but there are some big things that are changing that put a lot of those books in positions where a DM has to figure out how to integrate. Which is okay - but still not super easy.
 
@ThomasMarkov yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about that... I thought I'd be more excited for it
 
8:19 PM
Otherwise, they've introduced a new keyword "d20 test" which is just shorthand for where, in past printings, they've simply written "Ability Check, Saving Throw, or Attack Roll"
 
@Xirema and inspiration awarded (which i love!). But i mean more of trying to pull some of the previous content into this without needing the updates they've done.
 
Don't love the name, but the concept seems fine enough.
 
Nat 20 guaranteed success and inspiration
 
Hmm, that too.
 
As ever, if I want to customise my background I can, but now it feels even more straitjacketed
 
8:21 PM
chthonic background
 
Why not make backgrounds mostly flavour and let you pick whatever 1st level feat (even if the feat is recommended in the background)
 
@AncientSwordRage As written in the playtest document, there's nothing stopping you from doing that.
 
@ThomasMarkov humans now get 2 at 1st
 
@AncientSwordRage Isn't that covered/suggested?
 
@AncientSwordRage They are limited to only "1st level feats", though.
Which notably excludes the more auto-pick feats like GWM or SS.
 
8:23 PM
> Creature Type Every character and monster in the game has a Creature Type.*
orcs a core race now too.
 
I like tying feats to backgrounds.
 
@JohnP @Xirema the way I read it was that the sample backgrounds are the default... It's not the case, it's just how it Feels To Me ™
 
Feat levels decoupled from class.
 
@JohnP yeah I loved that
 
@AncientSwordRage Well, "Build your Background" is the first thing they put in that section, before any of the sample backgrounds.
 
8:25 PM
I'd have still liked to be able to mix and match a bit more of the innate abilities
 
Huh. Humans get inspiration with every long rest.
 
@Xirema yes, but what's easier - picking one or making one?
 
@JohnP They've done away with the concept of "Half-" races entirely, and instead, if you want to be a Half-X, you are explicitly "Half X, Half Y", and can mix/match features from both.
3
 
Ooh, folding grappling and shoving into unarmed attacks. I haven't thought through all the implications, but hopefully that's actually a lot less fiddly.
 
@JohnP the race that encourages the least roleplay now has less incentive ← my initial reaction
 
8:26 PM
@nitsua60 The tavern brawler feat is now really fun, too!
 
@AncientSwordRage "Lets give humans alla tha things so newbies don't have to think"?
 
Is it still D&D if humans aren't OP?
 
D20 Test - 1 automatically fails, 20 automatically succeeds (+ inspiration). Doesn't override other requirements such as distance, line of sight, etc.
 
@JohnP do newbies go for humans?
 
@AncientSwordRage I dunno, it's been so long since I played with anyone actually new to RPG's :p
 
8:29 PM
In my experience it seems like newer players gravitate towards elves and half-elves.
 
BESW's profile picture showed up in a reddit meme today.
 
I have pejoratively—perhaps unfairly—been referring to them as the "Mary Sue" race because there's a few archetypes that keep cropping up with those characters. 😛
 
20 is an automatic crit as well, double the damage.
 
@JohnP Double the dice still.
Also I havent seen BESW in a while.
 
@ThomasMarkov true that.
You can give extra inspiration earned to another PC.
 
8:34 PM
@JoelHarmon they couldn't make them OP enough for me to want to play one (I say in jest, having eyes up that 1st level feat for years)
@ThomasMarkov he's been busy AFAIK
 
Looks like the UA levels the prices for everything. "All X now cost Y"
 
That ^^ I do hate. (It's an unreasonably strong feeling, but I'll own it.)
 
@nitsua60 Agreed. A simple 6 hole Celtic style whistle should not cost as much as a crafted/strung lute.
 
@nitsua60 I'm sure there will be much more to hate as more material is released.
2
 
To me it feels like they're paying attention to the wrong things, making a "fix" like that.
@ThomasMarkov (I'm trying to be nice here =D )
 
8:40 PM
@ThomasMarkov hate for new editions of D&D is like entropy, it always increases...
@nitsua60 wrong things according to whom though?
 
Overall, I like the idea of races being more about things they can do and backgrounds being where the ASI comes from (although I do still really like choose your own, which this still accommodates).
 
