Page 34 of 50 FirstFirst ... 9242526272829303132333435363738394041424344 ... LastLast
Results 991 to 1,020 of 1492
  1. - Top - End - #991
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    Because a big chunk of the player-base plays with Point Buy and, more importantly, because that's what Pathfinder did. Seeing as WotC is already cribbing Bloodlines and Channel Energy off Pathfinder to try and get their 3e players back, it makes sense to learn from some of that system's better decisions.

    Though, personally, I hope that Humans get a bit of a nerf. It's nice to be able to play a non-human character without feeling like you're ruining your build to do it. Humans are supposed to be good, but other races should have a fighting chance.
    I suppose, but I'm not a huge fan of their execution of point buy. (And personally I think it can be more fun, albeit less predictably balanced, to use dice.)

    I want the races to be as perfectly balanced as possible. I mean, elves are supposed to be superior to humans, in most fantasy, yet in 3.X playing an elf was generally a bad idea.
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  2. - Top - End - #992
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NY, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    (And personally I think it can be more fun, albeit less predictably balanced, to use dice.)
    That's great for you, seriously, no sarcasm intended. I personally disagree, so do many other players, and since 5e is supposed to be the "big tent" D&D I really hope they aren't counting on everyone using any one chargen method.

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    I mean, elves are supposed to be superior to humans, in most fantasy, yet in 3.X playing an elf was generally a bad idea.
    I REALLY hope they drop the "Elves are Just Better" garbage from the standard fluff. It's cliche, insulting, vaguely racist, and adds absolutely nothing to the game. Backing that mary-sue stereotype up with mechanics... would be the absolute worst possible mistake they could make with Elves.

  3. - Top - End - #993
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    That's great for you, seriously, no sarcasm intended. I personally disagree, so do many other players, and since 5e is supposed to be the "big tent" D&D I really hope they aren't counting on everyone using any one chargen method.
    I completely agree that point buy is a better method in general. I guess because there are the two sides to it they should probably write it expecting large groups to use either point buy or dice rolling.

    I REALLY hope they drop the "Elves are Just Better" garbage from the standard fluff. It's cliche, insulting, vaguely racist, and adds absolutely nothing to the game. Backing that mary-sue stereotype up with mechanics... would be the absolute worst possible mistake they could make with Elves.
    I mean, that's how it was in most fantasy. In D&D it's really fairly annoying because elves are frequently fluffed as snobby, pretentious jerks. If they really want them to be better than humans, they shouldn't try to write them as a LA+0 race.
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  4. - Top - End - #994
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I understand why roll for stats exist, and I understand why it's an option (though default option kind of mystifies me), that said, I'd use point buy even if it wasn't an option. I like to be able to control how powerful my players are, and I don't like one character being stronger than others before the build even starts. You even get things like one guy wanting to play a wizard, and rolling all 14 and 15's. You can make a good character with that, but not a wizard.

    If I did allow rolls, I'd force you to roll for each stat in order, to make a truly random character.

    As for humans, I do think they are a little too good. I'm fine with a floating +2 bonus compared to other races static +1, that's a good edge to give to humans, but the +1 to every stat is a little much. It screws up the human baseline, and with rolls and especially point buy it makes it too easy to make your character good at everything. I'd prefer a floating +2 to a stat, and like a bonus skill.

    I also have to say Wood Elves special ability is too limited. It's only useful to characters who use stealth, and only in natural environments(which a) can be uncommon in some campaigns, and b) are difficult to define, are caves natural?) Stout Halflings just suck. If I'm going to spend my subrace to protect against an uncommon condition, I don't want to still lose an action every time it comes up.
    "Sometimes, we’re heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  5. - Top - End - #995
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Speaking of skills: I don't like how in 3.X cross-class skills cost two skill points. Having a lower cap makes sense, because you spend less time studying it, but having it cost more skill points per rank makes it seem like you're spending more time studying it and getting less gain from it. Okay, so I'm a Chem student. I have less time to practice guitar this semester because I'm (supposed to be) studying more. So why should every ten hours practicing only give me the benefit of five hours' practice if I were majoring in music?
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  6. - Top - End - #996
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    Speaking of skills: I don't like how in 3.X cross-class skills cost two skill points. Having a lower cap makes sense, because you spend less time studying it, but having it cost more skill points per rank makes it seem like you're spending more time studying it and getting less gain from it. Okay, so I'm a Chem student. I have less time to practice guitar this semester because I'm (supposed to be) studying more. So why should every ten hours practicing only give me the benefit of five hours' practice if I were majoring in music?
    That only works if you try to take D&D's rules as a simulation, which it wasn't. The skill system was abstracted to hell and back for simplicity and variety. Simulation is not what that system is even capable of, what with the way knowledge checks worked.

