|
Post by hamurai on Jun 11, 2018 7:23:05 GMT -6
It's basically a special ability. That ranges from "can use ranged weapons in melee without disadvantage" to "gets a few ritual spells but no other spell-casting". Other feats are "+2 HP per level" or "can't be surprised" or "learn to use other armor" etc. Some feats expand the character options (and are a nice alternative to multi-classing), some narrow the focus of some classes and build on class abilities.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jun 10, 2018 23:42:27 GMT -6
This thread is about 5th edition D&D. Also, as I've stated in the first post, it's about the game-mechanical aspects of feats and not so much about how they're tied into the story of the individual groups.
5e is more complex than OD&D. My online group likes that. I've tried to convince them to play OD&D but they don't like the simplicity. I don't use such feats in OD&D either, unless you call those abilities "feats" which characters may have learned through game-play. A player could certainly be a "Linguist" and learn new languages, similar to the 5e feat (no INT bonus though).
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jun 10, 2018 6:18:32 GMT -6
I'd be perfectly fine to use the point-buy method, but our DM gave us the option to roll the stats, so I went for it.
Apart from a few feats I like the 5e list, too. I've never played 3rd edition so I can't comment on that feat list. What I've seen while skimming Xanathar's I also liked.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jun 10, 2018 1:59:15 GMT -6
Every RPG is incomplete. It's impossible to make a rule for every occasion, although some games certainly try. Personally, I don't care for the bloated systems with a million tables to roll d1000 just to find out what kind of fish a certain lake has which the adventurers pass by.
I agree with Fin, the Chainmail references can make seem OD&D incomplete. They could have re-printed the referenced rules.
Missing ranges for missile weapons, for example, are of course a lot easier to research today than 30 years ago. In the end, though, the exact range doesn't matter anyway. It's an abstraction and doesn't take into account many factors that archers would have to think about, like wind. So it's probably no issue if you don't research and just make an educated guess. That's what we did when we started playing all those years ago. We still had a great game, even if our arrows might have been flying too far or not far enough. That's not what I remember about those games.
Some people are just not comfortable with making their own stuff up and feel like everything needs to be in the written rules. We have a DM like that and I've often argued he should just get rid of the rules he doesn't like and make some house rules with us, his game group, but that leaves him saying "And where do we stop? We'll be house-ruling so much over time, we won't even be playing D&D any more." Which always makes me laugh and say "So be it, as long as it's as we want to play!"
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jun 9, 2018 23:39:01 GMT -6
My old online group is reforming and the DM and I were talking about feats, which are, by the book, an optional rule. So far I haven't had a group who played without feats, though. I was re-reading the rules this weekend and thinking a lot about the impact of feats in the game.
Disclaimer 1: The following thoughts are purely mechanical in nature. Of course one should play the character most desired and not care about game mechanics. To me, mechanical balance is an issue, though. Disclaimer 2: I don't think the "basic" human is a good choice. +1 to every ability sounds good, but the effect is weak. Classes rely on 3 abilities at most and you only get a +1 to a modifier every two ability points, which means that most of the time at least 50% of these bonus points are wasted. This may be a more valuable option if you roll for ability scores and manage to get a bad result. 4d6 drop lowest tends to produce results above what you can point-buy, though.
So here are my thoughts:
TL;DR: My conclusion was that feats should be pretty much mandatory at least at first level as the variant human's bonus feat, and for fighters.
Why is that? 1) Let's have a look at the variant Human race and compare it to some other races from the PHB.