@NautArch yes, me too, besides my quibble
 
I'd love to know what's behind specifying that a high elf's L1 racial cantrip is prestidigitation. I mean, it can be switched out on a long rest. How is that not "you get a cantrip from the Arcane list"? Will anyone here 'fess up to being the DM who says "no, you don't get to start your very first adventure on the assumption you've ever slept a night in your life."
 
@nitsua60 o/
 
@NautArch Yeah, there's a bit of structural thinking here that feels like it could help reinforce having "grown up" in your fantasy's setting.
@NautArch \o
 
8:43 PM
Is the character origins the only thing availble so far? Or am I missing something?
 
@nitsua60 Which goes back to your starboard item :) The direction is good, but will the support be there?
The video thing pretty much says they are, but let's see what happens if the rubber hits the road.
 
@NautArch You mean when they're rushing to put out a DMG? </snark>
 
@NautArch I cant wait to see how much of it is lifted out of the Annals of Great Answers at rpg.se.
 
VTT based on Unreal Engine, that could be very nice.
 
Based only on the chatter here, I'm disappointed that they're moving away from "pick one of these bundles; enjoy the opportunity costs!" to "people didn't like opportunity costs, so pick one thing from each of these a la carte menus". They did that to races with Tasha's. I wonder when they'll get around to making classes into point buy feature lists. And yes, you can get off my lawn.
 
8:46 PM
@JohnP yessir. Although a friend of mine brought up does that take agency away from everyone to 'build' the environment together as they play?
 
@ThomasMarkov then we can ask, how much of the new DMG, quoting RPG.SE has since been quoted on RPG.SE....
 
@JoelHarmon I think there are still some opportunity costs, but this is a bit of a sea change.
 
@NautArch Does that exist in VTT now? You can't take away something that doesn't exist.
 
@JoelHarmon There's some of that, but I do think they didn't go nearly as far in that direction as I and some friends had feared they might.
 
I'm with you on the lawn, but i'm starting to wonder why. I think there's something to be said for over the top characters/action.
 
8:48 PM
You could easily have imagined "race" being pick a size, pick a sensory feature, pick a cultural feature, &c.
 
@JohnP Less in 2D. In 3d, you've built a lot of the look of the whole room. A battlemap is often pretty sparse, but it may feel less sparse in a full 3d space.
 
@NautArch I don't think that will disappear, I predict the first "optimized builds" hit the interwebs in a day.
 
@JohnP My point is lean into the optimization. Have big crazy encounters!
 
@nitsua60 yes to that
 
@nitsua60 There was always that, but also had a lever of "I'll get these ASI things I really want"
That was the compromise lever.
 
8:49 PM
The benefit being if you make things that customisable you can open up proper mix an match abilities
Like if you made people pick between 1-2 things at character creation
 
@AncientSwordRage Like tieflings picking between one of maybe four features?
 
I don't hate how they handled starting ASIs. I think they nicely split the difference, there, between bioessentialism and "nothing matters!"
(I mean, except when you realize that customizing backgrounds now means you just pick where to put ASIs freely. So nothing actually matters.)
 
@AncientSwordRage I know there's a Firefly meme appropriate for that but I can't find it rn.
 
@JoelHarmon yes, but a) for all races and b) without RP baggage (i.e. either being tied to abyssal, chthonic and infernal)
 
Luck points equal to your proficiency bonus.... =]
 
8:53 PM
What if you want to be a drow with detect magic and pass without trace?
 
@nitsua60 But don't have the super-advantage thingy (or 3rd d20 at all)
 
I don't like the damage rerolls on Tavern Brawler. Just give them a d6 for the base damage--it's got to be close to that, anyway.
Your Tavern Brawler can have hands like clubs. We'll allow it.
 
@nitsua60 Yeah, a d6 seems reasonable for that.
Lucky is a much simpler and not as powerful thing now.
 
@nitsua60 Clubs use a d4, no?
 
@AncientSwordRage Then you either convince your DM to rewrite the world away from Salvatore-style Drow, or you invest other resources into getting those spells, such as a feat.
 
8:58 PM
@Someone_Evil (shh....)
 
@JoelHarmon or a class
 
And d4 reroll on 1 gives 2.88 average
 
According to the back of my shopping list, [d4 reroll 1 once] increases the average from 2.5 to 2.875.
 