  7. - Top - End - #997
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    That only works if you try to take D&D's rules as a simulation, which it wasn't. The skill system was abstracted to hell and back for simplicity and variety. Simulation is not what that system is even capable of, what with the way knowledge checks worked.
    Yeah, that's probably a problem with my expectations. I think the rules should simulate reality (besides the magic and stuff) at low levels. I should be able to simulate a real person (besides the magic and stuff) using the rules for levels 1-6, with level six being ridiculously amazing real people and level one being the masses of commoners.
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  8. - Top - End - #998

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I don't think any of the 6 base stats should ever go below 1 or above 20 when just taking into account playable races.

    In addition I think each of the bae stats should have a default question for the DM to ask each of his/her/hir/its players with 20 possible answers probably for each question corrisponding to the 1 - 20 value of that stat. And depending on how a player answers that question about his/her/hir/its character, will determine that player's character's corrisponding stat value as it will relate to the answer closest to the 1 the player gave within that race's range.

  9. - Top - End - #999
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    I should be able to simulate a real person (besides the magic and stuff) using the rules for levels 1-6
    I don't think this should be a priority; the D&D rules have always been an utter failure at simulating real persons (because that's not what they're written to do). D&D is a heroic game; if you want to simulate real-world people, there are plenty of other systems for that.
    Crystal Shard Studios - classy freeware games!

    Utility Belt wizard (Batman 4E-style) * Chocolate!

  10. - Top - End - #1000
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    I don't think this should be a priority; the D&D rules have always been an utter failure at simulating real persons (because that's not what they're written to do). D&D is a heroic game; if you want to simulate real-world people, there are plenty of other systems for that.
    There's some line saying that low-level characters are like normal people, levels 6-10 are above-average, level 11-15 are like big heroes, something like that. Anybody know what I'm thinking of?
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  11. - Top - End - #1001
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    PairO'Dice Lost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Malsheem, Nessus
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    There's some line saying that low-level characters are like normal people, levels 6-10 are above-average, level 11-15 are like big heroes, something like that. Anybody know what I'm thinking of?
    The oft-quoted Calibrating Your Expectations essay at the Alexandrian came to roughly that conclusion, the general consensus here being that it's flawed but fairly accurate, and there are a bunch of posts people have made supporting that general scale (examinations of the CR of Hercules's and Perseus's foes, examples of what you can do with 9 ranks in a skill, etc.) which I can link later today when I get back to my laptop, if you're interested.
    Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
    You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.


    Spoiler: Sig of Holding
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by abadguy View Post
    Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
    Won a cookie for this, won everything for this

  12. - Top - End - #1002
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    Speaking of skills: I don't like how in 3.X cross-class skills cost two skill points. Having a lower cap makes sense, because you spend less time studying it, but having it cost more skill points per rank makes it seem like you're spending more time studying it and getting less gain from it. Okay, so I'm a Chem student. I have less time to practice guitar this semester because I'm (supposed to be) studying more. So why should every ten hours practicing only give me the benefit of five hours' practice if I were majoring in music?
    A deeper problem is with cross-class skills. Skills were meant to be a way to customize your character outside of their class. So why were they so intrinsically tied to your class which skills you can have. If I want to play a diplomatic fighter, or a stealthy wizard, why can't I?
    "Sometimes, we’re heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  13. - Top - End - #1003
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    A deeper problem is with cross-class skills. Skills were meant to be a way to customize your character outside of their class. So why were they so intrinsically tied to your class which skills you can have. If I want to play a diplomatic fighter, or a stealthy wizard, why can't I?
    That's exactly my point. I understand that some skills are tied to classes (Disable Device and Rogues, Survival and Druids or Rangers), but can't that be expressed by a bonus instead of by making cross-class skills cost double?
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  14. - Top - End - #1004
    Troll in the Playground
     
    obryn's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2012

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    Seeing as WotC is already cribbing Bloodlines and Channel Energy off Pathfinder to try and get their 3e players back, it makes sense to learn from some of that system's better decisions.
    Eh? 4e's divine classes have channel divinity ... it was released before PF, so I'm not seeing how Channel Divinity is now cribbing from PF.

    The bloodlines bit, Pathfinder cribbed from WotC off the "draconic lineage" flavor and classes like the Dragon Disciple. It's not like it was an invention cut from whole cloth.