| variant Human
| Mountain Dwarf
| High Elf
| Halfling | Half-Elf | Half-Orc | Ability Points
| 2x +1
| CON +2 STR +2
| DEX +2 INT +1
| DEX +2 CON/CHA +1
| 2x +1 CHA +2
| STR +2 CON +1
| Skills | 1 | 1 Tool
| 1 | -- | 2 | 1 | Languages | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | (Notable) Special Abilities
| Feat
| Darkvision Resilience Combat Training Stone Cunning Armor Training
| Darkvision Cantrip Fey Ancestry Weapon Training
| Lucky Brave Nimbleness Stealthy / Resilience
| Darkvision Fey Ancestry
| Darkvision Relentless Savage Attacks
|
We can see that the variant Human gets at least 1 ability point less than every other race. The number of skill proficiencies and languages is pretty much the minimum for other races. Looking at the other races' special abilities and reading through the feat descriptions it's clear that no single feat could ever reproduce the bonuses the other races get. For example, to get the effect of the Dwarf's Combat and Armor Training, a human would have to get 2 feats (and therefore forego +4 stat points when leveling). The Savage Attacks feature of the Half-Orc is exactly what a feat does. Plus they get Darkvision and Relentless. The Elf's Weapon Training equals the Weapon Master feat, but they get 3 more abilities at the beginning.
Therefore I argue that at least at first level, humans should get a feat to balance their abilities a little.
2.) Fighters get an Ability Score Improvement (ASI) on 4th, 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th and 19th level. Assuming they brutally maxed their abilities with point-buy at the beginning, they might start with STR 16, DEX 16, CON16, INT 9, WIS 9, CHA 9 if basic Human, or STR 16, DEX 15, CON 16, INT 8, WIS 8, CHA 8 if variant Human. They'd need to get to level 12 to max out STR and CON which is what their class relies on. What to do with the rest of the ASIs? Assuming they rolled their stats, they begin with even better scores and are in less need of ASIs. Feats would help to make the Fighter more interesting and varied. (I rolled a 17 when rolling my stats. With a +1 from Human I start with a score of 18, meaning I could get to 20 by 4th level already. A feat might tempt me away from that. Just an example. I'm not playing a fighter, I think.)
That second argument is less important, though, in my opinion. ASIs are never wasted and being able to max out 2 abilities by 12th level is in itself a merit.
So... What are your thoughts? Does your group include feats in the game? All? Only a few? And what about the additional feats added by other books? (Our DM only allows PHB and SCAG)
Edit: typo fixed
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jun 1, 2018 0:47:59 GMT -6
For OD&D I mostly use the RAW system, but it depends on the players, really. Some of them (especially the younger ones who started with AAC) are so used to the AAC that I tend to play with AAC to avoid confusion. Personally, I don't mind switching. We've never used the T20 system.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 29, 2018 23:21:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 29, 2018 23:18:58 GMT -6
The description also states the effect has a duration of 1 Turn. Huh? What does that mean? Does it only neutralize the poison for 1 turn, after which the poison comes back? Or does it remove the poison totally? I'd say it takes 1 turn to neutralize the poison and get it completely out of the victim's system. During that turn, the poison may still work and do damage or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 6, 2018 22:52:11 GMT -6
I'd also link poison and disease to CON rather than HP. To me, HP are endurance, skill and luck in combat. Poison and disease should be able to bring down an experienced hero as quickly as anyone else.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on May 6, 2018 22:35:32 GMT -6
Welcome Chris!
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 22, 2018 23:52:03 GMT -6
You may as well turn the idea around - the walls or floors can be there, but invisible (similar to talysman's idea). The characters will have to feel their way around. Doors may become visible once opened (think of it like... a HeroQuest board with some door markers standing around, but no walls arise anywhere).
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 20, 2018 12:12:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 20, 2018 11:53:31 GMT -6
Welcome!
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 17, 2018 23:02:56 GMT -6
Wow! That's a lot better than I'd imagined!
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 25, 2018 0:49:31 GMT -6
I can relate to getting mad about having bad luck or making a mistake and losing something you wanted. What I can't relate to is objectifying that feeling and shifting the blame elsewhere. Saying "the problem is level drain, and the GM, for allowing level drain, and the game, for including level drain." OK, now I get your point. Thanks for your patience and explaining! I'm totally with you on this. And I like your rule about regaining a level per adventure. Seems like a good pace. I tend to see things from my group's point of view, or rather I see the "worst player reaction" - and then I tell myself I won't bother with permanent level drains because of unnecessary drama.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 24, 2018 10:24:14 GMT -6
You could drain a character of stat points, which upon hitting 0, make the character a vampire's slave, for example. Or the withering touch of a wight might drain charisma and people will no longer follow you but fear you for your looks. Or drained constitution makes for a less healthy future. You might even lose HP permanently when they're drained.