@nitsua60 Maybe something something monks? I don't have context.
 
That's close enough to 3.5 (average d6) that I don't want to deal with picking up a damn d4 again 1/4 of the time =D
 
9:00 PM
@JoelHarmon but saying "it's not broken if the DM can fix it" feels like a well known logical fallacy (that I'm choosing not to name)
Especially when the game-level fix would be as easy
 
@AncientSwordRage It isn't broken, you just want something it doesn't do. Where's my full caster but with four attacks per round class? It just doesn't exist.
 
So Magic Initate is keyword:Repeatable (with a restriction). And is the only Repeatable feat listed. What else do we think will be Repeatable?
 
@JoelHarmon that's a false equivalency
 
@nitsua60 Skilled is too
 
@AncientSwordRage Yeah, that's a bit more of a change. Why can't my wizard have cure? It's just subbing in a spell for a different one.
 
9:02 PM
What I'm saying is like the pizza menu saying you can't mix and match toppings, because the chef doesn't like that idea
@JoelHarmon well that's a reasonable request though
 
And yet the DMG strongly advises against it.
 
@nitsua60 martial adept?
 
GcL
@JoelHarmon Difference drives variety?
Other magic systems have the setup where any caster can attempt any spell... they just might have a rough time of it... or die in the attempt.
 
@JoelHarmon that's like asking the chef to put pepperoni slices on your carbonara
Weirder, but not bad
 
@nitsua60 Elemental Adept currently says "You can select this feat multiple times.", which I take to be equivalent.
 
9:07 PM
While at least some of us are on the topic of feats: I hope the rework Weapon Master into something choosable. Doubly with 1st level feats being moved to Backgrounds I would really like choosing cultural weapons to be viable
 
I am still a believer that there do need to be some hard decisions in character design. If you want things that another class does, you really should multiclass for it. Everyone getting everything doesn't completely sit right with me unless it's a total menu and you've got points to spend on everything.
@Someone_Evil I have a feeling they will.
 
@NautArch I agree, but for me those choices absolutely cannot be at the cost of fluff.
I'd be reasonably happy if Dancing lights, Faerie Fire and Darkness were all constrained to one path, say
 
GcL
@AncientSwordRage I'm swinging flashlights around while I dance no matter what path I'm on. So there! /S
 
But I dislike that it's 'drow must have these'
 
@NautArch I agree. I rather like the White Wolf point buy systems - near total customization. But the fluff there doesn't play heavily on deeply ingrained tropes, which I think is why it doesn't bother me.
 
9:13 PM
One fix is to split racial bonuses into innate and racio-cultural (that's not a thing, I really need a better word)
 
@NautArch 100%
 
So a drow raised with halflings might be naturally stealthy and brave, but can have keen senses and trance
 
@JoelHarmon Exactly! If that's the system, it's fun. But it doesn't work in halves.
 
Okay, I have thought of one reason why auto-failure on nat1s for all d20 rolls might be problematic.
Concentration checks.
It's going to be really frustrating if that investment into Constitution Saving Throws can't get past that innate 5% chance of failure.
 
@Xirema ooof.
 
9:16 PM
@Xirema it'd be cool if there was a rule saying 'ignore nat ones if your above level/have proficiency in/feat/etc'
 
GcL
@AncientSwordRage I like that. Of course, would probably always opt for "raised by dwarves" because braided beards are rad.
 
@AncientSwordRage I had toyed with brewing a variant where you had Race+Culture+Background, though I think that when you actually do that the race-cultures start looking really weird
 
Because it feels like it's ok to fail 5% of the time at lower levels/for some character choices
@Someone_Evil I've never put ink to paper (digital or otherwise) but it's crossed my mind more than once.
@GcL and then name yourself Carrot?
 
GcL
@Xirema auto-fail for 1 on rolls sets a situation where skilled characters fail more often than less skilled simply because they get more attacks/actions/etc at what they're skilled at.
 
@Xirema Do you often have so many bonuses that a 1 would pass?
 
9:19 PM
@JoelHarmon A lot of Concentration checks only have a DC of 10 (because that's the minimum against half the damage dealt, which often from a single blow isn't that high), so you only need +9 to auto-succeed on any concentration checks.
 