    -O

  15. - Top - End - #1005
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    Ehh, I kind of like the option to stay in the base class to get some higher abilities and capstones. Especially if they go the more fluff based reasoning behind prestige classes as they've indicated. For a few of the characters I've played, I don't want to be inducted into the Great Knights of Prestigious Way and then go through the rituals to join Epic Warriors of More Awesome Than You, I'd rather just be a normal mercenary who is just that good.

    Like the Warblade, for example. Warblade 20 is a fine character that can stand up fine when compared to those who prestiged out of the class earlier. I'd rather have that model than otherwise.
    Point.

    Maybe it's just me, but I think aesthetics is another factor. It sounds cooler to say you are <insert prestige class> than <insert base class>. Cleric or Sacred Exorcist? Wizard or Loremaster? Warblade or Eternal Blade? Rogue or Arcane Trickster? Certainly the mechanics of a prestige class and base class matter, but how many threads have we seen where someone is playing a base class but asking about prestige classes as if it's an automatic development-but-of-course-everyone-goes-into-a-prestige-class?

  16. - Top - End - #1006
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    Then why bother? Variation in abilities by individual is already accounted for by the dice.
    Because otherwise non-humans get an unfair advantage in character creation. In point buy, an elf wizard with +2 Intelligence only needs to buy a 16 to get an 18. A human wizard must buy the more expensive 18 costing more than a -2 to another ability score in compensation to compare to an elf's -2 to Constitution. If rolling for stats, an elf player needs only roll a 16 to get an 18. If he rolls a natural 18 anyway, that can go into another stat and let something else get the +2 to Intelligence, a 16 if he's lucky or anything if not playing a wizard. The human player has to get a natural 18 no matter what.
    Last edited by navar100; 2012-09-17 at 02:17 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #1007
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Flickerdart's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    The problem with 3.5's prestige classes is the same problem as with 3.5's base classes. Half of them suck, and of the half that don't, half of those only have good features for the first few levels. Saying "I'm a Sacred Exorcist" might sound cool, but when you're also an Abjurant Champion and a Spellsword...

    If 5e wants to use prestige classes as joining organizations or otherwise becoming special, then they need to distance that from a character's primary method of becoming more powerful, because offering the ability to join the guild of Harpers should be an actual reward, not a chore that the PCs try to get out of as much as possible because the Harpers suck.
    Quote Originally Posted by A_Moon View Post
    How many times, when the Fighter says "I draw my sword", did you just want to smack that cheating-optimizer in the face and say "No! You don't draw your sword! You draw Orcus!". When the Cleric says "I run away from Orcus!": "No! You run into Orcus! Rogue tries to hide? He hides behind Orcus! The bard in a tavern on the other side the town tries to order a drink? How about a nice frothy mug of Orcus?
    Quote Originally Posted by Guancyto View Post
    Perhaps this will sate Flickerdart's endless hunger for assassinations.

  18. - Top - End - #1008
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    That's exactly my point. I understand that some skills are tied to classes (Disable Device and Rogues, Survival and Druids or Rangers), but can't that be expressed by a bonus instead of by making cross-class skills cost double?
    Welcome to Pathfinder!

  19. - Top - End - #1009
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost View Post
    The oft-quoted Calibrating Your Expectations essay at the Alexandrian came to roughly that conclusion, the general consensus here being that it's flawed but fairly accurate
    The last time we discussed it, the conclusion was that it's not "fairly accurate", but wildly flawed, inaccurate all over the place, and contradicted by WOTC employees.
    Crystal Shard Studios - classy freeware games!

    Utility Belt wizard (Batman 4E-style) * Chocolate!

  20. - Top - End - #1010
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    noparlpf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost View Post
    The oft-quoted Calibrating Your Expectations essay at the Alexandrian came to roughly that conclusion, the general consensus here being that it's flawed but fairly accurate, and there are a bunch of posts people have made supporting that general scale (examinations of the CR of Hercules's and Perseus's foes, examples of what you can do with 9 ranks in a skill, etc.) which I can link later today when I get back to my laptop, if you're interested.
    I'd like that, yes please.
    Personally I consider the 3.X system pretty flawed. I'd have to sit down and go through it again to come up with my reasons why, and that would also probably involve going outside and trying things like jumping off the fire escape to see how high it has to be for me to get hurt despite Tumbling.