In terms of in-game logic, a level drain basically means taking experience from a character. How's that done? Do the drained characters forget what they learned? But that's probably for those who like making sense in a game world and not just do things because some rules say so. Personally, I never understood it.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 24, 2018 1:53:50 GMT -6
Nope, the Journeymanne rules start at level 1 and covers all basic rules, too.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 24, 2018 1:49:32 GMT -6
IT has nothing to do with how fast your group levels. It has to do with whether you distinguish between "losing something in the game" and "not enjoying a game". And some people don't enjoy a game when they lose something they've worked for very hard for a long time, even in a game world. Like gaining a level so they can finally use that cool spell or shiny sword they've always wanted. Just examples. Don't tell me you can't relate to or understand that. What I'm saying is, the level drain is much more potent when levels are very hard to get. Same goes for items. When you find a plate mail under each rock, the rust monster will no longer be terrifying. I would feel mad about losing those levels, but as long as I don't suspect the GM of cheating or someone deliberately rigging that situation, I still enjoy the game. That's all I'm saying. You'd feel mad about it. No one is saying the GM is cheating or anything. You'd probably not feel mad about losing a level if you knew that you'd level next session again anyway. That's just crazy talk. Somebody might think your emotional age is greater than 11. I'll just guess and assume it was aimed at the "character suicide" thing.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 23, 2018 12:46:02 GMT -6
I guess it depends a lot on how fast your group gains levels. If you've played a year to go from level 3 to level 4 and then get drained it's probably a lot more frustrating than when you level every other game session.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 20, 2018 7:16:42 GMT -6
I agree that this makes undead something to fear. But I'd reserve (semi-)permanent level drain for the really powerful ones. That said, as a DM (regardless of the game system) I sometimes do take away hard-earned stuff (including levels) from players to make them go after it again (like a nemesis stealing their favoured artifact), but I always give them the chance to recover it. It's basically rewarding them the same thing twice, for double the joy but not double the game balance implications. Additionally, it does give their possessions some background flavour and story apart from the game mechanics. The items suddenly have a story to tell. Doesn't work as well with levels, though. But come to think of it, an undead might also steal their levels and the player may "loot" that part of their life force back when they defeat the enemy.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 19, 2018 23:42:08 GMT -6
All our early groups had level drain as a temporary effect, I think. Some refs allowed us to recover naturally, others wanted some kind of a restorative spell. Personally, I've never made level drains permanent. Seemed far too much for my taste.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 15, 2018 23:50:24 GMT -6
Maybe it's time to split this part of the thread from the earlier one? - You tell me, gentlemen. I vote for it. While the ongoing discussion/argument is, in parts, still interesting, we've strayed far enough and long enough from the original topic to make this a thread on its own.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 14, 2018 0:03:05 GMT -6
Haven't the "clones" (I'd call them "children") been out there all the time, pretty much from day 1? You say that back then pretty much every table and every DM had their own rules to fill the gaps and I'm sure they wrote many of these down. The difference today is, everyone has the chance to give those house rules a half-decent layout and publish it on the internet.
