TRPG General Chat

KorvinStarmast

00:10

@Anaphory Sandbox campaigns react to player decisions. in the OSR D&D world, which those articles are aimed at mostly, as I read them, you use random encounters to help you react to the players so that you are not railroading them. I realize that for a lot of people that doesn't make sense. OSR style, it is part of the way to keep danger and uncertainty an element of adventure.

You flesh out the connection on the fly. It's not that hard, once you have done it a few times. In fact, it is incredibly easy and makes your job as DM less difficult, not more difficult, once you have done it a few times.

I think that there is a lot of tension between Illusionism and Improvisation, but I confess to you that I usually find such theoretical discussions tedious. At some point, people need to stop picking the fly crap out of the pepper and play.

nitsua60

01:12

@KorvinStarmast I've got to say about spiritual weapon I'm still not 100% on the accepted answer. I mean, with the tweet it's clear what JC intended, but as written I'm still very much seeing it both ways.

To my thinking it comes down to the notion of "reach."

Unfortunately that's another of 5e's overloaded terms: it's got both a plain-language sense and a mechanical sense.

My mental model revolves around the caster's reach: it seems to me that there's an argument that any creature within 5' of the spiritual weapon is within the caster's reach-as-plain-English, though maybe not in their reach-as-game-term.

So maybe I'm 60-40 on the "no OA" side, but I'm not feeling strongly one way or the other.

Shalvenay

01:42

hey there @Nyoze, how're things going?

Nyoze

@Shalvenay Not so good of late. Lots of personal/relationship issues at the moment. How have you been?

Shalvenay

@Nyoze alright here, been having some decent games as of late

Nyoze

@Shalvenay I cant play anymore. I am actually in the process of deactivating and deleting all my accounts. Glad to hear all is well with you though!

Shalvenay

@Nyoze oh? :/ what's wrong?

Nyoze

@Shalvenay long story but to cut it down short i screwed up online and have decided that for now its best i'm not using computer unless its work related.

Shalvenay

01:53

@Nyoze nods ah. have to let the mess pass for a while I take it?

Nyoze

@Shalvenay If the mess will pass :/ and even if it does I'm not sure i can trust myself again. It's a pretty big mess :/

Shalvenay

@Nyoze sorry to hear that man, and I wish you the best with your future life

Nyoze

@Shalvenay Thanks man. And same goes for you! Who knows, i may be back one day!

@Shalvenay you have my email if you ever want to chat

Shalvenay

02:21

hey there @Jason_c_o, how're things going?

KorvinStarmast

@nitsua60 Happy either way. Gotta love the artwork, eh? :)

Jason_c_o

Oh hey, I'm well. How about you? @Shalvenay

I don't stop by chat often and figured I'd step in haha

Shalvenay

@Jason_c_o doing fine here

welcome to the RPG.SE lair by the way :)

KorvinStarmast

@Shalvenay dare we challenge TRex? We have a week to ponder that dire challenge.

Jason_c_o

Thanks. I've been using the site a while now but never really bothered to make a presence back here

Shalvenay

02:25

@Jason_c_o yeah, the chat here is pretty nice to hang out in :) we even have the occasional chatizen RPG session :)

BESW

[wave]

KorvinStarmast

wave caught

Mike Q

02:40

particle released

Jason_c_o

wavefunction collapsed

trogdor

science BURNINATED

BESW

03:18

trogdor

I dig it

BESW

trogdor

XD

Jason_c_o

hahaha

kviiri

11:00

@Anaphory Sounds like you had a great time!

Ben

13:24

Anyone interested in helping me with choosing a feat for my druid in pathfinder?

Carcer

just a first level feat?

Mike Q

@Ben What books are available? What are you trying to accomplish with the build? What feats do you have so far?

David Coffron

@Ben also what kind of druid? There's this:

2

Q: Good early-level feat options for a Wildshape Druid

I'm trying to help a player create her Druid character. She wants to focus on Wild Shape, and we were thinking about feats and I couldn't find many applicable early-level feats for her. I'm thinking obviously Natural Spell at 5th level, but that doesn't help me now as they're starting at level ...

pathfinder

Rubiksmoose

@nitsua60 The big thing for me is the concept of spell doing only what they say. The spell isn't giving you a weapon that you can wield like a normal weapon. It is giving you a weapon that can attack when you do a specific thing: use a bonus action on your turn. Actually I was going to say that allowing it would probably not be that bad, but I think allowing it to be used as a reaction out of your turn would be a significant enough power boost to reject it.

The fact that bonus actions and reactions are so different and fit into completely different parts of the action economy make me very wary of just allowing this. If the spell had been a reaction to begin with though, then I think I would strongly consider allowing it and that the discussion about reach would be relevant.

David Coffron

13:40

@Rubiksmoose not to mention that one of the proposed problems with large PCs is there increased "threat area." Having such a diverse threat area is quite good

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Yeah that will certainly make things weird as well. Possibly too good. Sure you can only take one OA per round but having two 3x3 areas where enemies can provoke is really good. Also the fact that if you let the enemies provoke by leaving the weapon's "reach" then you also have an OA provoking target there that enemies can't even attack direct which is also really good.