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    Because otherwise non-humans get an unfair advantage in character creation. In point buy, an elf wizard with +2 Intelligence only needs to buy a 16 to get an 18. A human wizard must buy the more expensive 18 costing more than a -2 to another ability score in compensation to compare to an elf's -2 to Constitution. If rolling for stats, an elf player needs only roll a 16 to get an 18. If he rolls a natural 18 anyway, that can go into another stat and let something else get the +2 to Intelligence, a 16 if he's lucky or anything if not playing a wizard. The human player has to get a natural 18 no matter what.
    I thought Elves had a bonus to Dex. I can't check the playtest for the 5e elf right now because for some reason I moved it to a different hard drive.
    Anyway, there's nothing wrong with that. Going with your example, that elf wizard would be subpar for his own race. If elves are naturally smarter than humans, then of course they'll be better wizards. And a Con penalty really hurts, especially for a d4 hit die wizard. It balances out.
    Jude P.

    Playing Pokémon X
    3DS friend code: 0705-3326-2027
    4- or 5-IV Pokémon available for trade listed on my Giant League Wiki page.

  21. - Top - End - #1011
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    PairO'Dice Lost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Malsheem, Nessus
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    The last time we discussed it, the conclusion was that it's not "fairly accurate", but wildly flawed, inaccurate all over the place, and contradicted by WOTC employees.
    I might have missed the latest conversations about it, but as I recall the consensus was that the major flaws were that (A) trying to generalize things like door-breaking and Jump to all ability and skill checks was a terrible idea and (B) saying everyone in real life is 1st level and 5th level people are rare is bogus and the actual boundaries are more flexible than that, but that the general thrust (you can represent real-world people as low-level characters much more accurately than as high-level characters, and ability and skill checks at lower levels are more accurate to real-life benchmarks than a lot of people give them credit for) was sound.

    If you have any links to more recent discussions about it, please post them, I should probably read up on that.
    Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
    You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.


    Spoiler: Sig of Holding
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by abadguy View Post
    Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
    Won a cookie for this, won everything for this

  22. - Top - End - #1012
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by obryn View Post
    Eh? 4e's divine classes have channel divinity ... it was released before PF, so I'm not seeing how Channel Divinity is now cribbing from PF.

    The bloodlines bit, Pathfinder cribbed from WotC off the "draconic lineage" flavor and classes like the Dragon Disciple. It's not like it was an invention cut from whole cloth.

    -O
    Actually, in later supplements there were whole suites of bloodline feats for 3e, so WotC can claim credit for sorcerer bloodlines, and Turn Undead has a long standing tradition in 3e of being used for other purposes. Now WotC is just building these ideas into the classes instead of being poorly executed later additions.
    "Sometimes, we’re heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  23. - Top - End - #1013
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Anderlith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Pathfinder built off of 3.5 & DDN is building off of that. It's a natural evolution that is working out well. The bloodlines have their root in 3.5 Heritage feats, Turn Undead from Turn Undead Feats, etc. Pathfinder did a lot to bring certain feat abilities into class abilities, D&D is just coming full circle.

  24. - Top - End - #1014
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by theNater View Post
    A flexible +2 ability score boost, like 4e's, bumps the racial average for each stat up by a third of a point (assuming it's spread evenly among the six ability scores). Changing the average from 10.5 to 10.8 is not really significant.
    The non-human races of D&D each have certain traits that are hard-wired into modern fantasy. Dwarves have really high constitution, as they can usually drink anyone under the table. Elves have really high intelligence, as they are known as the best spell-casters. This is, of course, in comparison to humans. From this logic, the toughest dwarf should be tougher than the toughest human, and the smartest elf should be smarter than the smartest human.

    However, when you make a character in D&D Next, the rules don't support those tropes. Since a human can gain a racial bonus of +2 to an ability score, while each other race can only get +1, then you will always be able to make a human who has a higher stat than any other race can achieve. The toughest dwarf can get a 20 in Constitution with the right class, but the toughest human can have 21.

    This is something that I think they should change; it's a trope that I would try to reinforce. Humans are supposed to be able to succeed at whatever they set their minds to, not surpass every other race. It results in something like "Where should we go to find the wisest person in the world?" "Well, they'll certainly be a human, so let's go with that."

  25. - Top - End - #1015
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tyndmyr's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost View Post
    The oft-quoted Calibrating Your Expectations essay at the Alexandrian came to roughly that conclusion, the general consensus here being that it's flawed but fairly accurate, and there are a bunch of posts people have made supporting that general scale (examinations of the CR of Hercules's and Perseus's foes, examples of what you can do with 9 ranks in a skill, etc.) which I can link later today when I get back to my laptop, if you're interested.
    A more reasonable interpretation is that it's just a pretty terrible system for simulating humans at all. Carrying capacity easily gets ludicrous. Speed...A human with the quick trait and the Run feat(ie, how else are you going to represent a runner?) is going to be able to run a mile in about two and a half minutes at level one. In the real world, the record is about 4 minutes.

