@KorvinStarmast I've got two different, smallish answers I've dropped on that one. I'm not displeased with them. It does, however, end up being a very idea-generation-ey question. I wonder how it would be handled now if it were posed, without the halo of history obscuring its imperfections.
@nitsua60 :P haha. I mean -- in terms of "logistics of exploration is going to come into play heavily" vs. "that gets swept under the rug while the party deals with whatever monsters roam the innards of Chult"
@Shalvenay (I tease, I tease....) I don't know about heavy vs. light, but I read this adventure as having a strong component of "overland travel/survival/adventuring is a thing that we used to have fun doing but many current-generation published adventures don't really incorporate; here's what we find fun about it." (cc: @trogdor @KorvinStarmast)
It's one thing when you've got a question in mind that you've mis-stated and comments or discussion make you realize you should clarify. We want you to post the question you have, and for it to get good answers, so of course you should clarify it if necessary. (And that's why we believe in holding "unclear" questions, editing, and reopening.)
But in your case it's not that you mis-stated something originally. You had a question, the answers to that question prompt a slightly different question in you mind now.
@goodguy5 it seems like a borderline case to me. I didn't look thoroughly, but if it changes or invalidates answers you should definitely strongly consider that
Yeah--that's why hypotheticals/"just curious" questions tend to be a little problematic. When there's not an actual table-situation to which they apply it's not easy to write one that specifies all these details that don't actually exist =)
That's actually why I went ahead and left that lengthy-ish comment with the reopen-vote: I knew that at least ten other people had voted close, open, close, open on the question.
@goodguy5 if you are sure of that then just do that and edit it into your question I would say. nobody should complain if it doesn't change their answer's validity
@Rubiksmoose I would say so. I'd also say that if this becomes a recurring theme (another person comes along, another clarification made, lots of notifications have to go out...) goodguy might consider flagging the question themself and asking for closure. In the "I got some interesting answers but this question's actually a headache" vein.
but do note this is just me saying this. This isn't even really my type of question at all. If you are not sure wait for someone more authoritative than I.
@goodguy5 if other questions like this come up always feel free to come in this room and say "hey, I've got this optimization problem I'm considering posting, are there any more details I need to provide?"
@nitsua60 I actually did work with him quite a bit when it was first posted to get it into better shape
@goodguy5 honestly, theoretical optimisation problems are probably the most finicky, detail-specific questions you can ask. If it is anything other than that you'll have a much easier time.
I will say that martial adept's precision dice really should figure into any mix: the possibility of converting a non-hit to a hit with no action-cost is huge for expected damage.
There are two different ways a race could be "official": it could be "official" in the sense of fully-tested and legal for sanctioned organized play campaigns, and it could be "official" in the sense of being published in 1st-party material from Wizards of the Coast. Which one is relevant depends...
> "...cute. Extremely cute. Sweetly, lovably, frustratingly cute.... And it's hard, after seeing Janet play Tas, to imagine them any other way." Two of the other key characteristics of kender-their curiosity and kleptomania-were introduced by Hickman. Hickman was uncomfortable with the notion of a "race of thieves" in his games, but still wanted the skills typically associated with thieves, so he added their "innocent tendency to 'borrow' things for indeterminate periods of time."
I think it's the difference between a CE character having no scruples about killing someone for spurious reasons, and a character feeling compelled to kill people for spurious reasons.
@Shalvenay But that's not what happened. A player created a likable kleptomaniac, and declared that their homeland was just like that. Thus was the race born.
And notice: it never played detrimental to the plot. It either played for a laugh or ended up saving the world.
Or having a shattered moral compass, but the good sense not to do anything too sociopathic where they're certain to get caught by the town guard. This is exacerbated by DMs who fiat their players out of tough spots like that.
...it's getting less and less of a light modification to remove unnecessary complication, and more and more a full stripping down to the base resolution mechanic and rebuilding from the ground up to be less... let's say confusing.
Stripped out all the fiddly feat- and spell-selection clone mechanics in favor of stuff like "What unique talent do you bring to the team? When your specialty is relevant to an action, draw two extra cards."
"Octopus (mental): Eda grants you piercing insight. Your mental actions never Fumble."