@JoelHarmon Doesn't take that much to get a +10 con save mod
 
@AncientSwordRage Only if you have a plain sword and odd birthmark.
 
My paladin, which took the Resilient feat for con, got to that point around level 12-ish.
 
Oh, right, you'd get away with +9
 
@JoelHarmon exactly
 
9:20 PM
But would have been viable a lot earlier if I'd been optimizing her more.
 
Let's call it the Carrot test
 
@Xirema Warcaster seems better and better
 
I find it odd that they'd cap a DC, but not modifiers.
 
@AncientSwordRage See if it sticks.
 
GcL
@AncientSwordRage Somebody has to leave the fortress and venture forth.
 
9:21 PM
@NautArch I mean, bounded accuracy is sorta supposed to cover that
 
> you may not venture forth without the rest of your party
 
@GcL I don't worry about this too much because they're also going to succeed a lot more often than unskilled players, and auto-fail is usually only problematic if you have Critical Failures (i.e. negative consequences above-and-beyond normal failure).
 
I'd agree that it doesn't do it that sharply, but I can't say I've found myself call for a DC30+ very often
 
But then you get edge-cases like this, where common (and unavoidable) low DC checks suddenly aren't a guaranteed success anymore, even if you've built around those checks.
 
GcL
@Xirema yes, but the failure rate isn't going to scale with the difficulty. Doing mundane stuff having a 5% failure rate for skilled and unskilled alike is a real pain for the skilled character doing the thing all the time.
 
9:23 PM
@Xirema Outside of high level rogues (and some other IIRC)
 
@Someone_Evil Not with the power creep that's come in.
 
@NautArch I believe I said sorta
 
@Xirema I'mnot sure i'm ready for autosuccess/failures for ability checks and saves.
@Someone_Evil tip o the hat
 
I mean, when WotC is taking feedback, mine is definitely going to be "autofail on 1/autosuccess on 20 creates more problems than it solves"
 
But there isn't that much in terms of directly modifiers, is there? There's more resources to help boost etc.
 
9:25 PM
@Xirema But is it enough to overcome the simplification it brings?
I'm in 100% agreement, but I can totally see the pragmatic choice.
 
I don't know.
 
Speaking of nat 20s. Thoughts on spell attacks not being able to crit anymore (in that propsal)?
 
darn you pragmatism!! <shakes fist in air>
@Someone_Evil I'm a fan. Helps reduce the power creep of casters at higher levels.
 
In practice, the rule doesn't matter. Most checks aren't high or low enough that a nat1/nat20 wouldn't have failed/succeeded anyways.
 
Which goes the other way to simplification, methinks
 
9:26 PM
Or even at lower.
 
Why are natural 20 autosucess and natural 1 autofail problematic on certain checks?
 
@Xirema I'm not confident they'll listen to feedback that's good for the game Vs good for sales
 
@Xirema this sounds really cool even :)
 
@MikeQ concentration saves that used to be autosuccesses due to the build
 
GcL
@MikeQ It means that investing in a skill is only good if there are going to be situations where there will be very few attempts.
 
9:27 PM
@Xirema True, if you needed a 20 on an ability check, it was probably something that shouldn't have been rolled.
 
GcL
Given enough time, a complete neophyte could accomplish the same task as a skilled veteran by just trying 30 times.
 
Isn't the whole point of the d20 to simulate uncertainty when there is meant to be a chance of failure?
 
Or that you were going to give on a crit anyway.
 
GcL
To avoid that, you'd break stuff up into multiple checks... which has the same effect of just not having auto-success. Also, "jump to the moon"
 
@MikeQ But if you've invested to mitigate failure at certain difficulties and that is no longer paying off, that's frustrating.
 
9:28 PM
@MikeQ the simplification now means that your rolling for things you shouldn't need to
 
auto-success on nat 20: the p-hacking of D&D
 
Not a huge deal, but otherwise a change.
 
@NautArch Was high level spells with spell attacks an issue for that? I was under the impression they were disliked for their unreliability
 
@Someone_Evil I think a very modest nerf to the d2d damage of spellcasters isn't such a bad thing, but given that WotC also started moving towards giving NPCs "Spell-like features which aren't technically spells", you're going to very rapidly end up in the "the outcome of this battle depends entirely on how your DM judges some arcane rules about attacks" territory.
 