But really I think the main reason I reject it is that it would make things complicated to keep track of and not enhance fun really.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose there are a lot of monsters who have spectral weapon which is already an awesome spell. I doubt the non-cleric party members would enjoy this change.

Ben

I am currently only level 3, animal companion (so no domain), I haven't had much incentive to multi class (yet), and stats are pretty average.

I'm aiming for a "wild" type character, I.e. animal-based things.

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron oh really I had no idea it was relatively common among monsters. That could be seriously annoying for palyers lol

Mike Q

@Ben There's basically 2 ways to build a PF druid: Caster or wildshape frontliner

David Coffron

13:49

@Ben I mean Natural Spell seems both good and flavorful then

Ben

As for what's available, we've been advised to use this page as a go-to

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I mean cults are a relatively common theme and cult fanatics (the cult chaf) get it. Many monstrous races have a "priest-type" that get it.

kviiri

Two game sessions scheduled yay \o/

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Ah yeah that makes sense.

kviiri

and this time by SOMEONE ELSE!
'

Mike Q

13:51

Natural Spell (and later, Natural Speech) is generally useful for all druids. As a caster, it lets you turn into something small and mobile, and you can blast AOE spells from afar.

Ben

@MikeQ I'm thinking something of a go-between. I can stick up for myself in battle if need be, but I want to use my spells to be the main thing.

I read through the list of feats, and so far I'm up to "K" in general feats. Lol

kviiri

How bad is the "feat tax" in PF?

Mike Q

@kviiri As you might expect, it hurts martials much more than casters

kviiri

@MikeQ Ow.

Feat Tax --- because Martials have it too good.

Mike Q

Like, fighters get a lot of feats, sure, but most of the feats they take are marginal benefits or prerequisites for later feats

David Coffron

13:53

@kviiri it can be pretty bad (especially for martial types) fmpov. I've seen quite a few local campaigns that use some published homebrew rules to help fix it a bit

Ben

So far Animal Soul has taken my interest

For reference I am also a Skinwalker

kviiri

I haven't really liked feats a lot, ever. 5e is a lot better than my previous 4e because there's a relatively manageable number of them, but still...

Carcer

spiritual weapon kind of bugs me in the way that it makes a big floating thing that nobody can interact with in any way, almost

kviiri

It feels like that part of game which few people actually profess to enjoy and many people berate --- browsing to book to find a maximal bonus for your stats.

David Coffron

@kviiri well in 5e they're totally optional which is a good change of pace. In fact, a lot of the time you are better off just not using a feat.

kviiri

13:57

@DavidCoffron Aye!

Mike Q

@Ben I found the sheet for my old druid/monk. I had Combat casting, Power attack, Improved initiative, Natural spell, Spell focus (conjuration), Augmented summoning, Improved grapple, Greater grapple (and Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat)

kviiri

I'll be right back -->

Sir Cinnamon

I would rather pick a feat because it gives my character something unique that fits my idea of them rather than hunting for what gives the optimal combat effectiveness

David Coffron

@Carcer have you seen bigby's hand?

Sir Cinnamon

i dont think a player should build characters around what is the highest possible DPR, and I dont think a campaign should be so hard as to encourage that either

David Coffron

13:58

They did it right with that. Making it actually have AC and HP

Ben

@MikeQ I was thinking about combat casting too.

David Coffron

@SirCinnamon everyone has their own fun

I like a challenging game personally

Rubiksmoose

@SirCinnamon I think either way can be fun depending on what the group wants.

Carcer

@DavidCoffron yeah if it's going to be a thing floating about in the world then having it have proper stats is the way to go

Sir Cinnamon

@Rubiksmoose I guess this is key - it has to be the whole group or none

Rubiksmoose

14:00

I tend to fall into your camp more so than the min-max one though

David Coffron

Although I prefer the challenge has more to do with requiring unique and creative approaches rather than just "damage this thing fast"

Ben

One thing I want to do is kind of be the "middle man" for the group. We have a Blood Rager and a Cleric as the other two classes

Mike Q

@Ben Looking back, I would recommend against the exact build I used. My druid was very versatile (full attack? grapple? cast a control spell? cast a damage spell? summon?), but it meant juggling a lot of roles and specializing in none

Sir Cinnamon

If one member of the group is min-maxing then other players either don't, and feel weak, or are forced to do it too, and dont get to build the character they want

Ben

No-one is min maxing ATM...

Carcer

14:01

I'd be somewhat tempted to rerule spiritual weapon so that it doesn't create a persistent thing that floats around, the spectral weapon only appears when you actually attack with it, and you can just use it to hit anything within 30 feet of you

David Coffron

@Ben scribe scroll can be a good spell to help fill gaps you have in spells. Especially the ones you don't really want to have in your daily list

Ben

Scribe scroll is a feat or a spell?

Mike Q

@Ben Overall I'd say that druids shine at utility, scouting, and AOE control. The bloodrager and cleric won't fill those roles as effectively.

Ben

I would agree with that :)

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer Seems like a slight power boost but might cut back on the confusion around it?

kviiri

14:05

@SirCinnamon I kinda agree, but DnD ties the concept of character agency rather strongly into numbers. Minmaxing isn't fun, but neither is being underpowered

Mike Q

@Ben It's a feat. Wizards get it at level 1. It costs money (and some time) to make a scroll, and deals with the item crafting rules. Still, could be useful for a divine prepared caster who can switch up their spells each day.

Sir Cinnamon

@kviiri well I guess if your campaign has an emphasis on combat, a manipulator character might feel underpowered, and a combat focused character will feel the same in a political environment

David Coffron

@SirCinnamon certainly can go that way, but in one of my groups the other players are fairly optimized and I am hardly. I still have fun and I don't seem to be holding back the group much (we have an MVP vote which I've won multiple times)

Ben

@MikeQ I have +0 int

Lol

Sir Cinnamon

So theres some level of synergy and thought to put into your moves and stats, but I think you can generally pick from a wide selection if you arent overly concerned with 100% optimal damage output

Rubiksmoose

14:08

@SirCinnamon In D&D being good or at least competent at combat is essential for any character to have fun really.

Sir Cinnamon

@Rubiksmoose Yes, competent but not necessarily optimal

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose right. I have a lot of fun making "rogue" (as in off the standard) builds, but it takes some time and understanding to make them not just bad

Rubiksmoose

If you aren't doing significant amounts of fighting I would question why the group was using D&D in the first place.

Mike Q

@Ben If you invest in Spellcraft (~1 rank per level) then you should be ok

kviiri

I think it's a bit shoddy design if the players have to make trade-offs between efficient and interesting (although DnD isn't the worst offender in this by a long shot)

Ben

14:09

@MikeQ I do have that

Rubiksmoose

@SirCinnamon Yeah there is certainly a range of optimization that is fun.

David Coffron

@MikeQ whew. Coming from D&D 4e+ only it took me so long to figure out wth was going on with skill ranks.

Rubiksmoose

@kviiri It is more like D&D really only focuses on combat so the system doesn't see other choices as being "interesting" at all. Unfortunately, this battle bias seems to have been baked into D&D's core since its inception.

kviiri

Savage Worlds is a real pain in that the non-combat and combat skills come from the same pool, and while training a character to any direction is possible, learning the necessary abilities and skills to be combat-capable post-chargen is a pain

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I think it's fun up until you feel like you can't make a choice that you otherwise would want to for character or some other reason. It's one of the problems I have with 5e's Warlock. Some Invocations are flavorful but not really useful in most games.

Rubiksmoose

14:12

On the other hand, I do think it is harder in 5e to make a completely non-viable build then it was in say Pathfinder.

kviiri

@Rubiksmoose Aye. But it's still better than games that are all about combat and still allow you to ruin your day by not focusing on it x)

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Yeah I agree and I hate that as well.

kviiri

Of course combat is a bit of a red herring in the sense that it could be anything, really. Anything that divides the game into "X and non-X" and pits the players on to different sides of that division

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose which is kind of sad bc from a RP perspective I love the warlock as a class.

Carcer

@Rubiksmoose yeah, slightly more useful as you don't have to move it around but way less confusing

Rubiksmoose

14:16

@kviiri You mean to say that skill challenges and social encounters could also be seen as "battle" for example?

Carcer

no more "can I flank with it", "can it opportunity attack", "does it block movement" etc.

Rubiksmoose

:46978825 Yup misread!

kviiri

@Rubiksmoose Yes, although probably something more specific would be closer to the point

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer Yeah it does remove all those confusing questions. In my experience, when we have used the spell at my table both as DM and Player I have found myself forgetting about the spectral nature of it when placed on a battle map and treated as a creature for the sake of things moving around it etc.

Interestingly, this would also take away the complicated question of: do these enemies know they can just walk through the SW's space?

Mike Q

@Rubiksmoose Maybe with a permissive DM and arcana check

Rubiksmoose

14:23

@MikeQ Yeah it would depend on INT and other things in conisdering if I would even give a creature an arcana check. I think the default assumption from creatures unfamiliar with this spell would assume that it was solid and pointy and that going near it is bad.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I used to do that but then I stopped. Recently I made counters for intangible effects (this, dancing lights, items with darkness cast on them, etc) since the space isn't occupied. It helps keep them less ambiguous

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron I think that is definitely a good way to do this. We have been trying to transition to TotM battle more lately though. Now that we have been doing completely TotM stuff with Masks for a few months I wonder if that will help push us along there.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I have been doing the same in one of my groups and am starting to love it. If you have a group that can pull it off it is great fun

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron I'll admit that I am actually one of the ones with the hardest time with it in D&D. However, I love it conceptually and I love it in other systems. It is just so many abilities in D&D are so spatially specific and I have a hard time picturing things spatially and understanding.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose we've just been handwaving it a lot of the time

"Yeah they're about within range of your sling"

It's a nice change of pace from the meticulous measurement of space on battlemap

Carcer

14:35

@Rubiksmoose especially when you have a lot of individual creatures in play I think it's very challenging

Mike Q

Bah humbug! No combat is truly complete without a ruler and protractor!

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Yeah that is the way to go really. It is so liberating and makes things go faster as long as everyon has the same mental image of where everyone/thing is.

Carcer

for very small stuff, like five or six individuals involved, it's not so hard to keep in mind

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer Absolutely. The more you get the harder it gets for me. As a DM it is usually not an issue becuase I get to set and fudge the mental image as I see fit. As a player trying ot understand a battlefield though...

I think the latest we were doing is sketching out roughly where everything is on paper or battlemap not to scale and using that to make sure everyone is on the same page.

(if a battle was complicated enough there might be confusoin)

Mike Q

How can a system fully simulate the nuances of medieval-style combat without tables and flowcharts and geometry

Also lizardpeople and magic

I'm pretty sure those are accurate as per the goals of simulationism

BESW

14:45

Oct 14 '14 at 10:02, by BESW

All game systems must abstract their simulation at some point, or they become a bunch of rocks. The question is what they're trying to simulate, and where they move from simulation to abstraction.

Oct 14 '14 at 10:04, by BESW

And because all non-trivial abstractions are leaky, it's literally impossible to achieve truly realistic mechanics.

Anaphory

@kviiri Oh, yes, I did!

Carcer

oh come on

you can't go quoting things you said in chat four years ago

that's just showing off

Mike Q

What if I like rocks

I sure hope 6e comes with a supplementary physics textbook

I mean, if the bestiary doesn't tell me the average mass, volume, density, melting point, electric resistance, BMI, income, and voting preferences of a goblin, then how am I expected to DM the game in an objective way?

Anaphory

Not as much blown away as I was when Masks crossed my path last year, but still an excellent collection of interesting games, and more variety than I had on other cons. If anyone of you folks is in Holland next September, make sure to swing by!

Yuuki

15:00

@MikeQ You forgot average annual moving violations.

Carcer

@MikeQ "voting preferences of a goblin" - pretty sure it says "neutral evil" in the stat block

Yuuki

@Carcer <This witty reply has been closed as too opinion-based>

Mike Q

The martial classes are too boring. Let's give them more simulationist mechanics!

Action economy isn't just drawing a weapon and attacking - We should also account for parrying, blocking, and different directions of attack, plus the time required to pull back and ready a swing

Of course, all of these should be penalized by default, and require heaps of feats in order to become decent

Yuuki

"I can't use a sling so obviously you need a feat for that."

Carcer

@Yuuki [SKR throws darts at a board]

Mike Q

15:08

@Carcer He'll need feats to do that

Carcer

@MikeQ (specifically I'm referencing a thread where SKR was justifying some limit on how many attacks monks and similar could make based on how quickly and accurately he personally could throw things)

Mike Q

@Carcer I'm aware of that one

Obviously the flaw in his logic is that he didn't have the prerequisite feats himself

Carcer

sure, sure.

you must be hype for PF2 eh

Mike Q

It's being designed by the same dudes who use "modern game designer" as the physical standard for "epic war-honed swordmaster"

Carcer

SKR left

Yuuki

15:12

@Carcer Oh yeah, is that the Pathfinder guy who justified the weapon cord nerf with an anecdote about him messing around with a Wii-mote?

Carcer

his reign of terror and martial oppression is over

@Yuuki I don't know that one specifically but it certainly sounds very SKR

Mike Q

@Carcer Either way, I've griped enough in chat about how little I trust paizo to make a coherent product

Sep 25 at 19:17, by Mike Q

I enjoy the system as a player, but I'm 99% convinced that the designers don't understand their own system, along with principles like balance, informational organization, or thorough playtesting

Joshua Aslan Smith

testing the new site layout beta, still pretty wonky

Carcer

s'fair enough

Yuuki

@MikeQ I haven't played Pathfinder that much, but I've always felt like Paizo's designers like making cruft for the sake for more cruft. It seems like they feel the entirety of their game is charop and so they put out a ton of stuff for messing around with optimized builds with no sense of what actually playing the game is like.

Carcer

15:16

@Yuuki let's be fair, half-an-hour of practice in the morning is equivalent to the training of a skilled warrior

Yuuki

Lara Cruft?

Mike Q

@Yuuki Yes, "cruft" is a useful word that applies to most things in PF

It seems like they enjoy adding more content for the sake of expanding the system, without asking questions like "Do we really need this new option" or "How will this new option affect the balance of the other options" or "Will this new rule conflict with any of our million other rules"

KorvinStarmast

There was a time decades ago when trolling was considered an art form, in the sense that "a good troll" was one that wasn't clumsy; it got people all riled up without being insulting to any particular participant on the BB. I think this is an example of a troll that was quite successful.

I checked the user profile, and that post appears to be a one off "dump this grenade in the room and see who jumps on it" post. The SE system rewarded this with two gold, four silver, and four bronze badges. Nice 'optimization' in terms of reward per unit effort.

Mike Q

@Yuuki Or "Should we playtest this class, or at do some rough estimate of its ability relative the other classes? Or can we just throw a bunch of features together and publish it?"

Yuuki

@KorvinStarmast I suppose there's something to be said about separating the question from the asker.

Carcer

15:25

@Yuuki there's room for a game about Lara just coming back home for once and having to do a big cleanup of her stupid mansion because of all the random junk she's stolen around the world

Yuuki

@Carcer After all the death cutscenes I've seen, I'm more than fine with a slower-paced Tomb Raider where Lara just moves stuff around the house and, at worst, gets like a paper cut or something.

A paper cut treated with the exact same cinematic gravitas as a spike through the head.

Rubiksmoose

@KorvinStarmast huh. Well my troll alarms didn't really go off here, but at least the answers were on point.

Mike Q

@Yuuki "We want to differentiate our product from D&D 3.5 and the WOTC style. On the other hand, we want to include all the stuff people liked from 3.5. So let's add more splat books with more options."

Rubiksmoose

@KorvinStarmast btw I dropped an answer on your question. I know it treads some of the same ground as the other two, but I think that the "it's probably ok to rule that this works" in the first answer is likely really glossing over issues if not wrong. And hopefully my added discussion on the effects of such a change help.

KorvinStarmast

15:43

@Rubiksmoose It is well organized and covers all of the bases. Works for me. :)

@Rubiksmoose When I offered an answer, (there were already a bunch of good ones, to include some from people I recognized from RPG.SE) I noted the heated interchanges in comments .... and I saw a whole lot of upvotes on comments of various sorts. After I had traded comments with a person whose answer got hammered ... doppel had also offered some insights on that answer's getting a bad reception I looked at the question again. And the troll flags went up.

Sir Cinnamon

I was given a 4e module as a gift many years ago, and now I can't recall the name or find anything online that sounds like it might be that module. I probably played at least 5 or 6 sessions of it

AHA! Found it

"The Scepter Tower of Spellgard"

Xirema

The more I think about 5e's conception of a Bonus Action, the more confused I get by what it's supposed to abstract. The way that Bonus Actions are set up seems to imply they're faster/less complex than regular Actions. You get an Action to do something complicated—like making a full suite of attacks against an opponent—and then a Bonus Action to do something extra, like getting an off-hand weapon attack, or disengaging as a Rogue.
But then, you get to something basic, like Readying an Action. "I want to prepare to cast Misty Step, so that when my opponent tries to cross the bridge, I telep…

Joshua Aslan Smith

@Carcer not sure what the next move for the series is going to be trinity is "done" as the macguffin of the third game was the end all be all for trinity

I honestly thought they would peel back more of the lore on the artifacts being alien in origin or something along those lines, what they hinted at in the first and 2nd game in the reboot

KorvinStarmast

@Xirema it is a game mechanic to add to the complexity and variation of the combat turn.

Rubiksmoose

Bonus actions are designed to be something extra—sprinkles on top of the ice cream. And they're designed to occur only once on your turn. #DnD https://twitter.com/doublefakedavid/status/1031605698457743362

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on August 20, 2018 at 6:22 PM

KorvinStarmast

15:53

It gets around "I swing my stick" as all that happens.

Sir Cinnamon

Not being able to ready a bonus action seems odd in some cases for sure. As does not being able to do 2 "bonus actions" instead of 1 action-1 bonus

As a DM i might allow either of those situationally

Joshua Aslan Smith

they are a separate class, not a downgrade in the action economy like a normal action and a move

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema It is best not to think about them in terms of which is faster in general. Because bonus actions are granted only by abilities it is saying this character can do this thing and another thing because they are especially good at it.

Yuuki

Bonus actions are not swift actions (to use Pathfinder lingo).

Xirema

@SirCinnamon the inability to Ready Bonus Actions is the big thing that gets to me. There's too many things I'd like to be able to do in a combat round that are prevented by RAW.

(and not just because I'm playing a paladin, where 2/3rds of my spells are cast as Bonus Actions)

Rubiksmoose

16:00

@Xirema Yeah I'm honestly not sure if there would be any downsides to allowing this.

Given how rare readying anything is in my games it never really comes up. I can't think of any case where it significantly breaks anything though.

David Coffron

@BESW i mean the most realistic systems imo are the ones with fewer rules as the group can play what makes sense

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose My gut instinct is that there aren't balance-related downsides to this, but "Bonus Actions cannot be Readied" is a pretty sweeping rule that has a lot of implications on tactical decisions, so I don't know how exhaustively anyone has checked for potential exploits.

David Coffron

@Xirema I can think of a few. Readying the dodge action from monks would be pretty strong since you can attack and then only dodge if someone gets close

(Keeping you reaction available for deflect missles)

Carcer

@DavidCoffron you mean to avoid spending the ki point if it would've been pointless

I would've ruled readying a bonus action as still requiring the use of the Ready action and your Reaction

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron Oh, I thought @Xirema meant readying a bonus action-only move with your Action.

Rubiksmoose

16:09

@DavidCoffron I think you can do this with Ready RAW.

David Coffron

@Yuuki yeah. Monks have a way to use the dodge action as a bonus action

@Rubiksmoose let me clarify. Monks patient defense feature

Carcer

@Rubiksmoose you can ready an action to dodge, but patient defence must be used as a bonus action and costs a ki point

it's to get the benefit of both attacking and dodging in the same round

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron The restriction on Ready is not on actions in general, but only on spells

Xirema

@Yuuki That is how I had interpreted this being used. "Ready an Action" uses an Action, so "Ready a [Bonus] Action" would still be an Action.

Yuuki

@DavidCoffron And you would still spend your action to ready it?

Rubiksmoose

16:10

@DavidCoffron The restriction on Ready is not on actions in general, but only on spells

David Coffron

@Xirema oh.

@Yuuki I misunderstood. I thought he meant a bonus action to ready a bonus action

Yuuki

The salient part is that there are some moves that can only be used as a bonus action. And these moves cannot be Readied by RAW.

Rubiksmoose

@Yuuki Where does it say this?

Yuuki

@Rubiksmoose I thought that was the gist of the conversation?

That you can't readied bonus actions?

If not, well then problem solved, I suppose.

Rubiksmoose

@Yuuki The gist got a bit muddled. The Ready action specifically says that spells must have a casting time of 1 action to be readied. Thus, it excludes bonus action spells. However, it never says anything about any other type of bonus action.

Carcer

16:12

twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/…

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose Yeah, I just read that. That changes things a bit.

Carcer

Crawford rules you cannot ready a bonus action

Xirema

@Carcer That also brings things back to my original understanding.

Hmm.

David Coffron

@Carcer I think you can as long as the reaction from Ready is on your turn. Bonus actions must be on your turn

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer Ah yeah, thats the other part. The general restriction on Bonus Actions does say that they must be taken on your turn.

Yuuki

16:14

I dunno, my logic is that when you Ready an action, it's no longer a normal Action or Bonus Action, so Crawford's ruling here doesn't apply.

Carcer

yeah, and it's difficult to contrive a situation where readying an action to take on your own turn is possibly useful

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer But nothing RAW says this.

David Coffron

Crawford is drawing a faulty logical chain. Ready actions can be triggered on your turn so in that instance a bonus action could be readied

@Carcer I've had it happen once before

Rubiksmoose

@Yuuki There was a question post about this...

Yuuki

You can't trigger an Extra Attack off of a readied Attack action because while the Attack is a readied action, anything that could be triggered from it is not a readied action.

David Coffron

16:16

Readied the dodge action if the monster attacks me when I move away. Wanted to have the chance to attack if the monster didn't want to use his reaction yet (my GM at the time thought reactions can occur before attacks finisih)

Yuuki

Therefore, the Extra Attack is still a Bonus Action and therefore cannot occur outside of your turn.

Carcer

what

Yuuki

Or at least, that's my logic chain.

David Coffron

@Yuuki extra attack has its own "on your turn" restriction

And is not a bonus action but a modifier to the standard Attack action

(Did you mean two-weapon fighting?)

Yuuki

I occasionally confuse Extra Attack and Two-Weapon Fighting.

Mostly because they both involve attacking more than once.

Carcer

16:18

I'd be tempted to let someone use their action to ready a bonus action, so long as they didn't use an actual bonus action on their turn

yeah they are very importantly distinct though

it's kind of the worst action economy possible as it uses up your action, bonus action and reaction in a single turn, so seems unlikely to be super OP somehow

Rubiksmoose

Oh wait, readied actions expire at the beginning of your next turn. So readying a bonus action would only help if it gets triggered the same turn you readied it.

Carcer

... yeah

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose which is why we are considering allowing ready action for bonus actions to trigger on other creatures turns

(Against RAW)

Makes them somewhat useful

Rubiksmoose

Ok I'm up to speed now.

Carcer

well, bonus actions are already somewhat useful, the problem is when you have something which you can only do as a bonus action that you can't possibly ready in response to some stimulus

like many kinds of spells

David Coffron

16:22

@Carcer although Readying healing word if someone falls would be really powerful so they don't miss a turn before your next one

Carcer

it could be very useful but it also means that you, personally, do literally nothing else all round

so you're sort of giving up your turn so they can have one

David Coffron

(Especially if you are doing like buff strats where one of your allies is very critical to damage output)

@Carcer a lot of support characters I've played basically do that anyway. Casting vicious mockery to make sure your front liner doesn't take a big hit from the orc is basically that (with 2 extra damage)

Xirema

@Carcer That's my general takeaway from most uses of this kind of action. Stuff like preventing (or reducing the likelihood of) a player from getting instantly-killed by several chained hits is powerful, but if you did use this kind of rule, you'd have to use your entire action economy on a single action.

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema quick suggestions: "as part of" sounds like there is something else that happens on the reaction as well. Also I would put at the beginning "instead of readying an action or spell with a casting time of action..."

It almost sounds like you are allowing the readying of an action and bonus action together which I don't think is your intent.

you could even just change to "you can instead choose to"

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose How do you feel about the current wording?

Ghiojo

16:31

Hello!

KorvinStarmast

@DavidCoffron A reaction is taken on someone else's turn; your ready an action on your turn to do something on someone else's turn. A bonus action is done on your turn. I can see Xirema's complaint about not being able to ready that, but I don't see it as a problem.

Ghiojo

Been a while since i've been in the chat, lel, how's everyone doing?

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema clearer for sure. Still a little clunky but I think it is clear. And I can't think how to make it clearer at the moment.

@Ghiojo Hi! Welcome back. Doing just dandy. How about yourself?

Carcer

@DavidCoffron epic boon of quick casting surprisingly relevant to current discussion

David Coffron

@Carcer are epic boons ever actually relevant xD

Carcer

16:35

this spell is now a bonus action cast for you so you can never ready it ever again

doesn't say you may cast it as a bonus action

Rubiksmoose

@Carcer oh wow lol

You're right

Ghiojo

Doing good! I talked with my DM about changing up my character a bit cause... his power level was very much lower than the rest of the party to the point where a light challenge for them was already almost deadly for me ^^;

David Coffron

@Carcer I never played with any GM who wouldn't still let you cast as an action if the situation warranted it. It's an epic boon lol

Rubiksmoose

@Ghiojo Did they agree?

Carcer

@DavidCoffron of course, that would be a super dumb way to rule

but it is the RAW

Ghiojo

16:36

Party or DM? Both agreed but yeah! The party agreed that I clearly was trying to do stuff but it was just very hard for me to do anything that had a mild ratio of success

(Cause I chose to put Intelligence on a Sorcerer cause Lore and I had like 10 dex and 10 Constitution... you can see where that goes)

(And 8 strength)

(It was my first time playing D&D, okay?)

Carcer

@Ghiojo sure, can't be expected to completely grok the system on your first go

Ghiojo

And the DM kinda told me to reroll my stats and if I wanted to switch classes a bit or multiclass I was allowed. Sooo I ended up making a lvl 1 Wild Magic Sorcerer, lvl 5 Wizard with the college of Lore (Unearthed Arcana)

David Coffron

@Ghiojo nothing wrong with that. It takes a while to grasp how important ability scores are especially when modifiers seem so small (the difference between +3 and +4 is huge

Ghiojo

Aaand I ended up with 19 Charisma, 19 Wisdom and 19 Intelligence... We switched Dice and used the DM's shit to make sure, nope. I actually rolled a 17, 18 and 16.

Well i actually rolled a 15 in the 18 but I decided to ask to move points from strength into intelligence cause it made no sense I had a +1 in strength.

NautArch

howdy howdy

Ghiojo

16:41

So it was fun, and I got 3 feats cause I am legitimately dissallowed from rolling History, Religion and I got disadvantage on Nature checks.

(Cause my char is from another dimentional plane, fucked up an experiment in his backstory and he arrives there, hence it makes no sense he should know anything about History or Religion)

So it was a good day, now it's time to see how much I work on social encounters, which is what this character is 100% made of, and why he should be weaker in combat anyway xD

And hello @NautArch ! How's it going to you in this fine day?

Rubiksmoose

Glad to hear things are looking much better now!

Ben

@MikeQ Natural spell does look really good. But I don't have wild shape yet. Ill definitely take that next time though. I couldn't find Natural Speech though...

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast DM denied the boomerang, so went with Sling kensai weapon and still figuring out what to pick for my3rd kensai weapon at 6th leve.

@Ghiojo not too shabby, but can always complain :)

Mike Q

@Ben I think it's in Ultimate Magic

David Coffron

@Ghiojo blinks 3 times. A 17, 16, 15, and at least a 12. The chances you roll that high are extremely low. Congrats! xD (also, your GM probably shouldn't have let you shift your strength into another ability score. Dump stats are really strong and that may unbalance your character in the other direction)

Rubiksmoose

16:45

@NautArch BOOOO!

Boomerang4life

Ghiojo

But actually, I need the opinion of experts, how good/bad is trading the lvl 20 Wizard thing for a level in Wild Magic Sorcerer?, Considering it's 1 advantage, 4 cantrips and 2 always prepared spells for the lvl 20 thing and having a slot from a level above which I can't use until i reach the next level

Mostly I wanted to keep Wild Magic Sorcerer cause it only makes sense for someone who literally fucked up so bad that he shifted planes and uncontrollably has been doing so for a while.

Rubiksmoose

1st question: are you actually going to reach level 20?

Ghiojo

That's a good question actually. Hopefully

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose This right here. Even the longest of long-running campaigns rarely reach level 20. So most of the time when planning character progression, you should just assume those features don't exist.

Ghiojo

Oh good, then I did good, cause I honestly like rolling in the WMS table and see how bad stuff can go to hell

nitsua60

16:49

@KorvinStarmast Technically speaking (the best kind of speaking), the reaction's taken in response to a perceivable, named trigger. Which is usually contemplated as the sort of thing that happens on another's turn, but could happen on one's own turn.

David Coffron

@Ghiojo I've reached level 20 only five times and I've been playing 5e since the playtest. 3 of those times we started at level 12+

nitsua60

e.g. I ready fireball to go off self-centered in case I'm attacked, hoping to provide immolative cover for my mates trying to escape. Then I move, provoking an OA which I survive and I can then take my reaction on my turn. It's a contrived example, but it holds....

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose He (fairly) doesn't want to have non-standard items that he can't easily look up in the physical books that he owns.

Ghiojo

Oh I know but we don't really play with Experience

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch "Let me just sharpie this in there for you..."

GreySage

16:50

@Ghiojo Statistically, WMS isn't actually that likely to mess things up.

Ghiojo

We do it based on achievements when the DM tells us to level up really

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose hehe. Yeah, it doesn't seem like a huge deal, but he's a relatively new DM.

Ghiojo

Oh I know, it only has a 11% chance I think

Or less, 5% are actually bad

Xirema

@Ghiojo So you use Milestone progression instead? That changes things, but I wouldn't plan around level 20 characters regardless.

David Coffron

@Ghiojo well then it totally depends on how fast you all will progress. Some of my milestone based games levelled up every session. Some of them levelled up every other month

Rubiksmoose

16:51

@Ghiojo For reference my current campaign has been running fairly regular weekly sessions for around 2 years and we are only at level 15 I think. To be fair we go very slowly.

Ghiojo

Mhm

But like, the tension of rolling a d100 is always fun

David Coffron

@Ghiojo good. Fun is more important anyway :)

Ghiojo

Yep! I just hope I don't get the Fireball

That's the only one I activelly fear

(I have 35 health)

NautArch

@Ghiojo I'd definitely talk to your DM about how frequently they're going to ask you to do it outside of the standard rules. The odds are really low that you actually surge and the surges are fun. So more surges, more fun.

Xirema

When I plan character progression, I try to take things level by level. Don't plan in terms of "Okay, I'm going to have a Level 14 Sorcerer, Level 6 Eldritch Knight", plan in terms of "okay, I'm going to take 4 levels of Sorcerer, then take 6 levels of Eldritch Knight, then take the rest Sorcerer."

Ghiojo

16:52

Oh I actually asked them if I could roll for it when I cast wizard spells as well

but they looked at me like if I was insane

cause ya know

David Coffron

But to answer your question, Spell Mastery isn't all that important. By the time you reach the fourth tier, you have plenty of spell slots in my experience and your cantrips are doing as much damage as some 3rd level spells anyway

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast It's a bummer to not get a d8 ranged weapon, but we're talking about a very small actual difference in average damage.

Ghiojo

Yeah, that's true

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch Yeah its totally understandable just it was a fun concept.

David Coffron

@NautArch I mean Bend Luck doesn't have to roll to surge. It's all a GM call

Ghiojo

16:53

also I love the Lore Master sub-class from Unearthed Arcana.

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose But a slingin' goblin with a longsword on his back is still a fun concept.

Ghiojo

And yeah but the one that lets you have advantage states that after that point the DM can call you to make a roll at any point they want before you do a long rest

Which is jackpot

David Coffron

@Ghiojo I consider a little broken but if you love it, have fun xD

NautArch

@Ghiojo which is why it's important to ask about how often they'd ask

is this too broad to determine balance across all bonus actions?

Ghiojo

Oh I know, I don't think they will ask often

Rubiksmoose

16:55

@NautArch For sure for sure. But nothing is as fun as fake outrage over disallowing the orginal idea XD

NautArch

@Ghiojo :(

Ghiojo

because they already did some stuff that... well

They added a Deck of Many Things

At lvl 4.

Yyep... I told them "The Deck of Many things is Dangerous"

Rubiksmoose

@Ghiojo understatement of the century.

Ghiojo

As someone who barely knew I just knew what that thing is. But nooooo, let's add it, it'll be fun

And now one of our party members is trapped in another dimention and another one has their soul left their body.

And every time I drew I got good shit

Like a Staff of fire (Was gonna be a staff of the Magi but the DM realised very soon it was a bad idea)

And I actually drew the Fates card, which was the only card my Character (Well that one and wish) Wanted. Whiiich the DM got so salty he put me a timer and forced me to make a decission in 10 seconds or the card would fade.

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch I don't really think it is too broad. It is going to invlovle some knowledge of all them to answer, but each one isn't going to have to be put into the asnwer necessarily. I don't really think there is a way to ask the question that is specific to one bonus action anyways.

Ghiojo

16:59

Aand I took a rash decission out of pressure (Looking back I legitimately would've told them to fuck off) and I lost my pact with the Raven Queen (which looking back is good cause I did tell them how my character would never be a God's bitch and actually told her to kill him right there when she gave him the option of being her champion or die and crap)

Transcript for