If I had more time, and thought the results would be meaningful, I'd make a spreadsheet of the pre-made characters' stats and figure out expected average range and mean.
But I suspect I'll get about the same "balance" in relation to the card mechanic by eyeballing it.
I had lots of fun playing Stellaris: Apocalypse yesterday. The big changes made in Cherryh patch were a bit overwhelming but I think overall they changed the game for the better.
I'm playing this Templar/Brotherhood of Nod/Aztec Empire mashup who fancies themselves as the chosen protectors of the human race as a whole so they regard alien species with suspicion, with a healthy dose of pragmatism.
Their main ally is another human regime, Space Poland.
That calls for simple mechanics I'm familiar with!
...we could continue our Lady Blackbird session from last week. We were about to rescue the Captain, our two new players could be the Captain and someone else with him.
Mmmm. Sunset tomorrow marks the beginning of the intercalary days which Baha'is dedicate to fellowship, charity, and unity. We usually try to play something fun and lighthearted if a Geek Night falls on those days.
@trogdor Yeah. A group larger than I'm used to these days, with people who've never played with each other before, most of us lacking face and body language cues to facilitate group cohesion... I don't want to add an unfamiliar system to that if I'm the one running it.
Got my party to help me solve some riddles in Curse of Strahd
I was worried I'd have to do it alone
Not because they're hard, but because I hate always being the guy interested in doing the between-session thinking. I fear it might discourage the others if I do it too much
I fried lemon-ginger marlin and bell pepper for dinner, and then we made smoothies in our new smoothie maker--apples, Greek yogurt, bananas, frozen strawberries, some honey, berry juice, almond milk.
I'm looking forward to breaking my fast with smoothies next month.
I made some tofu and onion curry for myself and my SO yesterday. For some reason the spicing worked really, really well for the onion but left the tofu almost tasteless. The onions were probably the best I've made in ages.
I was thinking about if I cast dimension door on myself with the stipulation of "210 feet straight up", then fall onto someone. lemme find the anime image
@goodguy5 Unfortunately, that's not really a D&D move. Unless you have a way to mitigate the distance drop (like featherfall), then you are 100% going to receive falling damage.
It's more of DM call/homebrew, but I'd suggest using @SPavel's equal and opposite reaction idea. It's the cleanest and you can use it for a variety of objects. Weight is less important than distance.
I would probably roll each damage separately, though. But I like rolling dice :)
@goodguy5 You were absolutely correct I had the edit pending actually while I looked for links. Should have just fixed it in the meantime. Thanks for spotting it and bringing it to my attention though. I do appreciate it (I hate having typos or errors in my answers, drives me nuts).
@Rubiksmoose given the low level of the question and the borderline-rude comments they got from another user, can I suggest that a paragraph to the extent of "This is understandable, there are a lot of rolls that boil down to 'roll d20, add mods, compare to number' but that are partitioned into three species for partially-historical, partially-game-design reasons. They're the attack roll, the ability check, and the saving throw."
Basically, I feel like this is an understandable thing to be unclear on and counteracting the hostility elsewhere might be a good deed.
@nitsua60 I've actually confused this very thing on the site before (in a slip of the mind way but whatever)
I'm happy to do it. I was going to write a more full answer, but I was balancing that against the desire to help teach OP how to find the answers themselves a bit.
Yeah, when I'm writing "newbie answers" I tend to start with "this is understandable, here's the place it's explained which is easy to miss, here are some of the places it matters, here's how it got this way." Because I firmly believe that D&D is utter crap at explaining itself. (I'm not talking to you, Mentzer--red box 4eva!)
@Rubiksmoose Or maybe the comment on the question. If that's the one you're curious about, I'd suggest one thing: I don't find "this might be why people are doing X" comments very useful. I'm a much bigger fan of "I did X and here's why."
@nitsua60 Sorry yeah the one with regards to OP. I can understand that. Though in this case the reason I did it was because nobody else was and it it seems incredibly harsh and off putting for someone who might not understand the site.
But you don't know that's why anyone else was downvoting. I mean, it's 95% likely you're right, but if you just testify to your own actions then you're 100% right. And upvotes on that are pretty unambiguous, too.
But yes, I feel like it's a bit of a harsh reception.