@Someone_Evil Was thinking more of cantrips, etc. honestly.
And martials don't often have something that can drop a ton of damage all at once and have it doubled.
 
9:30 PM
@Someone_Evil How many attack roll based spells even are there beyond 1st level spell slots?
 
Excepting paladins (class du jour)
 
I know there's a few, but I'm fairly certain it's not many.
 
GcL
@Someone_Evil it wasn't an issue for cantrips, but some higher level spells that have an attack roll get weird and require more careful thought/ruling. E.g. witch's bolt. Crit should only double the first damage dice... not the auto-damage on subsequent rounds.
 
@NautArch Since you're reliant on the d20, rogues?
 
@Xirema Or they can do what I did, just say no counterspell.
@Someone_Evil Excellent point!
 
9:31 PM
@Xirema 24 (DDB search)
 
THeir schtick is reliant on that single attack and damage output.
But thats still their only thing.
Casters get so much more that exchanging some damage output seems reasonable for versatility (and aoes)
 
Well, there's some Skill Monkey and a bit else on the sly, but granted
 
Mostly, I think we all agree casters really do excel quite a bit, especially at higher levels with more dice. A little nerfing ain't bad.
 
@NautArch It'll be good that Mordenkainen's Sword can't crit anymore. brings it into line :p
 
@Someone_Evil lawdy yes. Maybe that helps that OP spell out. Maybe.
 
9:35 PM
If that change sticks, I'd really expect crits on spell attacks as a (class) feature at some point/somewhere. And if not official then homebrew
 
GcL
@NautArch Balancing casters with non-magic users is a tough one.
@Someone_Evil I'd be down for it only to apply to cantrips.
 
@GcL me too
not a bad balance.
 
@JoelHarmon some of us don't need much convincing on that ;)
 
I can't say I like the rule complexity that proposal necessitates.
 
@Someone_Evil I'd say "Bloodline, Culture, Background"
 
9:39 PM
Someone's going to have to explain where Shadow Blade falls in the "spells don't crit anymore" era.
 
@Shalvenay "Nature,Nurture"
 
@Xirema It creates a weapon and thus still crits. Flame blade on the other hand...
 
@Xirema Lots edge cases in this direction.
 
The way I've always interpreted the spell, it still would. I don't know how confident I am that other DMs will rule the same way.
 
GcL
@Someone_Evil Flame blade and other spell adds damage dice situations seem more like the edge cases.
Although, magic stone is a cantrip, so that one wouldn't be an issue for infusing bullets.
 
9:42 PM
@GcL Did you accidentally a word? And flame blade doesn't add damage dice, if I'm understanding you correctly
 
I still have that sitting in my campaign guide for the current campaign
Specifically so they can still cast stuff like green-flame blade and booming blade.
 
GcL
@Someone_Evil maybe I'm thinking of a different spell. I thought there were a bunch that add damage to an existing weapon.
 
@GcL Green flame blade or elemental weapon that was on your mind?
And you have a bunch of strike spells (most Paladin exclusive IIRC) that add effects to weapon hits, but those shouldn't be affected here
For those who need the rule:
> If a player character rolls a 20 for an attack roll with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike, the attack is also a Critical Hit, which means it deals extra damage to the target;
Wait, I just realized it also means monsters and NPCs don't crit anymore?
 
@Someone_Evil I won't be terribly shocked if the rule gets repeated in the MM 5.5e or whatever they print at that time.
 
I just realized a moment ago that you folks aren't talking about D&D 5e
 
9:48 PM
@MikeQ I mean, we are and we aren't
 
GcL
@MikeQ Yeah. 5.5. Just enough of a change to require the consumer base to re-buy all the books.
 
@MikeQ We're specifically talking about "One D&D", which is the marketing-friendly name WotC has produced for what is essentially 5.5e.
 
Feb 24, 2020 at 22:15, by MikeQ
@Xirema But what about D&D 5.5e when they "fix" everything?
 
It's actually a pretty terrible name, but don't tell that to any marketers, it might hurt their feelings.
 
The prophecy has been fulfilled
 
GcL
9:49 PM
@Xirema It might just be the old curmudgeon in me but the "One D&D" was Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and it sucks. I love it, but looking at it now... it's terrible.
 
lololol
 
@Xirema I'd assume it's the same marketers Microsoft uses for the XBox, and I'm not sure their feelings can be hurt
 
@Xirema ...but we are one when we play D&D together. Kumbaya.
 
@Shalvenay I like
 
If they are going to try to make some radical changes for 5.5, then my only prayer is that they do what they were too cowardly to do before: Level 20 Subclass-specific/exclusive Capstone features.
Make every class like paladins.
 
GcL
9:56 PM
@Shalvenay I like that as well.
 
For a game where Multiclassing is "technically optional", they've done too little to specifically encourage single-class play.
 
GcL
@Xirema Seems like a waste of time. Not a lot of campaigns run 20-level characters. On the other hand, if you're planning on that, home brewing those capstones might be fun to do as a session 0
 
@GcL Well, that's kind of an anthropic problem though. There aren't a lot of level 20 campaigns because the content for level 20 is kind of bare-bones.
 
@Xirema I'd actually feel better about dips or split multiclassing if I knew what I was sacrificing
 
GcL
@Xirema Was the same in AD&D and 2e. 3rd edition with the prestige classes was the only one I played where multiclassing to get some ultimate prestige class was the more OP than a quadratic wizard.
@Xirema It's because making meaningful challenges for 20th level characters is pretty involved.
 
9:59 PM
@GcL Also that, though I would argue that's just a reframing of what I said. 😛
Replace 'content' with 'tools'
 
GcL
@Xirema It takes more work to write meaningful content because the scope of the world that has to be included to make a challenge worthwhile for those levels is so much greater.
Rats in a sewer requires... a city or someplace with a sewer and some rats that need to be re-homed to the Fire Swamp where they flourish. So also need a Fire Swamp.
 
@GcL it doesn't need to let lvl 20 face meaningful challenges that lvl 19 can't take on , it just needs to make enough players go "oh, I want to play that class for that ability"
 
@GcL "you get called about rats in the sewer, but it turns out they're dire beavers instead"
 
GcL
@AncientSwordRage 18,19,20 are all demi-god tier challenges really. I only participated in one campaign that got to that final tier and was enjoyable. It was a lot of work for the DM.
 
@GcL sure
 
GcL
10:04 PM
@Shalvenay That's a definite wrinkle! Dire beavers would decimate the Fire Swamp ecosystem. Now you've got two problems, and a hook for finding a druid with a working knowledge of the ecology of dire beavers.
 
But if I play a barbarian I am looking forward to being a Primal Champion even if I can't actually arm wrestle Orcus, I feel like a high level character who could try
 
GcL
Also, might need a Beavers of Unusual Size trap in stead of an ROUS trap.
 
The only encounter I've ever run at level 17 featured a boss that could, each round, cast 5 of any combination of Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Shield, and Absorb Elements. (This was a pre-Silvery Barbs campaign)
It was almost enough to reduce one of the PCs to 0 hit points.
And he had an AC of 26 and a minimum of +10 to his saving throws.
So when people say it's hard to develop challenging encounters for level 20 play...... I believe them.
 
GcL
@AncientSwordRage Looking at barbs, that L15 persistent rage is interesting. Wake up, rage, coffee, maybe some light reading... still raging, have a jog with the druid, maintain tools, some yoga... still raging...
 
@GcL yeah but it doesn't feel capstone to me...
 
GcL
10:20 PM
That L15 takes away a lot of the rage uses management up to that point. Just rage all the time for perpetual damage resistance.
Totem of the bear expands that to everything except psychic damage
 
10:43 PM
6
Q: Can a siege weapon "see" its target?

Darth PseudonymIn another question, I was considering the mechanics of siege weaponry (and Spelljammer's ship-to-ship weapons, more to the point). I considered use of the faerie fire spell as a way to gain advantage on the attack rolls: Any attack roll against an affected creature or object has advantage if th...

 
10:58 PM
@GcL I think if I was pressed, I'd definitely make it relying on previous features a requirement for something to be considered a 'capstone'
It's not just, the top part of the pyramid, this is time and space bending electrum capstones.
 
11:28 PM
@GcL which updated monsters deliver
 

« first day (4340 days earlier)      last day (50 days later) »