I know that I've never played any version of D&D by the book and when I was running my first own campaign of AD&D I had a little notebook with at least 10 pages of house rules and annotations. Back then we had no internet, though, so no chance to connect to anyone else beyond the folks in my group and most of them didn't bother with reading the rulebook and just asked me, so basically we played an AD&D clone/child back then.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 6, 2018 7:25:33 GMT -6
I'm glad I found this board. That said, focus on how many people have a great experience here, not on the few who might not.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 29, 2018 4:53:46 GMT -6
Crawling across a Saharan desert is something else. In the latter case, I think finding a safe haven is less likely, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. That's what I had in mind, I remember us playing sort of a Dark Sun/Ancient Egypt setting where crossing deserts was part of the challenge. We allowed leveling up on the journey back then and adapted the rule for future campaigns, too. I guess in the end it depends on the type of campaign and if it makes sense in the campaign's pace when you allow to level.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 28, 2018 4:12:30 GMT -6
In my mind an "adventure" is any period of in-game activity between safe havens. I.e., the period while players are "on adventure" and at risk of misadventure. It doesn't matter whether one or many real-world gaming sessions are required; "the adventure" continues until the players make it back to a safe haven (of whatever sort the referee allows). Does that mean your group couldn't level when they were exploring dangerous wilderness for weeks or months of in-game time? A "safe haven" requirement always sounds like they need to get back to civilization. That's why we agreed on a "rest" requirement, so even in the wilderness and the unknown, or during a military campaign, as long as you got a good night's/day's rest, you could level up.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 27, 2018 14:17:17 GMT -6
Please understand, I know this isn’t “by the book.” I’m always a little hesitant to reply to threads like this because there are so many people who want to helpfully point out to me that I’m “doing it wrong.” There's no wrong way to play a game, just "by the book" and with house rules. Nothing wrong with house rules, in fact. When you look at how many people actually make money off of their house rules in the OSR movement, there seems to be a real craving for house-ruled versions of all D&D editions. When I started playing, all the rules I knew were the ones my neighbour translated for me because back then, I had not learned English (apart from some words and expressions I picked up in old Amiga/Atari games). So we played by his (sometimes wrong, often house-ruled) translations and what sense I could make from the tables in the books he showed me. Many of these early, mostly unintentional house-rules stuck in my head and I used them or adapted them for later editions as well. That said, I'm not sure I've ever played a role-playing game strictly by the book. Well, maybe the ultra-light rulebooks where you can't really change anything without dissolving the game entirely. And that happened, too.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 27, 2018 14:04:37 GMT -6
All: what does it mean that you can't level more than once per "adventure." Does that mean: between delves in the same dungeon or once the entire dungeon is "cleared." I've always don't it that when folks make it back to rest and safety they may gain XP from successful encounters and acquisitions. How do y'all read it / actually do it? We've never bothered with that rule, as it was too vague for us. An adventure can span several months of real time or just one evening. Usually, in one evening the PCs can't achieve and loot as much as in a month or more, so there's a natural limit to leveling. We always gave out as many XP as were earned. I don't think we had more than one instance of getting more than one level per adventure, and that was a new character after the old one had died, so we actually were glad the new one got a chance to catch up more quickly. Leveling needed rest, though. That was pretty much the only requirement in our group back then.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 27, 2018 1:57:50 GMT -6
We've had quite a few discussions about the questions Ways posted earlier and I'd like to share what we agreed upon back in the day: * Is it double dipping? (gaining the XP award + the benefit of having use of the item) Yes, it gets you XP and the magic item. That's the sweet joy of finding a magic item instead of "just" gold coins. For us, XP were mostly about discovering, about experiencing, for example, new mysteries. * If the players later sells the item for a load of gold is he triple dipping? We never awarded XP for gold when selling used items. In addition, we didn't award XP for gold when the item was not earned in an adventure or dungeon. They reason we ruled this is one of out thief players who wanted to sell his magic armor (for gold + XP), then steal it back (for gold + XP), then sell it again (for gold + XP)... and so on. So, if you find a magic armor in a dungeon or during an adventure and you decide to sell it, you get gold + XP once. If you keep it and use it, you have the XP for discovering item and the use of the item. * Can a player get XP for owning an item he can't use? Yes, we allowed XP for trophies. Note that the use of an item as a trophy would make it "used" and if sold later, only gold and no XP would be gained. * What if the player never uses the item? See above. As long as the character knew the item's purpose and worth (identified the item), XP were awarded. * If the player later parts with the item for any reason should the XP be deducted? No, as you can't take the knowledge about an item from the character (unless you can, like by level-drain). It's bad enough to lose a strong magic item for whatever reason, losing the XP would make it even worse.
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 15, 2018 0:38:26 GMT -6
|
|