    It works pretty good from the standpoint of having a decently playable game, but for simulating reality? Not so much.
    Back from a lengthy vacation from Giantitp. I've been dabbling with 3d printer technology and game design, PM if you're curious.

    "World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimization."

    New: Tyndmyr has a game shop!

  26. - Top - End - #1016
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    PairO'Dice Lost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Malsheem, Nessus
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyndmyr View Post
    A more reasonable interpretation is that it's just a pretty terrible system for simulating humans at all. Carrying capacity easily gets ludicrous. Speed...A human with the quick trait and the Run feat(ie, how else are you going to represent a runner?) is going to be able to run a mile in about two and a half minutes at level one. In the real world, the record is about 4 minutes.

    It works pretty good from the standpoint of having a decently playable game, but for simulating reality? Not so much.
    Well, granted, D&D doesn't do a good job of simulating people compared to other systems, or do a good job at all in general. Given that there are always going to be players who either want to try to recreate some famous real or fictional character in D&D or who try to argue about what is or is not realistic about certain characters at certain levels, however, trying to figure out the least bad approximation seems like a worthwhile effort.
    Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
    You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.


    Spoiler: Sig of Holding
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by abadguy View Post
    Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
    Won a cookie for this, won everything for this

  27. - Top - End - #1017
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I care very little for simulating reality in D&D. The second goblins and wizards show up, I've suspended my disbelief enough to allow for improbable jumps and fast movement speeds.

    I'd agree that there should be no way a human, for example, can have a higher CON than a dwarf. I'd prefer to take away the stat boosts from the classes, and make the races +2.
    "Sometimes, we’re heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  28. - Top - End - #1018
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    However, when you make a character in D&D Next, the rules don't support those tropes. Since a human can gain a racial bonus of +2 to an ability score, while each other race can only get +1, then you will always be able to make a human who has a higher stat than any other race can achieve. The toughest dwarf can get a 20 in Constitution with the right class, but the toughest human can have 21.
    This actually isn't true. According to the playtest rules, all player characters capped at 20 for all of their abilities regardless of racial or other modifiers.

  29. - Top - End - #1019
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Camelot View Post
    The non-human races of D&D each have certain traits that are hard-wired into modern fantasy. Dwarves have really high constitution, as they can usually drink anyone under the table. Elves have really high intelligence, as they are known as the best spell-casters. This is, of course, in comparison to humans. From this logic, the toughest dwarf should be tougher than the toughest human, and the smartest elf should be smarter than the smartest human.

    However, when you make a character in D&D Next, the rules don't support those tropes. Since a human can gain a racial bonus of +2 to an ability score, while each other race can only get +1, then you will always be able to make a human who has a higher stat than any other race can achieve. The toughest dwarf can get a 20 in Constitution with the right class, but the toughest human can have 21.

    This is something that I think they should change; it's a trope that I would try to reinforce. Humans are supposed to be able to succeed at whatever they set their minds to, not surpass every other race. It results in something like "Where should we go to find the wisest person in the world?" "Well, they'll certainly be a human, so let's go with that."
    I agree that letting humans be tougher than dwarves would be weird, but I'm okay with the toughest human being exactly as tough as the toughest dwarf, as long as average humans are less tough than average dwarves. How about giving humans a floating +1? It'll maintain the distinction for average members of the races, and while toughest humans will be as tough as toughest dwarves, they will (theoretically) be rarer.

  30. - Top - End - #1020
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2009

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Camelot View Post
    The non-human races of D&D each have certain traits that are hard-wired into modern fantasy. Dwarves have really high constitution, as they can usually drink anyone under the table. Elves have really high intelligence, as they are known as the best spell-casters. This is, of course, in comparison to humans. From this logic, the toughest dwarf should be tougher than the toughest human, and the smartest elf should be smarter than the smartest human.

    However, when you make a character in D&D Next, the rules don't support those tropes.
    Correction: They support those tropes, but not in a way you (personally) expect or like.

    (Hill) Dwarves in D&D Next are tougher then humans. It is represented by immunity to poison and +2 HP/level.

    (High) Elves show their familiarity to magic by getting a minor spell, regardless of class.

    (Wood) Elves show their grace by their movement speed and hiding abilities.

    Likewise with Halflings. Typical Halfling and Hobbit tropes are very well represented by their traits (the mechanics could use some work, though).

    Humans have a higher raw potential (= ability scores), which is pretty in line for the D&D human fluff.

    I think most peoples criticism of the Humans in Next come more from the unorthodoxy then the mechanics themselves.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •