RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to StoKiTh

22:25, 1st May 2024 (GMT+0)

OOC Discussion.

Posted by The WorldFor group 0
The World
GM, 1 post
Thu 3 May 2018
at 05:17
  • msg #1

OOC Discussion

Trying to set this up.  Thread for OOC discussion.
Allan
player, 1 post
Thu 3 May 2018
at 13:55
  • msg #2

OOC Discussion

I'm in
The World
GM, 3 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 16:00
  • msg #3

OOC Discussion

OK, I think everyone is on, except for Orme, and I don't know if he plans to join or not.  I created a thread to discuss character creation.  I think it may be useful for future reference to have that discussion in its own thread.  I haven't read much of the module yet, but I will post on that thread anything you need to know.
Allan
player, 3 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 16:44
  • msg #4

OOC Discussion

Polemaster and sentinel feats pair so awesomely.

quote:
Polearm Master
You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:

When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon. This attack uses the same ability modifier as the primary weapon. The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and the attack deals bludgeoning damage.
While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, or quarterstaff, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter the reach you have with that weapon.


quote:
Sentinel
You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy’s guard, gaining the following benefits:

When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, the creature’s speed becomes 0 for the rest of the turn.
Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach.
When a creature within 5 feet of you makes an attack against a target other than you (and that target doesn’t have this feat), you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against the attacking creature.


The idea that you can get an AoO on anything going after you and stop it before it can reach you. Then on your turn strike and step back to do it all over again is incredible. It makes it hard not to go variant human for the extra feat.
Joe
player, 2 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 16:51
  • msg #5

OOC Discussion

Totes.

I don't want to mix threads, but I am leaning human for feat purposes.
Dixon
player, 2 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 17:16
  • msg #6

OOC Discussion

@Joe I've been meaning to make a character with that feat combo for a while but I haven't wanted to play it on the forum.
Allan
player, 5 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 17:37
  • msg #7

OOC Discussion

I put it in the discussion because I thought it was interesting more than compelling though I haven't ruled it out.

I love characters who can strike without getting hit. Ranged players get stuck in close quarters but this combo seems to be able to avoid taking hits fairly well up close and deals damage at the same time.
The World
GM, 7 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 17:58
  • msg #8

OOC Discussion

I would like to try character sheets and maps stored either in shared Google Drive, or Dropbox.  Anyone have a preference for one or the other?
Joe
player, 7 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 17:59
  • msg #9

OOC Discussion

Drive probably
Allan
player, 9 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 18:02
  • msg #10

OOC Discussion

drive is good with me
Dixon
player, 4 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 19:11
  • msg #11

OOC Discussion

I use both. I like drop box because it isn't browser based and seems faster but both are fine.
The World
GM, 9 posts
Thu 3 May 2018
at 20:05
  • msg #12

OOC Discussion

OK, We'll try Drive.  You should get an invite to a folder containing character sheets for you to edit.  Let me know if you have any issues.
Allan
player, 10 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:19
  • msg #13

OOC Discussion

Anyone else get stressed out planning a tank character knowing that poor HP dice rolls can wreck their plan?
Joe
player, 9 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:27
  • msg #14

OOC Discussion

That's what lay on hands is for. And cleric. If Dixon is going to play a dwarf cleric (is that what you are doing?) then he should be soaking damage too.

Also, first level max.

Just don't get hit.
Joe
player, 10 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:34
  • msg #15

OOC Discussion

The thing holding me back is feeling like we need an arcane caster. What is everyone's thoughts on this?
Allan
player, 11 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:35
  • msg #16

OOC Discussion

I was considering how most builds the HP is a bonus to living but if your character is designed to take a lot of abuse your effectiveness is more tied to your hp roll.

If I was a sorcerer I would not sweat hp but as a melee strong paladin it effect his value each level. Like if the sorcerer had to roll for new spells.

I'm not asking for a change, just stating that they have more up to chance on how awesome they can be than some other classes.
Allan
player, 12 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:37
  • msg #17

OOC Discussion

Always nice to have a massive damage output against things with a lot of hp
Joe
player, 11 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 16:45
  • msg #18

OOC Discussion

Well, you can also look at book average (half HD rounded up) is the baseline and you can roll to make it especially good, or bad. So in the sorcerer example it would be like rolling 1d3-1 so you can gain and extra spell, or not gain any, or you can just take the base.
Joe
player, 12 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 17:01
  • msg #19

OOC Discussion

Question for seth, will we be using the "Identify magic items with short rest" rule, or the identify with identify house rule?
The World
GM, 13 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 17:32
  • msg #20

OOC Discussion

In reply to Joe (msg # 19):

Let's play you can get a general idea of the thing with a short rest and get the specifics with identify.
Dixon
player, 8 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 20:07
  • msg #21

OOC Discussion

Yes Joe I am playing a dwarf Cleric and a hearty one at that!
Dixon
player, 12 posts
Sat 5 May 2018
at 18:07
  • msg #22

OOC Discussion

Really feeling the new campaign excitement. Looking forward to getting started!
Matt
player, 2 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 18:44
  • msg #23

OOC Discussion

In reply to Dixon (msg # 22):

I am not posting this for political reasons. I am posting it for "I didn't know this game existed" reasons.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/fe...ltimate-tic-tac-toe/
The World
GM, 19 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 21:09
  • msg #24

OOC Discussion

Tried playing against myself.  It is tricky game.
The World
GM, 21 posts
Tue 8 May 2018
at 17:14
  • msg #25

Supplies!

Here is what I am thinking for food and water.  Each time you enter civilization it is assumed to stock up to cover 15 days without considering cost/time/effort, or having to mention it.  After 15 days away from civilization you are out of food and water unless you have specifically made arrangements to have more than the standard 15 days.  Follow rules in PHB for half rations, and going without food and water, basically exhaustion is the penalty.

I would also like to try to keep track of ammunition.  Similar to food and water, you automatically get 20 mundane missiles for whatever ranged weapon you carry each time you enter civilization without having to mention it or deduct any cost.  If you want more, you have state that and deduct cost.  If you want to retrieve them, you must state that, and you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.

Fair?
Joe
player, 27 posts
Tue 8 May 2018
at 18:04
  • msg #26

Supplies!

I would be happy with that arrangement.
Dixon
player, 14 posts
Tue 8 May 2018
at 19:36
  • msg #27

Supplies!

Seems fair to me. Out of curiosity if I want to steal the system for games I run, are you deducting some amount of gold from loot or just being generous?
The World
GM, 22 posts
Tue 8 May 2018
at 19:55
  • msg #28

Supplies!

I'm being generous.  I think 15 days rations and 20 arrows is like 8.5 gp.  I think that amount will be pretty trivial, pretty quick, so I don't feel like I'm being too generous.  Usually when you get to civilization you are probably due for a little bonus anyway.

I think the real generosity is in not having to think about it much, which applies to players and DM.  But, I hope it also still allows for "survival" situations where appropriate.
The World
GM, 25 posts
Wed 9 May 2018
at 14:43
  • msg #29

Supplies!

I will be on site and unable to post most of the day.
Joe
player, 43 posts
Wed 9 May 2018
at 15:18
  • msg #30

Re: Supplies!

The World:
I will be on site and unable to post most of the day.

Does on site mean you are at your office and that normally you are working from home, or does it mean you will be at a customer site?

On site for us means that we are at our normal location, most of the time. Off site means working remotely from home or at a supplier.

Also, I keep wondering if Seth is a vampire, because I heard once that "the world is a vampire".
Allan
player, 26 posts
Wed 9 May 2018
at 15:37
  • msg #31

Re: Supplies!

Was it while you were smashing pumpkins or smiling politely?
The World
GM, 26 posts
Wed 9 May 2018
at 16:01
  • msg #32

Re: Supplies!

On site for me means on a job or work site or otherwise in the field.
Allan
player, 29 posts
Thu 10 May 2018
at 17:16
  • msg #33

Re: Supplies!

I will be camping this weekend so I vote the actual game starts Monday. I suspect Seth has a bit of backstory to insert into the forum anyways. Maps, general world information, etc. Any common knowledge we should be aware of.
The World
GM, 27 posts
Fri 11 May 2018
at 23:05
  • msg #34

Rules are meant to be broken

Sorry, I have been super busy at work.  I will try to get some things posted over the weekend.  I have a few rules I would like to discuss.

1 and 20
I want to play RAW for 1's and 20's.  My understanding of this is explained below.

I would like to play that 1's are auto misses for attack rolls, but just a regular miss.  So nothing necessarily bad happens if you roll a 1 on an attack other than you miss.  In my opinion, basically losing you turn is bad enough.  20's are an auto critical hit on attack rolls.

for all other rolls 1's and 20's are just regular rolls.  Add your modifier, and see if it is above or below the threshold you need to tie or beat.  Depending on your modifier, for some low DC tasks you can't fail, and for some very high DC tasks you may have no chance of success.

Communication of DC's
For tasks where you have good information about how hard something might be, I will represent this by giving you the DC.  For tasks where you have medium information, I will tell you if it looks very easy, easy, medium, hard, very hard, or nearly impossible, which should give you an idea of the DC to within about 5.  I believe this scale only makes sense relative to a low level character with some combination of ability and proficiency in the task. Where you have little or no information, I will tell you your character has a hard time judging how difficult the task may be, with language like, "looks like it should be fairly simple," or "hard to judge, but it looks like it could be tricky."

Private Messaging
I have been wondering if it would be more fun or less fun to communicate something that only one character knows or notices via private message, and leave it up to the player if the character makes that thing known.  Or if it's better to just state it openly, and let people play their characters as if they didn't know.  I'm fine either way.

more to come...
Dixon
player, 18 posts
Fri 11 May 2018
at 23:26
  • msg #35

Rules are meant to be broken

I think I prefer private messaging information that is known to only one character... on that note I will need to check my PMs much more often.
Matt
player, 5 posts
Sat 12 May 2018
at 01:40
  • msg #36

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

The World:
Sorry, I have been super busy at work.  I will try to get some things posted over the weekend.  I have a few rules I would like to discuss.

1 and 20
I want to play RAW for 1's and 20's.  My understanding of this is explained below.

I would like to play that 1's are auto misses for attack rolls, but just a regular miss.  So nothing necessarily bad happens if you roll a 1 on an attack other than you miss.  In my opinion, basically losing you turn is bad enough.  20's are an auto critical hit on attack rolls.

for all other rolls 1's and 20's are just regular rolls.  Add your modifier, and see if it is above or below the threshold you need to tie or beat.  Depending on your modifier, for some low DC tasks you can't fail, and for some very high DC tasks you may have no chance of success.

Communication of DC's
For tasks where you have good information about how hard something might be, I will represent this by giving you the DC.  For tasks where you have medium information, I will tell you if it looks very easy, easy, medium, hard, very hard, or nearly impossible, which should give you an idea of the DC to within about 5.  I believe this scale only makes sense relative to a low level character with some combination of ability and proficiency in the task. Where you have little or no information, I will tell you your character has a hard time judging how difficult the task may be, with language like, "looks like it should be fairly simple," or "hard to judge, but it looks like it could be tricky."

Private Messaging
I have been wondering if it would be more fun or less fun to communicate something that only one character knows or notices via private message, and leave it up to the player if the character makes that thing known.  Or if it's better to just state it openly, and let people play their characters as if they didn't know.  I'm fine either way.

more to come...


One thing that I've done with Joe in our 1:1 game that I have liked (and submit only for consideration) is to suggest a course of action I would take if the DC didn't exceed a certain number, the idea being that my character should be able to get an approximate sense of how tough some things are before attempting them, like sneaking across a wooden floor. I do this proactively in the forum and then give a sense of what I would do if those conditions aren't met--It has helped to minimize the required back-and-forth, I think.

E.g. -- If I think I can cross the courtyard without being seen (i.e., I estimate it would be a DC 15 or greater perception check to spot me among the crowd), I cross the courtyard. Otherwise, I stay put until he makes his way into the house.
Joe
player, 49 posts
Sun 13 May 2018
at 23:09
  • msg #37

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I am good with Private Messaging.
Allan
player, 31 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 03:24
  • msg #38

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

When playing before i thought the pace could be slowed as long as it stayed steady regular post being three most important to progressing and participation. Private messages were avoided to accelerate posts but now i think slower regular posts are better and and private posts can add good flavor. This also is good with languages if you want to consider using group's for different languages. I think the rpol help has a section on how.
The World
GM, 28 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 05:18
  • msg #39

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

OK, here is the biggest change (I think) I am going to suggest.

Combat
Everyone states their intent at the beginning of the round.  When everyone has stated their intent the events resolve in initiative order.

I hope this speeds things up, and requires less posts from me.

If multiple players direct an attack on the same foe, there is a chance that foe dies before all the players turns resolve.  You can choose to either attack with advantage, or choose a secondary target.

I will apply this same rule to the opponents you face.

I'm not sure if this will work, but I'd like to try it.  If it doesn't work, we'll go back to RAW.
Allan
player, 32 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 05:23
  • msg #40

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to The World (msg # 39):

This is 2e. I'm ok with it because it is my preferred style.
Joe
player, 50 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 18:15
  • msg #41

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I am fine with it up front turn, but I have some questions.

The World:
Combat
You can choose to either attack with advantage, or choose a secondary target.

I don't understand this. Like, you would attack the original target that 'died' with advantage? What is the logic? If you are within melee range, then that makes sense, but if you are attacking with a ranged weapon, then the target being prone would incur disadvantage. Or is there some other mechanic in play?

Does everyone know what the other players' intentions are? Do we know what the initiative order is? If we do know, are we supposed to ignore it? Will we have an idea of how close someone is to dying?*

*

Spoiler text: (Highlight or hover over the text to view)
Some relatively common ones describe 100%-76%, 75%-51%, 50%-26%, and 25%-1% as something like healthy, injured, bloodied, dying. Or just the below 1/2 hp as "bloodied'. Or some other combination.



Spoiler text: (Highlight or hover over the text to view)
I do have reservations about this way of doing things.

One issue I have with this is that there are a lot of options and a lot of the game logic applies sequentially within a turn. For instance, you can move between attacks and other actions. So, let's say you were playing a monk that could attack twice with the attack action, and use a bonus action to attack twice more with Flurry of blows. That is 4 attacks that can be made over a 40' or 50' move to multiple targets and the second 2 attacks require you to make an attack action first. If you outline your entire turn, there will be a lot of guessing as to who is still active, where they are, and who you will be able to get to.

It is much more workable in 2e because you have less options.

I think there is something to be said for the idea that thigns happen simultenously and that by doing things ahead of time can lead to more unexpected outcomes, but it also means that it is less likely that you can do what you want to do on your turn, and turns are not fast. Even in real life, one turn can take a few minutes which makes a 'miss' disappointing (to your point about crit misses earlier).

If the intent is to just speed things up and make common sense adjustments on behalf of the players, I know from experience that this can be a huge burden. DM round posts are already pretty cumbersome. Resolving actions as they happen might seem like a lot to do, but it outsources consequences out rather than forcing one person to compute how everything rolls out.

I suspect that at least at the beginning our turns will probably be straightforward, though, so hopefully it works out.


Ratt
player, 2 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 18:53
  • msg #42

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

How do you want to handle disguises? In the intelligence section it has creating a disguise as a type of "other intelligence check". Under deception in charisma it lists "pass yourself off in a disguise". In Xanathar's Guide it mentions that if you have a disguise kit that your disguise gives you advantage on deception checks.

In this case, I am going to say this is my "second persona" as defined in the False Identity feature for the charlatan background, which says,

"You have created a second identity that includes documentation, established acquaintances, and disguises that allow you to assume that persona."

So, maybe we don't have to worry about this particular disguise for now. I will do some better research for further disguising.
Joe
player, 51 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 18:59
  • msg #43

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Post not yet edited for format...

From Xanathar's Guide:

Tool Descriptions
The following sections go into detail about the tools presented in the Player’s Handbook, offering advice on how to use them in a campaign.

Components. The first paragraph in each description gives details on what a set of supplies or tools is made up of. A character who is proficient with a tool knows how to use all of its component parts.

Skills. Every tool potentially provides advantage on a check when used in conjunction with certain skills, provided a character is proficient with the tool and the skill. As DM, you can allow a character to make a check using the indicated skill with advantage. Paragraphs that begin with skill names discuss these possibilities. In each of these paragraphs, the benefits apply only to someone who has proficiency with the tool, not someone who simply owns it.

With respect to skills, the system is mildly abstract in terms of what a tool proficiency represents; essentially, it assumes that a character who has proficiency with a tool also has learned about facets of the trade or profession that are not necessarily associated with the use of the tool. In addition, you can consider giving a character extra information or an added benefit on a skill check. The text provides some examples and ideas when this opportunity is relevant.

Special Use. Proficiency with a tool usually brings with it a particular benefit in the form of a special use, as described in this paragraph.

Sample DCs. A table at the end of each section lists activities that a tool can be used to perform, and suggested DCs for the necessary ability checks.

Disguise Kit
The perfect tool for anyone who wants to engage in trickery, a disguise kit enables its owner to adopt a false identity.

Components. A disguise kit includes cosmetics, hair dye, small props, and a few pieces of clothing.

Deception. In certain cases, a disguise can improve your ability to weave convincing lies.

Intimidation. The right disguise can make you look more fearsome, whether you want to scare someone away by posing as a plague victim or intimidate a gang of thugs by taking the appearance of a bully.

Performance. A cunning disguise can enhance an audience’s enjoyment of a performance, provided the disguise is properly designed to evoke the desired reaction.

Persuasion. Folk tend to trust a person in uniform. If you disguise yourself as an authority figure, your efforts to persuade others are often more effective.

Create Disguise. As part of a long rest, you can create a disguise. It takes you 1 minute to don such a disguise once you have created it. You can carry only one such disguise on you at a time without drawing undue attention, unless you have a bag of holding or a similar method to keep them hidden. Each disguise weighs 1 pound.

At other times, it takes 10 minutes to craft a disguise that involves moderate changes to your appearance, and 30 minutes for one that requires more extensive changes.

Disguise Kit
ActivityDC
Cover injuries or distinguishing marks10
Spot a disguise being used by someone else15
Copy a humanoid’s appearance20

This message was last edited by the player at 19:06, Mon 14 May 2018.
Allan
player, 34 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 20:22
  • msg #44

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I suspect others my like this as well....

Seth, can you change my character to be my primary character so that I can us the default posting option instead of selecting my character each time?
The World
GM, 30 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 22:14
  • msg #45

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Allan (msg # 44):

OK, I deleted all of the characters that were your name.  I then realized this also deleted your bios.  Sorry about that.  You'll have to redo that if you want it in there.
The World
GM, 31 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 22:36
  • msg #46

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Ratt (msg # 42):

Here's what I'd like to do for Ratt's False Identity.  Let's treat seeing through the disguise as a DC.  To set the DC consider the proficiency in disguise kit, the disguise, and background feature as granting advantage, +5, and a +6 to Deception, so DC is 21.  Even if someone beats the DC, unless they have more information, they would just think something doesn't seem quite right, kind of a gut feeling.
Ratt
player, 4 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 22:53
  • msg #47

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I agree with all of that, except I believe the way it works is that unless someone has a reason to be suspicious, they would use their passive perception. We typically don't roll to see if every person we meet is in disguise (though maybe we should!).
Ratt
player, 5 posts
Mon 14 May 2018
at 23:03
  • msg #48

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

That being said, from a very meta standpoint, I plan on revealing everything to the other players as soon as there is a level of mutual trust. I'm not doing this to play games against other players, I think it makes sense though to be careful when living on the surface (and in the underdark, for that matter). I basically gave up a background feature to be a typically untrusted* race.

*In Faerun, which is where we are, Drizzt is famous, and famously good. In one of the more recent books I read, there was at least one Drow (Jax) who owned a tavern in Luskan (iirc), which is south of where we are. In a world with half-orc, tiefling, and dragonborn PCs, I wouldn't think a half-drow would be a huge obstacle. Maybe Seth can fill us in on the cultural acceptance.
The World
GM, 32 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 15:44
  • msg #49

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Ratt (msg # 47):

Yes, I agree that unless someone has a good reason to roll, they would use their passive perception.

But that brings me to another house rule I'd like to consider.  I'd like to made finer distinctions about what is passive.  More on that later.
The World
GM, 35 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 19:09
  • msg #50

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Ratt:
*In Faerun, which is where we are, Drizzt is famous, and famously good. In one of the more recent books I read, there was at least one Drow (Jax) who owned a tavern in Luskan (iirc), which is south of where we are. In a world with half-orc, tiefling, and dragonborn PCs, I wouldn't think a half-drow would be a huge obstacle. Maybe Seth can fill us in on the cultural acceptance.


I think I am probably least knowledgeable about Forgotten Realms.  I've read 2 or 3 books.  I think half-drow would be looked at as unfavorable/with prejudice but tolerated in most places, but I'm ready to be corrected on that.
Ratt
player, 7 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 19:16
  • msg #51

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

The World:
Rose:
1. Ruby of the War Mage?

1. I don’t know much about this.  Joe and Dixon said their characters were interested in this, so I used it as a device to put them together.  I’ll have to research it some if it ends up being something you want to pursue, it’s not part of StoKiTh quest unless we write it in.

The Ruby of the War Mage is a 'common' magical item listed in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. They added several common items in that book, mostly providing a little flavor and sometimes some decent utility. This one is one of the more powerful common items and thus has more restrictions (must be attuned by a spellcaster). It allows the user to affix it to a weapon which he can subsequently use as a spellcasting focus.

Although I do want to find this item, it is not something I will be forever hung up on if we can't work it in.

Maybe it would be fun if we all chose a minor item that we can quest for or be included in our first haul (assuming we find any treasure...).

I will try to find a list.
Ratt
player, 9 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 19:42
  • msg #52

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Shared XGtE, did everyone get a notice from Drive?
The World
GM, 36 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 19:48
  • msg #53

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Ratt (msg # 52):

Yes, I got it.
Rose
player, 4 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 20:13
  • msg #54

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Yup.
Ratt
player, 10 posts
Tue 15 May 2018
at 23:01
  • msg #55

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I am waiting for Adam and Dixon to chime in before posting more.
The World
GM, 43 posts
Wed 16 May 2018
at 18:54
  • msg #56

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

OK, so combat.  I think rather than delay this combat figuring things out we'll just go RAW.  My thinking was to try and make things feel more simultaneous, and avoid having to wait as much for people to post.  I'm persuaded that this may create more problems and may not be worth it.

How much does this idea appeal to everyone?  Allan says yes, Joe says no.  If giving this a try doesn't appeal to a majority of players let's just go RAW.  If a majority want to give it a try we'll work something out and see if it improves things or not.
Ratt
player, 16 posts
Wed 16 May 2018
at 19:12
  • msg #57

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Like pro-choice advocates, I think we should split the baby. I like the shotgun method of giving your intended turn, at the top of the turn, but that turn ends after the bad guys go, then the turn starts over. This lowers the possibility of your target running away before you turn lands. It would look something like this:

Morgrim
Worg 2
Worg 1
-end of turn-
Ratt
Zip
Rose

So, after worg 1 goes, we can reorient to:

Ratt
Zip
Rose
Morgrim
Worg 2
Worg 1
-end of turn-

Then, everyone updates, and Seth does the complete roundup and we start again after the baddies go.

If something gets mixed up, we make good faith effort to sort out a good alternative.
Morgrim
player, 8 posts
Wed 16 May 2018
at 20:02
  • msg #58

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I agree with Joe, cut the baby in half! I call the dark meat...

In all seriousness Joe's is a quality suggestion and I favor it.
The World
GM, 51 posts
Thu 17 May 2018
at 06:38
  • msg #59

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

good golly, so much to keep track of...
Ratt
player, 23 posts
Mon 21 May 2018
at 19:21
  • msg #60

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Let me know if there is anything Matt can do to help.

JK, just tell him directly.

JK, let me know if I can help with map or whatever.
Rose
player, 15 posts
Mon 21 May 2018
at 23:19
  • msg #61

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

You could help me work on my yard
Ratt
player, 24 posts
Mon 21 May 2018
at 23:25
  • msg #62

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Rose:
You could help me work on my yard

(Looks at keyboard) I don't see how...
Matt
player, 6 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 17:31
  • msg #63

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Ratt (msg # 62):

I'm still kinda watching.
Matt
player, 7 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 19:57
  • msg #64

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Matt (msg # 63):

New word: Perschmoozing, verb, to casually participate in light conversation for purely social purposes.

Used in the sentence: I am perschmoozing the forum.
Ratt
player, 25 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 21:17
  • msg #65

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Did we break Seth?
Rose
player, 16 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 22:24
  • msg #66

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I know new was working I  getting a map out to us. I'm not sure the difficulty but I'll make a couple suggestions.

For expedience you could put a screenshot on Google drive. There are lots of ways to write in it if that is the need. Even mspaint would work.

There are grid programs for free where you
You can upload a picture and insert a grid overlay.

If you (Seth) state the problem we can solve it as a group im sure
Ratt
player, 26 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 22:30
  • msg #67

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Rose:
If you (Seth) state the problem we can solve it as a group im sure

Look at this (the hook) while my disc jockey spins it on the turntable.
(This might seem like I am making fun of you somehow, that's not the intention)
The World
GM, 55 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 22:46
  • msg #68

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Sorry, I have been extremely busy at work.
Rose
player, 17 posts
Tue 22 May 2018
at 22:52
  • msg #69

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Alright group, let's solve that.
Ratt
player, 27 posts
Wed 23 May 2018
at 17:11
  • msg #70

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

quote:
When the other players look at me I also hold up two fingers and point to the pumpkin goblins the point to the chicken goblins.

Ok, I'll go back down and head south between the wall and 4a with the intention of going toward 10. What is 10, by the way?

The basic strategy being to use 4a and 10 as cover from the goblin's view.


Seth has been post in PM for me while in the tower, but since I am in view and going back outside and moving, I thought I would copy my post here for reference.
Ratt
player, 29 posts
Fri 25 May 2018
at 16:27
  • msg #71

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I thought this article from anydice was pretty interesting.

https://anydice.com/articles/4d6-drop-lowest/
The World
GM, 74 posts
Tue 29 May 2018
at 19:28
  • msg #72

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Two things:
Do you prefer to have a table of combatants, or is not having one working for you?  I am kinda liking not having one, just because it is a pain to do up, and then update. But as a player there are lots of reasons I can see for wanting one.  If a majority want one I'll do it.

I have been meaning to post this for a while, concerning "passive" rolls.  I would like to do things thus:

If it is something that is truly passive, meaning you aren't really actively doing it or intending to do it, then it is 5 + modifiers.  So if you don't state you are trying to be stealthy, your default stealthiness is 5+modifiers.

If it is something you are actively doing, but maintaining a sustained effort at (keeping up a disguise, or riding a horse for example), it is 10+modifiers.  I think 10+modifiers is still the appropriate thing to use for perception.  So unless you do something special to be extra perceptive (put your ear to a door for example) there is no need to roll a perception check.  You never gain less information by trying to be extra perceptive and rolling less than 10.

In cases where DM needs to make a roll without players knowing a roll was made, that is easy to do on the forum, so no need to assume 10 in this case, I'll just make the rolls.

Make sense?
Ratt
player, 35 posts
Tue 29 May 2018
at 19:49
  • msg #73

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

quote:
Two things:
Do you prefer to have a table of combatants, or is not having one working for you?  I am kinda liking not having one, just because it is a pain to do up, and then update. But as a player there are lots of reasons I can see for wanting one.  If a majority want one I'll do it.


I am fine not having a block, but I think it is situational dependent. Right now we are all kind of fighting our own battles, so the choice of who we attack is pretty small since we are all engaging very small groups and there are not other players fighting the same enemy party. In a case with a group against a group, I think I would prefer a block.


quote:
I have been meaning to post this for a while, concerning "passive" rolls.  I would like to do things thus:

blah blah blah

Make sense?

I would add one level off complication. That you only have one active sustained thing. For instance, if we were in a dungeon:

Player 1: As we move along, I keep an eye out for secret doors (passive investigation 10+modifiers)
Player 2: I lag behind but move stealthily to see if anyone is trailing us (passive stealth 10+mods)
Player 3: I keep an eye and ear out for danger (passive perception 10+mods).

My question is, though, what constitutes active sustained vs a single roll situation? Does active sustained require your action? Or can you be performing other actiony things? Like let's say I want to cast guidance every round on another player, while keeping a lookout? What if I am picking a lock or disarming a trap, could I also be passively stealthy?
Rose
player, 32 posts
Tue 29 May 2018
at 21:11
  • msg #74

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I'm good without a battle block but mostly because I'm alone and it's simple. I'm pretty much scanning  for my section and ignoring the others. Without a battle block i think ill have to read a lot closer and that will probably slow my responses while I'm busy working outside.
Ratt
player, 42 posts
Fri 1 Jun 2018
at 17:53
  • msg #75

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Morgrim:
unseen by less keen eyes.

Perception: Most rolled skill in the game.
The World
GM, 87 posts
Wed 6 Jun 2018
at 04:19
  • msg #76

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Sorry for lack of posting. It's been a very busy few days.
Ratt
player, 46 posts
Wed 6 Jun 2018
at 06:13
  • msg #77

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

I understand; we are fighting goblins, but you are fighting a hydra.
Zip
player, 25 posts
Wed 6 Jun 2018
at 17:21
  • msg #78

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

A hydra... by yourself.... you must be like a level 20 acoustician
The World
GM, 89 posts
Wed 6 Jun 2018
at 18:11
  • msg #79

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

ha ha.  That feels me good.  Thanks.
The World
GM, 91 posts
Thu 7 Jun 2018
at 01:00
  • msg #80

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Matt, are you still following? If so I'll add you to the private posts so you can read what's going on.
Ratt
player, 47 posts
Fri 8 Jun 2018
at 03:54
  • msg #81

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

Can we do a thing? I am having a little trouble knowing when everyone has gone and when I can go again because I can't see other people's privates.

It adds a little to Seth's burden, but could he change the subject line to the current round, and at the bottom have a "Actions needed" list.

I will demonstrate in the next post.
Ratt
player, 48 posts
Fri 8 Jun 2018
at 03:55
  • msg #82

Round 5

Blah blah blah

Private here

private there

blah blah blah


Actions needed from: Ratt, Morgrim, Zip
The World
GM, 93 posts
Fri 8 Jun 2018
at 12:54
  • msg #83

Re: Rules are meant to be broken

In reply to Ratt (msg # 81):

I think that is a great idea.
The World
GM, 94 posts
Fri 8 Jun 2018
at 13:08
  • msg #84

Bridge from village to keep

Here is what the book says about the bridge.

Storm King's Thunder:
A 70-foot-long, 10-foot-wide sloped bridge used to connect
the village bailey to the motte. However, a falling
rock struck the bridge and destroyed a 15-foot-long section
of it, cutting off Nandar Keep from the village.
A creature with a Strength score of 15 or higher can
leap across the broken section of the bridge if it moves
at least 10 feet before the jump. The jump is made more
difficult by the fact that the bridge is sloped:
• A creature jumping from the lower part of the bridge
to the higher part must succeed on a DC 10 Strength
(Athletics) check to land on its feet. On a failed
check, the creature falls prone at the broken edge
of the bridge and takes 2 (1d4) bludgeoning damage
from the fall.
• A creature jumping from the higher part of the bridge
to the lower part must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity
(Acrobatics) check to land on its feet. On a failed
check, the creature tumbles to the bottom of the
bridge, landing prone and taking 5 (2d4) bludgeoning
damage from the fall.


I'd like to play it this way
Rose
player, 45 posts
Fri 8 Jun 2018
at 14:19
  • [deleted]
  • msg #85

Bridge from village to keep

This message was deleted by the player at 14:20, Fri 08 June 2018.
The World
GM, 105 posts
Thu 21 Jun 2018
at 13:26
  • msg #86

Bridge from village to keep

I have been doing a poor job of managing my life.  I am committing to at least 1 post per morning.
Ratt
player, 52 posts
Thu 21 Jun 2018
at 14:41
  • msg #87

Bridge from village to keep

Should that last post be round 8?
The World
GM, 106 posts
Thu 21 Jun 2018
at 20:13
  • msg #88

Bridge from village to keep

In reply to Ratt (msg # 87):

yes
Ratt
player, 54 posts
Thu 21 Jun 2018
at 23:46
  • msg #89

Bridge from village to keep

So, do we get the benefits of our new levels?

I mean, I assumed that we would get the new abilities, like invocations, but would I immediately add a spell slot and hit points, or do the maximums just go up?
The World
GM, 108 posts
Fri 22 Jun 2018
at 01:09
  • msg #90

Bridge from village to keep

Add the spell slots and HP to what you have. So if you gain a spell slots the slot is full. If you gain HP add whatever you roll to what you already have.
Zip
player, 36 posts
Sun 24 Jun 2018
at 03:50
  • msg #91

Bridge from village to keep

As far as things like searching the town i would favor a little more on the side of "we search the town". without a lot of description from the dm It makes it a lot harder for me to know what exactly my character wants to do. I feel like without a lot of back and forth between me and the dm i dont know what else to do besides say "i search". It took us a month and a half to to kill a few goblins, i dont want it to take another month and a half to search the place for a few gold and a hand full of arrows.

right now i dont know exactly what seth wants me to do or say unless he wants a lot of back and forth to do it and that just seems like it would take forever.

example

zip says
Zip will start his search in building 8 and work his way around clockwise until all buildings have been searched by somebody. after the buildings have been searched he would then search the goblins starting with the one on the west side of building 8. If someone else searches a building or goblin zip would not re search them

dm responds
Zip finds 5 of his spent arrows.  If you want more than that you will have to describe what you are doing to get more.  Are you looking in the trading post, taking them off of dead goblins, or something else?  Do you do this first or do you search the Inn (building 8) first?

as to the second sentence i feel like i answered that by saying "Zip starts at building 8 and works his way around..." what more do you want?

As to the question in sentence 3 i feel like i answerd all those as well with a yes. my intent was to say zip searches all buildings. that would include the trading post, would it not? after searching the building he would then search the dead goblins.

as to the order i felt like i also answered that. stating that i start at building 8 and work around then search the goblins.

Im not trying to be defensive, just explane that i dont know what seth wants when he says describe what you do?

to me it doesn't seem to matter where or what building gets searched first as long as they all get searched. also how can Zip choose to search the tading post first if he does not know what building is which until he searches it? does he know this? I need more info as a player to say more than Zip searches. that takes time and a lot more posts. how long do we want to spend searching this town (im talking real time not game time), a day or a week or a month?

If we as a group decide that we dont mind spending another month searching this town i dont mind doing a tone of back and forth to get it done. my preference would be to fast forward this a bit and just say we do it and get it done in a day vs a month.
The World
GM, 111 posts
Mon 25 Jun 2018
at 05:39
  • msg #92

Bridge from village to keep

Good points.  I guess if we want to move faster that certainly makes sense, and I will try to accommodate that, and it makes sense trying to move things along since the forum is inherently slow.

My biggest concern is that I am trying not to make any decisions for you.  So for example if you say something like, "I search the town," I feel like I need to make some decisions about how you do that without being given more specifics.  That's fine if we want to move things faster, and I will just try my best to do what I think makes sense for your character.

I also think some of my difficulty is that everyone is doing different things.  Zip is searching, Rose is roping, Francis is resting, and Morgim is... I think searching for signs of life.  All these would resolve at different times, it could take hours to do a thorough search of the whole town for example, so I guess I'm trying to break it down into smaller steps, but maybe we just kind of ignore that, or maybe I need to just clarify, or ask what everyone does for the next hour.
Ratt
player, 57 posts
Mon 25 Jun 2018
at 14:43
  • msg #93

Current goals?

Rose: build bridge; survivors
Morgrim: search for goblins/survivors
Zip: search for goods
Francis: rest

I propose that we gather some raw materials from the trading post and Morgrim uses his artisans blessing to build a bridge in the gap, this takes one hour.

Meanwhile, Rose and Zip search the buildings that have already been entered, bringing the prisoner goblin(s) to Francis in the tower for safe keeping and interrogation. Let's say that takes about an hour. Then we can either go together to the keep, or to search the buildings that have yet to be breached.

There may still be survivors in the town. I didn't search the wind mill and it doesn't seem like you guys entered all the buildings, but maybe I am wrong.

This seems like a pretty easy fast forward before we get to things where stuff happens.
Ratt
player, 59 posts
Wed 27 Jun 2018
at 16:08
  • msg #94

Current goals?

What does Francis know about goblins? Does he know that bugbears are goblinoids and has he seen them before?

I hope Rose doesn't die going into the keep. This is meta, but it definitely seems like a place we should enter together. If Rose wants to wait a second, Francis will come down and jump across bridge if Rose can help catch him on the other side and maybe give him advantage to cross. I am not headset on taking a rest, I am down 3hp and a spell, but that is not too big of a deal. Ratt would not feel compelled to rush at this point, but will go along with hurrying to mirror the interests of people that are more concerned over the well being of others, though pragmatically he doubt that at this point anything is time sensitive.

Being on the tower, is the gate of the keep within his 120' eldritch blast range?
The World
GM, 115 posts
Wed 27 Jun 2018
at 18:26
  • msg #95

Current goals?

It would make things easier for me if there was more coordination between people, so I support that.  Also with the private in post messaging thing there are a lot of things someone knows, but others don't.  I'm wondering if it would be better to drop the private message thing to save everyone the hassle of having the conversation about what they know that others don't, so that conversation can just be assumed.  I guess I'm fine either way.  So, I'll leave it up to the players, but if we keep doing the private message thing, just be aware that you may need to make others aware of what you know.  You don't need me to talk to each other, but it would still be slower.

But as far as coordinating entering the keep, that boat has sailed.

The gatehouses for the keep are about half in and half out of the 120' range from tower 2E.
Ratt
player, 61 posts
Tue 3 Jul 2018
at 18:11
  • msg #96

Current goals?

I think that I would prefer to not do private lines if we are not in combat, or if we are in light combat, as long as we assume that we will share our experiences with each other.

I started a game: link to another game

In case anybody wants to jump over there and pick up on the real life gameplay that I am/was running. If there is enough interest, I will upload your sheets.
Ratt
player, 62 posts
Tue 3 Jul 2018
at 21:29
  • msg #97

Current goals?

I am sure this is obvious, but matt is welcome to make a character as well. I don't think we need to be consistent between who plays irl and on here. Adam has already joined over there.
Matt
player, 8 posts
Tue 3 Jul 2018
at 22:34
  • msg #98

Current goals?

In reply to Ratt (msg # 97):

I've been through Phandelver before, and I think I would struggle with playing any D&D campaign through a second time without having my previous experience affect my current character--particularly when it comes to noticing the right stuff or asking the right questions.
Ratt
player, 63 posts
Wed 4 Jul 2018
at 00:07
  • msg #99

Current goals?

It's about to go off the rails. Just using the setting. If you go to thundertree or wave echo it will be different.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:31, Wed 04 July 2018.
Ratt
player, 64 posts
Wed 4 Jul 2018
at 00:30
  • msg #100

Re: Current goals?

Ratt:
It's about to go off the rails. Just using the setting. If you go to thundertree or wave echo it will be different.

Those are the two places that haven't been explored. Cragmaw castle was a totally different dungeon (I made a lower floor with blood monsters, stone constructs, and a ghost, as well as zombie goblins).
Zip
player, 38 posts
Wed 4 Jul 2018
at 06:27
  • msg #101

Re: Current goals?

going camping for the next few days so will not be able to post. just have zip continue to search buildings and goblins for now
Ratt
player, 65 posts
Thu 5 Jul 2018
at 22:07
  • msg #102

Re: Current goals?

Updated the other game to include recent happenings in Phandalin.

link to another game
The World
GM, 124 posts
Wed 18 Jul 2018
at 17:31
  • msg #103

check in

How's everybody doing?  I've neglected this game in favor of other things going on right now, mostly work.  It honestly feels like a lot for me to keep up with, and even when I have some time, is feeling like more work than fun.  I think my main takeaway is that DMing is a lot more work than being a player, and for my level of commitment it feels like too much work at this point.

Maybe others are also busy right now and haven't missed this forum much.  Dixon made a comment at dinner the other day along the lines that he gets burned out on forum play quickly and it doesn't quite match what he imagines it.  Similar sentiments have been expressed by others, and at least right now I think I kind of agree that smaller groups are better on the forum.

I have a couple of ideas: take a break from this game, abandon this game, or let someone else takeover the DM duties.  I might like to be a player, but I already know a lot of the story, so maybe that excludes me.

What are everyone's thoughts?
The World
GM, 125 posts
Thu 2 Aug 2018
at 14:01
  • msg #104

check in

In reply to The World (msg # 103):

I might be able to pick this up now. Is anybody out there?
Ratt
player, 68 posts
Thu 2 Aug 2018
at 16:14
  • msg #105

check in

Yeah, I am down. I have been pretty absent from rpol myself.
Ratt
player, 70 posts
Wed 22 Aug 2018
at 20:41
  • msg #106

check in

I am back from Utah.

If we keep going, let's not do private for awhile.
Rose
player, 52 posts
Fri 31 Aug 2018
at 20:57
  • msg #107

check in

In reply to Ratt (msg # 106):

My kids are back in school so I'm open to  rpol again. I anticipated a crawl during the summer if not a dismissal. I'm still more interested more in the characters from last game but that's only because these haven't had any real play.
Ratt
player, 71 posts
Wed 5 Sep 2018
at 22:34
  • msg #108

check in

I'm Game.
Rose
player, 53 posts
Wed 5 Sep 2018
at 22:36
  • msg #109

check in

Dixon says he's out
Ratt
player, 72 posts
Wed 5 Sep 2018
at 22:42
  • msg #110

check in

I would like to continue on with this one, if Seth is up for it.

In any case, I was thinking that we should list out some conceits, in order to make the forum more playable. Things like, try to keep the players together, don't hide treasure, assume information is shared. I would even be up for some nudging, like, (the campaign setting assumes the players will investigate this the keep). Or whatever. I think the goal should be to get through as much story as possible. So, like a quick thumbs up or thumbs down for resting. Like if two people want to do something, we just do it. If we are split we flip a coin and move on with our lives.

Since Dixon is out, 2 is a morjority.

I would be up for playing F'aim again, but I need more of a cleanser.
The World
GM, 126 posts
Thu 6 Sep 2018
at 15:56
  • msg #111

check in

I am willing to give it another shot.
Ratt
player, 73 posts
Fri 7 Sep 2018
at 16:06
  • msg #112

check in

Adam?
The World
GM, 127 posts
Mon 10 Sep 2018
at 15:20
  • msg #113

check in

I don't think Adam is checking the forum anymore.  I'll text him.  If Adam isn't interested Would Allan and Joe like to continue with just Allan and Joe?  If it's just Allan and Joe is the group then small enough to interest Orme?
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:23, Mon 10 Sept 2018.
The World
GM, 128 posts
Mon 10 Sep 2018
at 17:08
  • msg #114

check in

OK, Adam said he's still in.  I assume Orme is out.  I'll play Morgim as an NPC for now unless there are strong objections.  I will try to gin up a game post some time today and see if that gets things rolling.
The World
GM, 130 posts
Tue 11 Sep 2018
at 19:41
  • msg #115

Would this be fun?

Sometimes it seems like thinking about DnD is more fun than playing DnD.  To that end, what if we had a forum where we just posted character builds with a short story to go along with the build?

Another though I had is what if all the dice rolling and book keeping were kept from the players.  So they just have the narrative to go off of.  Would that be more or less fun?  Probably depends on the player and the DM.  Would anyone want to try that?
Matt
player, 9 posts
Wed 12 Sep 2018
at 07:45
  • msg #116

Would this be fun?

In reply to The World (msg # 115):

Yes, still out. The pace of this game has stressed me out and I'm not even playing.
The World
GM, 132 posts
Wed 12 Sep 2018
at 16:53
  • msg #117

Would this be fun?

While I am in favor of bringing things together, I think for now lets keep up the private posts.  Unless you guys vote not to.
Ratt
player, 74 posts
Thu 13 Sep 2018
at 21:23
  • msg #118

Re: Would this be fun?

The World:
Sometimes it seems like thinking about DnD is more fun than playing DnD.  To that end, what if we had a forum where we just posted character builds with a short story to go along with the build?

Depressingly true sometimes. I still think in person playing is far and away the most enjoyable.

I don't think posting builds would be fun enough. I do think that making characters then playing one-off encounters would be fun though. There are pretty quick ways to make characters (I use an app), it takes a long time to share it, though. Maybe if we used dnd beyond it would be easier.

I would like making various characters at various levels and pitting them against deadly challenges.

But I would rather just continue to play StoKiTh.

The World:
Another though I had is what if all the dice rolling and book keeping were kept from the players.  So they just have the narrative to go off of.  Would that be more or less fun?  Probably depends on the player and the DM.  Would anyone want to try that?


I think that would put an enormous burden on the dm unless he used averages, macros, etc. Or just eyeballed the likelihood, squinted, then gave a off-the-cuff result.

Lots of people play what they call "free-form" and what we used to call "no book, no dice". I honestly think that one of the things that makes the forum not-so-great is that you don't roll physical dice. Seeing a 20, or a 1, come up is magival.
Rose
player, 56 posts
Thu 13 Sep 2018
at 22:18
  • msg #119

Re: Would this be fun?


quote:
Sometimes it seems like thinking about DnD is more fun than playing DnD.  To that end, what if we had a forum where we just posted character builds with a short story to go along with the build?

Character concepts are entertaining but only with the prospect of playing them. No DnD daydream can ever hold a candle to those moments where the Players and DM are surprised. There are moments where it seems the game takes it's own direction and nobody saw it coming. So I probably would contribute very little to the making of characters just for fun.


quote:
Another though I had is what if all the dice rolling and book keeping were kept from the players.  So they just have the narrative to go off of.  Would that be more or less fun?  Probably depends on the player and the DM.  Would anyone want to try that?

With complete trust for the DM this would go over fine. But others are often skeptical of things not going their way. You might even say that we lack the trust necessary to make this possible. On the forum I am cool with whatever because I generally have a disconnect with my character that I cannot seem to bridge. So I can trust to be treated fairly even if it wasn't the way I thought it should be done. Even if I didn't trust the results I just would not care enough to complain.
Zip
player, 47 posts
Sat 22 Sep 2018
at 18:51
  • msg #120

Re: Would this be fun?

so i was talking to seth today about what to do with morgrim now that dixon is out. apparently they recommend playing the campaign with a minimum of 4 but ideally like 6. one option is to npc him, another is to have one of us take him over and then maybe the other two of us make additional characters and have a party of 6. another idea is to scrap morgrim and make 3 new characters. what are your thoughts? what do you want to do?
The World
GM, 142 posts
Mon 24 Sep 2018
at 18:18
  • msg #121

feedback

waaaaaAAAAAHHHH!!!!!

just kidding, not that kind of feedback!

How am I doing, what should I do differently, and what would you like to see change?
Ratt
player, 83 posts
Mon 24 Sep 2018
at 19:31
  • msg #122

feedback

I thought Seth's post was a reply to Adam's question and was very confused because I did not see the "Feedback" subject line. I think you can do a better job at answering Adam's question about other characters.

The way I judge games on rpol is how I feel when there is a new post. Do I feel excited? Do I stop what I am doing to read it real quick? Do I make a mental note to read it later because I want to be able to really focus on it? Do I feel like I just got another task to fit into the other things I have to do?

I feel excited when there is a new post and I will generally save it for when I have a minute to give it my attention. I don't think there is anything that must be changed. I am torn whether I like private posts or group posts. I think that we should do it only in the context of battles where there are distinct rounds, or when there is something a character wants to keep secret. Otherwise that we agree to share information whenever we meetup.

And I am always up for making another character.
The World
GM, 143 posts
Mon 24 Sep 2018
at 20:26
  • msg #123

feedback

looking back at the book it says 4-6 players.  So we could play with 2 characters each.  I could give the baddies 3/5 of their HP and we could just play with 3 characters (1 each).  I kinda don't want to NPC Morgrim for too long though.  Really I'm fine with whatever.  But unless someone speaks for Morgrim he will probably be killed or otherwise split off from the group at some point.
Matt
player, 11 posts
Tue 25 Sep 2018
at 18:21
  • msg #124

feedback

In reply to The World (msg # 123):

Old content is still good content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0u4M6vppCI
Ratt
player, 85 posts
Tue 25 Sep 2018
at 20:07
  • msg #125

feedback

Moral of the story, cut Morgrim's head off with an axe. Does he have an axe I can grab and chop his head off with?
Zip
player, 49 posts
Tue 25 Sep 2018
at 23:11
  • msg #126

feedback

i say we each play 2 characters for a party of 6. does someone want to play morgrim or do we just get rid of him?
Ratt
player, 86 posts
Tue 25 Sep 2018
at 23:37
  • msg #127

feedback

I will think of playing Morgrim, it's a pretty good character.
Ratt
player, 87 posts
Wed 26 Sep 2018
at 15:24
  • msg #128

feedback

Seth, would you prefer that we roll uncalled-for rolls that we think might be useful? I was about to post with a history roll for cultists, but what's your preference?

One reason I ask is because if you have a large group, a lot of history checks become kind of easy to make because it is like quadruple advantage. But on the other hand, if you are sneaking with a lot of people then it's like quadruple disadvantage, so maybe that's ok.

One option that I have thought about implementing is to just allow one roll with advantage (because of Help), which is probably rolled by the character with the highest modifier. The logic being that the person who is the most knowledgeable would have the best chance and everyone else adds about the same level of help. Like if someone had a question about acoustics Seth would have the best chance knowing, and although the rest of us might know some stuff, the knowledge the rest of us have would plateau at about the same level and would would include a lot of the same stuff, but the little that we have picked up might jog something loose for Seth or corroborate his answer from the perspective of another field of expertise.

But I guess that gets to similar questions about whether multiple people can try to pick locks if the most skilled person already failed. Or try to break down a door if the strongest person failed. I think in these cases I favor the idea of two tries, either by doing it with advantage by one person who is being helped (even if the help is done consecutively), or by letting two people roll, and that's it.

But that doesn't really follow for the stealth example in reverse, but I think that's ok.
Rose
player, 68 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 02:10
  • msg #129

feedback

I prefer a case by case basis.
Zip
player, 51 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 05:14
  • msg #130

feedback

should allan and i start thinking of another character to play
Ratt
player, 89 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 17:27
  • msg #131

feedback

I don't think I want to take over Morgrim. I am leaning either toward a Warforged (Juggernaut), either Fighter or barbarian; or a wizard of some type. I am have also thought about a human cleric with the ritual caster feat to cover all our spell bases.
The World
GM, 145 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 21:49
  • msg #132

Repeated tries

So one thing I was thinking was that with some things multiple tries might make sense, and then it just takes longer to do it.  For example maybe it takes more tries to pick a difficult lock and if you’ve got the time or want to sacrifice the turns (depending on the situation) they you can just take multiple tries.

The way the math works out (I think), is for no proficiency, and no ability modifier, it would take an average number of turns listed below to complete a task with DC listed below.

DC# turnstime
20202 minutes
19101 minute
186.6740 seconds
17530 seconds
16424 seconds
153.3320 seconds
142.8617 seconds
132.515 seconds
122.2213 seconds

This doesn’t seem like it quite works to me.  Basically almost anybody can pick a hard lock in average of 2 minutes.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 00:01, Fri 28 Sept 2018.
Rose
player, 70 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 22:23
  • msg #133

Repeated tries

In reply to The World (msg # 132):

On the premise it is fun to tinker with the game I will play along here.

First lets acknowledge the rule from the phb:

quote:
To make a group ability check, everyone in the group makes the ability check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds. Otherwise, the group fails.


This makes since to me for all situations where the group is collectively discussing their knowledge or working as one.

I would consider different approaches for circumstances such as below.

- The player is acting individually and may not be sharing with the group
- It is pass fail per player and not per group

I see a temptation for reducing the number of rolls but having been chastised in the past for only the appearance of limiting it to a single roll I cringe for the time it does not go the players way.

In short I think it is appropriate to use the default rules in all group scenarios and individual rolls where the DM sees necessary.

I also think that most skill rolls should be behind the screen for most skill checks. Over the table I try to have players roll as much as possible because it is fun. On the forum it is not fun. It is even a chore. I would happily push everything to the DM to roll. As a DM I would keep a set of dice where I posted from just to whip out rolls without dealing with the dice roller. It makes it more fun and less of a chore.

Whatever anomaly exist, such as the weakest person forcing opening the door instead of the strongest, can be easily narrated to make since. (The strongest guy weakened the door and not realizing it was about to give stopped only to have the gnome knock it over with a well placed shoulder).
Ratt
player, 92 posts
Thu 27 Sep 2018
at 23:41
  • msg #134

Re: Repeated tries

Rose:
First lets acknowledge the rule from the phb:

quote:
To make a group ability check, everyone in the group makes the ability check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds. Otherwise, the group fails.


This makes since to me for all situations where the group is collectively discussing their knowledge or working as one.

I think this makes sense for some things, but not others. Let's say there is a thief with 20 Int, expertise in History, high level, etc. He'd be rolling 20+ consistently. But if he was trying to remember something with a group of dummies, they would tank the check.

Obviously, the 'case by case' rule would apply. I kind of like the 3e method of adding +2 to the check of the person being helped if the helper rolls a 10 or above. Like the DC to make the task 10% easier is a DC 10. That makes sense to me. It is not as elegant as advantage, but I think it is pretty good.
Zip
player, 53 posts
Fri 28 Sep 2018
at 02:08
  • msg #135

Re: Repeated tries

i say leave it up to the dm to decide what to do in the situation.
Zip
player, 54 posts
Fri 28 Sep 2018
at 02:35
  • msg #136

Re: Repeated tries

So
Zip is a rouge
Morgrim is a cleric
Rose is a paladin
Ratt is a warlock

Morgrim might be out. I guess my preference would also be to not play morgrim.

Joe wants to make a fighter or caster maybe cleric.

If we get rid of Morgrim another cleric would be good for the healing.

I want to play something i haven't played before. maybe a cleric or a monk, open to sugestions for something that might be fun.

What are you thinking Allan
Rose
player, 71 posts
Fri 28 Sep 2018
at 15:20
  • msg #137

Re: Repeated tries

 clerics are pretty fun. I'd play one but i think i might go utility wizard or bard for more group resources
Ratt
player, 93 posts
Fri 28 Sep 2018
at 17:48
  • msg #138

Re: Repeated tries

One thing to take into account is that 5e is less cleric dependent than a lot of previous systems for healing (except 4e, which has a lot of self heal abilities). Bards, druids, and clerics all get healing word, which is really the clutch heal spell (since it is a bonus action). There is also already a paladin which can heal in a pinch. But, a cleric is the only one who can bring people back to life at a pretty low level. Paladins can cast revivify and raise dead, but not until like 9th and 17th level, for a straight paladin.

I am leaning toward warforged barbarian. I am thinking about the Zealot subclass which really benefits from someone playing a cleric because spells like revivify and raise dead don't use up consumable spell components to bring the Zealot back to life.

Revivify (3rd lvl spell) costs 300gp (diamond) and must be cast within 1 min of death.

Raise Dead (5th lvl spell) costs 500gp (diamond) must be cast within 10 days

Side note, Gentle Repose (2nd level spell) pauses the amount of time being considered 'dead' and lasts for 10 days. This spell is castable by a wizard or cleric.

Point is, I would play this character in a very reckless way as long as we had a lvl 5 cleric and someone was carrying a Gentle Repose spell in their back pocket. Or maybe Seth would rule that a warforg doesn't 'decompose' after death, or does so more slowly...

I can attest to monks being fun. They tend to want to make good use of their crazy mobility. Clerics don't have to be heal-bots and can lay down some consistent smack and good utility.

The nice thing about wizards over bards is that wizards can cast any ritual they have in their spellbook. Bards can only cast ritual spells they know, which is very limited. Clerics also have ritual spells, but they have to have the spell prepared, which is not terrible since they can switch after a long rest.
Matt
player, 12 posts
Mon 1 Oct 2018
at 17:01
  • msg #139

Re: Repeated tries

In reply to Ratt (msg # 138):

Allan's post made me realize that it might be possible to script a bunch of the tedious parts of this. Rolling, keeping HP, etc., could all be done with a script and the RSS feed if it is possible (and I think it is) to post/edit a post programmatically.....
Ratt
player, 95 posts
Mon 1 Oct 2018
at 22:44
  • msg #140

Re: Repeated tries

I think I am going to go with barb/ftr warforged. Any idea what y'all are doing?

Re: script

It is always question of efficiency vs flexibility. I can see setting something up, then manufacturing actions in order to have it be covered by what is written. But a I also didn't quite understand everything you said, so...

One somewhat easy innovation, I think, would be to create the macro/link business that I have seen you do in early questland and post it in a separate thread, making a post for initiative, which can be edited for each fight, and so forth. Again, I am not sure what you had in mind.

There was a couple times Allan and I played by IM and I used a dice app on my phone that worked well because I set up a bunch of common rolls and it was easy to tap (and shows a graphic of rolling dice that bump into each other and stuff).

It sounded like Allan make excel sheet rolls, which sounds like something Seth would do. There are also initiate tracking apps, but I would think that a spreadsheet works well. You can have a bunch of line items like "Adam melee attack" which has the calculation in the cell next to it which you refresh.

That being said, everyone is a the master of their own character and there is always the chance of specific changes that characters can apply, like the ability to re-roll which they may want to do on the fly, unless they want to set up rules for when to invoke such abilities.

My gut feeling is that dice rolling on forum is a pain to be distributed, especially when there is already so much burden on the DM.

Though it lends to players gaming the system sometimes, I prefer when we know AC and HP so we can know when we hit and if things die, so we can have greater in-turn control, so there aren't things like, "Oh, well if that first hit kills the guy then I would move to another guy and use my bonus action to hit someone else as per the Great Weapon Master feat." It also makes it a lot easier on the DM's turn which is a lot of book keeping.

That's my 2cp.
Ratt
player, 96 posts
Mon 1 Oct 2018
at 23:34
  • msg #141

Re: Repeated tries

rolled stats (had to roll twice because first set was a bust)

12
14
11
17
10
12
Ratt
player, 97 posts
Mon 1 Oct 2018
at 23:36
  • msg #142

Re: Repeated tries

Starting level?
Matt
player, 13 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 00:24
  • msg #143

Re: Repeated tries

In reply to Ratt (msg # 142):

I have confirmed that I can submit things to RPOL from a script. If we had a syntax that we used (and I had GM access), I could, I think:

a) Resolve attacks and skill checks and publish the results as a private message to the parties that are supposed to know
b) Create and maintain a battle grid
c) Keep track of rounds on things like spells

It seems to me that this would make the forum a lot less onerous. Though, as I think about it, the long pole is still getting people to reply in a timely fashion.
The World
GM, 146 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 20:19
  • msg #144

Re: Repeated tries

I think Matt may have just offered to take over as DM.  I think I am in favor.
Ratt
player, 98 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 20:44
  • msg #145

Re: Repeated tries

I thought it sounded like a co-dm thing.
The World
GM, 148 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 20:46
  • msg #146

Re: Repeated tries

I'd be down for a co-DM arrangement.
Zip
player, 57 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 21:13
  • msg #147

Re: Repeated tries

im leaning toward monk, but you coyuld talk me into playing a wiz. If i go monk im thinking feral tiefling, tabaxi, or kenku. im toying with the idea of wood elf too since they get all the right proficiency bonuses and a faster speed but it seems a little too vanilla i guess.

ferel tieflings get the dex bonus and if seth gives the green light could go winged

kenku gets the bonuses but cant talk and no dark vision (really seams better for a rogue)

tabaxi gets dex bonus and bursts of speed. i would ask for a house rule to up the unarmed attack since you seem to either loose a class benefit or race benefit since both give a 1d4. maybe up to 1d6 or a +1 for martial arts with claws. maybe im trying to power build too much
Zip
player, 59 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 21:32
  • msg #148

Re: Repeated tries

if matt dm's seth could pick up a character and we would have a group of 4 but maybe that would give seth an unfair advantage since he has read the campaign.

anyway i rolled stats for a character

17
15
14
9
9
7
Ratt
player, 100 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 22:13
  • msg #149

Re: Repeated tries

Re: Tabaxi

Sometimes abilities overlap. The benefit is that it gives you is an unarmed slashing option. Also the climbing is part of the claw benefit, which is crazy good, especially with the double speed option. Monk speed-increases apply to all movement modes as well. At level 2 you could go 40'x2 plus step of the wind and move... 80 + 80 + 80 = 240' in one round, unless I am mistaken. Or Climb 30 + 30 + 30 = 120, which is also crazy.

Similar to the Tabaxi is the shifter race in the Eberron book I shared. The subraces Swiftstride and Wildhunt go well with monk. The Shifting feature of the Swiftstride is pretty great if you want to play cat and mouse, plus the increase to speed.

With a wood elf you can hide as per mask of the wild and zip can hide behind the elf, which is silly. Wood elves have all the right bonuses, plus the increased speed. Also, getting longbow proficiency is nothing to sneeze at.

Human variant is not a bad option either. You can take the Mobile feat which gives +10' to speed, ignore difficult terrain with Dash (which may overlap with step of the wind, but saves you valuable ki), and you don't provoke opportunity attacks from creatures you make melee attacks against (you don't need to land the hit). Kind of neat, but not sure it is better than taking one of those other races. Also get another skill & language and with those two odd ability score rolls, two +1's work just fine. (18, 16, 14 in Dex, Wis, Con).

Feral tiefling is not something I have looked at much. I am opposed to a tiefling or kenku monk for want of variety, even though that is a different game.
Ratt
player, 101 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 22:14
  • msg #150

Re: Repeated tries

If nobody bites on the cleric, I might go warforged cleric. I am having trouble pulling together a build that fulfills my original vision with the warforged barb.
Ratt
player, 102 posts
Tue 2 Oct 2018
at 22:21
  • msg #151

Re: Repeated tries

Yeah, I want to go cleric. Also, I am a poopy head.
This message was last edited by the GM at 18:10, Fri 05 Oct 2018.
Matt
player, 14 posts
Thu 4 Oct 2018
at 04:34
  • msg #152

Re: Repeated tries

The World:
I'd be down for a co-DM arrangement.


Not what I'm pitching. The forum still is too slow, so patience runs thin with making plans like I prefer to. From the DM chair, I would feel a lot of pressure to post quickly to keep the game feeling like people can take their time to make a decision and deliberate, and I can't actually commit to that. I only check here on occasion to see if Joe will ever comment on the other game that is running where it is clearly his turn.

I do think, however, as a programming challenge, developing some utility for doing the bookkeeping on the forum sounds fun. I think it might be hard and stretch my scripting skills...Maybe I'll just try to implement a dice roller to see how useful it is.
Ratt
player, 104 posts
Thu 4 Oct 2018
at 22:42
  • msg #153

Racial Statistics

Ok, I have been thinking a lot about stats. Chiefly because I am frustrated by the fact that if you want to boost your prime ability score, it makes certain races less viable.

I don't know if I mentioned the new pathfinder system and the way they do stats. Basically, they start with like 10's across the board, then you add bonuses for race, class, background, and freebee (I think). Every step has one or two stats bonuses that are set and an allocatable bonus, but you cannot double bump at any given step. So, at the end, the most you can get is 18 of you bump the same stat at every phase (all bonuses come in +2's), and the other bonuses tend to get smattered around.

Here is how I would apply that to 5e. Start out with some standard array, like 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 8.

Then, for race, it is defined by whatever the bonuses already are, but if a race has a +2 to a stat, they instead get a +1 to that ability and a floating +1, but you cannot get more than +1 to any stat for race (or during any other step). It would look like this:

Dwarf +1 con, +1 any (other)
 Hill +1 wis
 Mountain +1 str, +1 any

Elf +1 Dex, +1 any
 High +1 Int
 Wood +1 Wis
 Drow +1 Cha

Halfling +1 Dex, +1 any
 Lightfoot +1 cha
 Stout +1 con

Human +1 all
 Variant +1 any, +1 any

Dragonborn +1 str, +1 any, +1 cha

Gnome +1 int, +1 any
 Forest +1 dex
 Rock +1 con

Half elf +1 cha, +1 any, +1 any, +1 any

Half orc +1 str, +1 any, +1 con

Tiefling +1 int, +1 cha, +1 any



Then, you get a bonus for class based on Primary ability:

Barbarian +1 str

Bard +1 cha

Cleric +1 wis

Druid +1 wis

Fighter +1 str or +1 dex

Monk +1 dex and +1 wis

Paladin +1 str and +1 cha

Ranger +1 dex and +1 wis

Rogue +1 dex

Sorcerer +1 cha

Warlock +1 cha

Wizard +1 int




Then, finally, you get a +1 to the two stats that relate to the skill proficiences you get for a given background:

Acolyte: +1 int or +1 wis, +1 any

Charlatan: +1 cha or +1 dex, +1 any

Criminal: +1 cha or +1 dex, +1 any

Entertainer: +1 dex or +1 cha, +1 any

Folk Hero: +1 wis, +1 any

Guild Artisan: +1 wis or +1 cha, +1 any

Hermit: +1 int or +1 wis, +1 any

Noble: +1 wis or +1 int, +1 any

Outlander: +1 str or +1 wis, +1 any

Sage: +1 int, +1 any

Sailor: +1 str or +1 wis, +1 any

Soldier: +1 str or +1 cha, +1 any

Urchin: +1 dex, +1 any


So, the most you can get to any stat is +3 for Race, Class, and Background, and because both race and background all get an "any" bonus, you can always get a +3 to your primary ability, of you want. Some races are still more flexible, and it makes for a world with more halfling wizards, or elven barbarians. If you choose a race with a set stat in the primary ability, you are rewarded with flexibility and because certain ones are still set, you still get races that are naturally good at certain stuff.

As far as the Monk, Paladin, Ranger incongruity, I went with exactly what the book said were primary abilities. Also, those classes are all what are referred to as MAD (multiple ability dependent), and I see no issue with have multiple bonuses for that reason (and others, which I won't get into).

If I were apply all this to the current character generation activities, I would propose an array like this:

15
13
11
10
10
9

Mostly because we can both easily get to 18, and 19 really, so the 15 in the array gets you up to 18 and then it drops down by 2's, has a couple 10's for averageness and features a lot of attractive odd numbers to tempt spreading stats around. You can end up with an overall +7 when adding all modifiers together after race, class, and background adjustments, and up to one with an 18. You can squeak out an overall of +8 with like an half-elf ranger. Comparing overall bonus is not a perfect science. to get that overall +7, all your stats end up even (in most cases, vanilla human always wins the overall stat game), which makes future increase more difficult and makes certain feats less attractive. Also, the magnitude of the bonus for each ability matters.

For reference, with the normal system, the stats I rolled get me to about an overall +9 with most races, or +10 with half-elf.

Adam can go anywhere from an overall +5 to a +8 (with vanilla human because of so many odd stats).

The standard array (15,14,13,12,10,8) from the book gets you to about +6 with most races, or +7 with half-elf, maximum of 17 in one stat.
The World
GM, 154 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 17:29
  • msg #154

Racial Statistics

I gave Matt GM access.  If you figure out how to make things easier with scripting that would be cool.  Otherwise I'm guessing you should be able to see any inline private messages without having to add your name.
Matt
GM, 15 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 18:10
  • msg #155

Re: Repeated tries

Cool.

Ratt:
Yeah, I want to go cleric. Also, I am a poopy head.


Hee hee hee hee hee.
Ratt
player, 108 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 18:54
  • msg #156

Re: Repeated tries

Am I going to have to keep a folder of screenshots of my posts? Also, I am a poopy head.
Rose
player, 79 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 20:58
  • msg #157

Re: Repeated tries

I'm thinking I'll probably stick with the one character for now since our party will be 5 strong. Less posting for me.
Matt
GM, 16 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 21:27
  • msg #158

Autopost

This message was left by a script
Matt
GM, 17 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 21:27
  • msg #159

Autopost

In reply to Matt (msg # 158):

Booya! This one was not.
Matt
GM, 18 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 21:40
  • msg #160

Re: Repeated tries

Ratt:
I think I am going to go with barb/ftr warforged. Any idea what y'all are doing?

Re: script

It is always question of efficiency vs flexibility. I can see setting something up, then manufacturing actions in order to have it be covered by what is written. But a I also didn't quite understand everything you said, so...

One somewhat easy innovation, I think, would be to create the macro/link business that I have seen you do in early questland and post it in a separate thread, making a post for initiative, which can be edited for each fight, and so forth. Again, I am not sure what you had in mind.

There was a couple times Allan and I played by IM and I used a dice app on my phone that worked well because I set up a bunch of common rolls and it was easy to tap (and shows a graphic of rolling dice that bump into each other and stuff).

It sounded like Allan make excel sheet rolls, which sounds like something Seth would do. There are also initiate tracking apps, but I would think that a spreadsheet works well. You can have a bunch of line items like "Adam melee attack" which has the calculation in the cell next to it which you refresh.

That being said, everyone is a the master of their own character and there is always the chance of specific changes that characters can apply, like the ability to re-roll which they may want to do on the fly, unless they want to set up rules for when to invoke such abilities.

My gut feeling is that dice rolling on forum is a pain to be distributed, especially when there is already so much burden on the DM.

Though it lends to players gaming the system sometimes, I prefer when we know AC and HP so we can know when we hit and if things die, so we can have greater in-turn control, so there aren't things like, "Oh, well if that first hit kills the guy then I would move to another guy and use my bonus action to hit someone else as per the Great Weapon Master feat." It also makes it a lot easier on the DM's turn which is a lot of book keeping.

That's my 2cp.


So, from practical "can scripting rpol be my full time job" point of view, I agree with you. However, that minor consideration aside, I disagree with a lot of that. It should be possible for a script to do the following:

1) Draw a grid (DRAWME: 20 x 20)
2) Populate that grid with "tokens": (PLACEME: A5)
3) Move tokens: (MOVEME: A5, A7)
4) Roll: (ROLLME: 1d20+5)

1, 2, and 3 all are roughly the same script. #4 is fairly independent.

If character sheets were up to date and in a uniform layout, we could add:

- HP tracking
- Skill checks
- Attack resolution
- Status/condition tracking

Etc.

And I think you could invoke it just by asking for it in the post, and I think the information could be distributed to only the DM, to the whole party, or to select memebers without too much effort.

At the point where I have this, everything is just parsing an altering text from here out.
Ratt
player, 110 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 21:41
  • msg #161

Re: Repeated tries

Slicin' up eyeballs,
Ah ha ha ho!

This message was left by me.
The World
GM, 155 posts
Fri 5 Oct 2018
at 23:09
  • msg #162

Sleep and long rests

You guys are probably coming up on your first long rest.  Rules on sleep and long rests are surprisingly confusing, and it looks like there have been some recent rule changes in Sage Advice and PHB errata.

http://media.wizards.com/2017/...nloads/PH-Errata.pdf
http://media.wizards.com/2017/...ds/SA-Compendium.pdf

Relevant sections:
PHB Errata:
Long Rest (p. 186). The first sentence of the rule now reads, “A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps for at least 6 hours and performs no more than 2 hours of light activity, such as reading, talking, eating, or standing watch.” In addition, you regain at least one Hit Die when you finish a long rest.

SA:
Does the Trance trait allow an elf to finish a long rest in 4 hours? If an elf meditates during a long rest (as described in the Trance trait), the elf finishes the rest after only 4 hours. A meditating elf otherwise follows all the rules for a long rest; only the duration is changed. [This answer has been altered as a result of a tweak to the rules for a long rest, which appears in newer printings of the Player’s Handbook.]


Joe is considering a warforged character, which has a trance like ability, which I’m not sure how to treat.  The above makes me think the warforged only needs 4 hours to complete a long rest, like an elf.  For all others 8 hours is required, 6 of which is spent sleeping.

The PHB suggests that a constitution check may be appropriate if you go without sleep, but isn’t specific beyond that.  Here is the rule I propose.

If you choose to go without 6 hours of sleep, role a constitution check.  The DC is the product of 6 times the number of days gone without completing a long rest minus the number of hours you have slept in the last 24 hours.  On a failure add one level of exhaustion to your current level.  After completing a long rest your level of exhaust is reduced by half, round down.

Some examples.

Flogwart goes 1 day without sleep, rolls a Con check against DC 6, and makes it, no exhaustion.  Flogwart goes a second day having slept only 2 hours, rolls a Con check against DC 10, fails and gains 1 level of exhaustion.  Flogwart goes a third day having slept just 1 hour, rolls a Con check against DC 17 and fails and gains another level of exhaustion.  On the fourth day Flogwart gets a much needed long rest, and goes down to level 1 exhaustion.  On the fifth day Flogwart gets another long rest and is recovered from his exhaustion due to lack of sleep in the previous days.

Kittertinct goes one day having slept 3 hours and rolls a Con check against DC 3, manages to fail and takes 1 level of exhaustion.  The next day she again only gets 3 hours of sleep, rolls a Con check against DC 9, this time saves, and stays at level 1 exhaustion.  On day three she gets a long rest and recovers completely from her exhaustion due to lack of sleep in the previous days.

I think this works even if you are elf or warforged.

Sound fair?
Ratt
player, 111 posts
Sun 7 Oct 2018
at 18:39
  • msg #163

Sleep and long rests

Constitution check or save. This makes a big difference since one level of exhaustion imposes disadvantage to ability checks (but not saves).

If it is a con save every night, I think it sounds fair.
The World
GM, 158 posts
Sun 7 Oct 2018
at 22:41
  • msg #164

Sleep and long rests

Wasn't really aware of the distinction until now. I think Save is appropriate, and I think it says Save in the PHB.
Ratt
player, 113 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 17:34
  • msg #165

Sleep and long rests

I think the distinction between checks and saves is that a save is a reaction to something happening to you, to a avoid a penalty, and a check for something that you are trying to do.

I think in the context of sleep, I think it would make sense to roll a con check to see if you can stay awake (after a certain number of hours of trying to stay awake or something), and then roll a save to see if you take penalties after you manage to stay awake.

Side note, there are some spells and stuff (like hex) that impose disadvantage (or adv) to ability checks but not saves. Messing with a particular ability check is not a huge deal because you have so many options for action, and it doesn't affect attack rolls. One exception is defensive grappling checks are ability checks, not saves (which seems inconsistent to me), but if you are defending you have the option of using acrobatics or athletics. I guess there are other opposed checks, but they typically aren't as devastating as what you roll saves for (like spells).

As another aside, do you think someone would know if they are hexed, or hunter's marked? There is probably a sage advice about it... Because hexing someone before battle for dex would be a good use, since initiative is a dexterity check.
Ratt
player, 114 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 17:38
  • msg #166

Sleep and long rests

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/14/hex-effect/

Sounds like they wouldn't know until it suffers an effect.
Matt
GM, 19 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 18:30
  • msg #167

Re: Sleep and long rests

Ratt:
Side note, there are some spells and stuff (like hex) that impose disadvantage (or adv) to ability checks but not saves. Messing with a particular ability check is not a huge deal because you have so many options for action, and it doesn't affect attack rolls. One exception is defensive grappling checks are ability checks, not saves (which seems inconsistent to me), but if you are defending you have the option of using acrobatics or athletics. I guess there are other opposed checks, but they typically aren't as devastating as what you roll saves for (like spells).


I think it is pretty unambiguously the case that the target doesn't know automatically, and I think I have the references to prove it....
Matt
GM, 20 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 18:34
  • msg #168

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Matt (msg # 167):

PHB 204:
...Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature's thoughts, typically goes unnoticed unless the spell says otherwise

Sage Advice Compendium, Page 11:
Do you always know when you’re under the effect of a
spell?

You’re aware that a spell is affecting you if it has a perceptible effect or if its text says you’re aware of it (see PH, 204, under “Targets”). Most spells are obvious. For example, fireball burns you, cure wounds heals you, and command forces you to suddenly do something you didn’t intend. Certain spells are more subtle, yet you become aware of the spell at a time specified in the spell’s description. Charm person and detect thoughts are examples of such spells.

Some spells are so subtle that you might not know you were ever under their effects. A prime example of that sort of spell is suggestion. Assuming you failed to notice the spellcaster casting the spell, you might simply remember the caster saying, “The treasure you’re looking for isn’t here. Go look for it in the room at the top of the next tower.” You failed your saving throw, and off you went to the other tower, thinking it was your idea to go there. You and your companions might deduce that you were beguiled if evidence of the spell is found. It’s ultimately up to the DM whether you discover the presence of inconspicuous spells. Discovery usually comes through the use of skills like Arcana, Investigation, Insight, and Perception or through spells like detect magic.
Matt
GM, 21 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 18:38
  • msg #169

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Matt (msg # 168):

I'd also add, now that I don't have a dog in the fight, that it STILL seems to me like there is a gap in the rules around attempt to cast with subtlety. It should be an opposed check between the caster and the observers, and the observers should get to use a number of checks (player preference) in opposition to the check made by the caster (probably dependent on the specific spell components being disguised or down-played).
Ratt
player, 115 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 18:59
  • msg #170

Re: Sleep and long rests

Matt:
In reply to Matt (msg # 168):

I'd also add, now that I don't have a dog in the fight, that it STILL seems to me like there is a gap in the rules around attempt to cast with subtlety. It should be an opposed check between the caster and the observers, and the observers should get to use a number of checks (player preference) in opposition to the check made by the caster (probably dependent on the specific spell components being disguised or down-played).

And depending on distance, other noise, visibility, etc.

I have another question. Let's say you have a spell, like hex, where at some point you can change the target of the spell with a bonus action. Do you have to execute the same spell components (VSM) to switch targets? What about if you are wild-shaped at the time? I wasn't able to find the answer to this.

Also, let's say someone does see you cast the spell, can you obscufate the target? Like with Hex, if I said, "Die you mangey hell-demon goblin!" but then targeted a bugbear? Or even if I didn't say anything at all, just cast a spell that had not obvious effect, but the target saw the casting and everything.
Matt
GM, 22 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 19:12
  • msg #171

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Ratt (msg # 170):

quote:
Do you have to execute the same spell components (VSM) to switch targets?

I don't think so. These spells tend to require concentration, so "moving" the spell seems like one of the things you are buying for only being able to have that one spell up.

quote:
What about if you are wild-shaped at the time?
</quote?
I don't think it has an impact on whether you can change targets unless it says it does.

<quote>
Also, let's say someone does see you cast the spell, can you obscufate the target? Like with Hex, if I said, "Die you mangey hell-demon goblin!" but then targeted a bugbear? Or even if I didn't say anything at all, just cast a spell that had not obvious effect, but the target saw the casting and everything.

I don't think the observer can determine anything from the casting itself, unless the specifics of the casting (e.g. Command, which requires that the caster point at the target) and I think that reading is supported by the subtext of the Sage Advice piece I quoted.

Of course, this raises the real question: If I am a caster, can I perform all of the components of a spell without actually casting it, effectively bluffing that I have cast a spell on someone in such a way that I could convince an actual practitioner that I have cast a spell with a "inconspicuous" effect?

I would say yes, personally.
Matt
GM, 23 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 19:14
  • msg #172

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Matt (msg # 171):

Coming back to the idea of scripting, I also think it would be possible to build a "paging" service, so you could get notified if it has been your turn for over X hours/days etc.
Ratt
player, 116 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 23:04
  • msg #173

Re: Sleep and long rests

Just saw this in Xanathar's Guide to Everything:

XGtE:
Going without a Long Rest

A long rest is never mandatory, but going without sleep does have its consequences. If you want to account for the effects of sleep deprivation on characters and creatures, use these rules.

Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion. It becomes harder to fight off exhaustion if you stay awake for multiple days. After the first 24 hours, the DC increases by 5 for each consecutive 24-hour period without a long rest. The DC resets to 10 when you finish a long rest.


So my vote is to use that since it is an official source.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:12, Mon 08 Oct 2018.
Ratt
player, 117 posts
Mon 8 Oct 2018
at 23:09
  • msg #174

Re: Sleep and long rests

As far as the warforged ability, there are a couple of things at play:

Under Warforged Resilience
You don't need to sleep and do not suffer the effects of exhaustion from lack of rest and magic can't put you to sleep.

Under Sentry's Rest
When you take a long rest, you must spend at least six hours in an inactive, motionless state, rather than sleeping. In this state, you appear inert, but it doesn’t render you unconscious, and you can see and hear as normal.

I believe the normal rules of long rest is no more than 2 hours of light activity and no less than 6 hours of sleep.

It appears to be that in order to gain the benefits of a long rest (spell replenishment, etc.) a warforged replaces the sleep portion with an inactive mode where it can see and hear, but doesn't move or do anything else. If he doesn't need to regain anything from a long rest, he can just go about his business as normal and not sleep with no ill effects.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:17, Mon 08 Oct 2018.
Ratt
player, 119 posts
Tue 16 Oct 2018
at 19:57
  • msg #175

Re: Sleep and long rests

This is kind of last minute, but is anyone up for a skype game tomorrow night, like after 8:30? Emily has book club tomorrow and I normally end up watching tv when she is gone because it is late and I don't feel motivated to do anything else.

I will find out what day it will be next month and give more notice. It might always be like the third wednesday of the month.
Zip
player, 66 posts
Fri 19 Oct 2018
at 05:41
  • msg #176

Re: Sleep and long rests

did we ever get a ruling on starting level and gear for our new characters? i think my guy is pretty much done except for those things.
The World
GM, 164 posts
Fri 19 Oct 2018
at 15:57
  • msg #177

Re: Sleep and long rests

I think it will be best to start new characters at level 3.  In addition to the gear you start with at level 1 per PHB roll 4d4x30 gp and buy whatever you want with that, or just keep the gp.

So we are bringing in a wood elf monk played by Adam, and a warforged cleric played by Joe?
Ratt
player, 131 posts
Thu 8 Nov 2018
at 20:17
  • msg #178

Re: Sleep and long rests

I don't want Storm King's Thunder to go away, but maybe we should switch to Questland for a bit (if Allan is up for it) and if Allan gets too busy, we can switch back. DMing is the most taxing and maybe what we need to do is have frequent switching.
What do you think?
The World
GM, 168 posts
Thu 8 Nov 2018
at 22:43
  • msg #179

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Ratt (msg # 178):

Yeah, I feel pretty burnt out on it now.  A switch would be good for me.
Ratt
player, 132 posts
Thu 29 Nov 2018
at 23:59
  • msg #180

Re: Sleep and long rests

So, is that a 'no' from Allan to dm and give Seth a break?

I am up to play F'aim or Psithur.

I am also up to DM, but I would like to try a homebrew system which I will explain if there is interest. The short version is that all rolls are super simple and everything is based on you six primary stats. There are no classes, but more so item-based and stat-based. The idea is that you decide how you are going to approach a problem or action, decide what stat you use for it, then roll. Attack/damage is resolved in a single roll. Defenses and hp are directly generated from stats.

Character creation would be a few minutes.
The World
GM, 169 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 06:56
  • msg #181

Re: Sleep and long rests

That sounds interesting. I'll hear more about this thing.
Rose
player, 88 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 16:17
  • msg #182

Re: Sleep and long rests

Yeah, honestly I'd be up for forum play but I'm probably in a similar position as others where there just is not enough trust to expect smooth play. The anticipation of conflict is to discouraging. I'm still not sure what i can get out of forum play so I'm simply hanging in there. Learning a new system, while always interesting, probably won't work at my level of commitment.
Ratt
player, 133 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 17:20
  • msg #183

Re: Sleep and long rests

It boils down to the six primary abilities (str, dex, con, etc.), hp, and three types of defenses. The HP and defenses are generated directly from the primary stats. All your stats start between 0-3 and you add them directly to your rolls which are made with FATE dice (or "fudge" dice, as they are sometimes called). The dice are 6-sided with the faces being -1, -1, 0, 0, 1, 1, the average being 0. All rolls are made by throwing four dice, so the result ranges from -4 to 4.

https://fate-srd.com/fate-core...math-behind-the-dice

Every action will come down to rolling the dice, adding your stat and comparing it to a DC or AC. If you exceed the DC or def, you succeed. Higher rolls will yield better results.

To use the example of attacking, you can use any stat to attack as long as you can make a case for it (my goal is to not say 'no' so much that other players might step in and say, "I don't think that makes sense"). Hitpoints are a composite of physical, mental, and emotional health or fortitude, as well as luck. So, you can attack by swinging a sword or intimidating someone. Once their hp is depleted, they are defeated, the manner of which is defined by the 'killing' blow. So, you if you intimidated someone, they give up, or run away. If you persuade someone, they cooperate, if you hit them they may be killed or knocked out, etc.

Let's say you are fighting someone who has the following stats:

Str: 3
Dex: 0
Con: 1
Int: 0
Wis: 1
Cha: 2

HP: 6 (str+dex+con+int+wis+cha)
Physical AC: 3 (str+dex)
Magical AC: 1 (con+int)
Emotional AC: 3 (wis+cha)

You decide to attack with a punch, so you would roll and add your str and compare that to their Physical AC (PAC). If you roll a total of 4, you will damage the guy for 1 point of damage (roll - PAC). That's pretty much the end of the story.

Every level you can add +1 to one of your stats, with some limitations, namely no more that +1 to any stat every four levels. So, after 20 levels, the most you can add to any stat is +5 (once each between lvls 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-20).

"Classes" will not exist and will be defined more by play and items. If you want to be a fighter, wear armor and carry weapons. If you want to be a mage find wands and spellbooks. My conception of spells is that if you have a spellbook or wand that lets you cast something like Prestidigitation you can attempt anything with that basic flavor. Or with a wand of Fire, you can shoot firebolts, or cause something to erupt, or heat metal by poking it, or whatever. Just roll, add int and "poof". In the case of direct damage roll will be compared to Magical AC (MAC). In other cases, like causing something to ignite, a DC will have to be defined, something like 0 for a stack of dry papers and 5 for a stack of wet branches.

Items will provide a bonus to certain types of rolls or ACs and will look something like this:

Dagger
+1 str* or dex*

Magic Battle Axe [pre-req: Str 1]
+3 str*

Helmet
+1 PAC (Physical AC)

Breastplate [pre-req: Str 2]
+2 PAC

Wand of Fire [pre-req: Int 2]
+1 int fire spells
Allows user to cast a fire spell 1/day

Holy Symbol [pre-req Wis 2]
+1 Wis*
+2 Wis vs undead
Allows user to cast light spell 3/day

Lockpicks [pre-req: Dex 1]
+1 Dex to open locks
Allows user to attempt to open locks

*would only apply to rolls that make sense, so for weapons it would always apply to attacks, but an axe would provide this bonus for chopping a door, a dagger to prying something up or cutting a rope or something. A pickaxe might provide its bonus to climbing or digging, etc. Anything that you can reasonably justify. They do not modify your base stats which then roll into hp and defenses.

The idea is to make everything more simple. One roll and a few numbers.

Part of the FATE system also involves things like creating advantages, which boils down to changing the environment for later exploitation (setting fire to a room, creating difficult terrain, blinding someone or making them dizzy, etc). The general idea is that creating some favorable condition will allow you or someone else to apply a +2 to a roll that would reasonably benefit from that condition. Because the distribution of FATE dice at the extremes become very improbable, a +2 is a big deal in cases where rolling a 3 or 4 will just barely let you succeed, which incentivizes alternate actions.

For instance, if you are fighting something with defenses in the 5 range and you can only muster a +3 to your rolls, you only damage when rolling a 3 or higher (6.17% chance). If you can give yourself or someone else a +2, your odds improve by about 32%. The things you do to improve conditions can have any conceivable difficulty, so you look to the environment or situation to find things that are relatively easy to do.

I think a shortcut would be something like trying to trip an opponent rather than damage them directly, so, maybe I would use only their dex for a DC instead fo their PAC (str+dex). Being prone would give someone else a +2 to their roll. Generally speaking, such bonuses can only be exploited once or twice before going away. I would also say that opponents would get wise to certain maneuvers, so you couldn't spam the same actions without the DC rolling in their normal defense.

An analog to a mental/emotional attack would be instead of doing 'intimidation' damage you try to goad someone to distract them, thereby attack only cha and providing a subsequent +2 for someone else.

Instead of generating or picking scores we can also do something like Race/class/background, each of which provides a set bonus (like con for dwarves or dex for elves) and a free stat that you can put anywhere.

Or roll 1d4-1 and re-roll the set if it doesn't add up to at least 8 (which is a little less than just picking). Otherwise, something like an array of 3,2,2,1,1,0.

If we do this we can introduce 'stunts' which would be a bonus you can use on a specific type of action a limited number of times. In the FATE system these are based on character aspects which might be described as, "smashing is always an option". So if you do something with that basic sentiment, which I would extend to "smashing a dialogue, or smashing a polite dinner party" in the sense that you do something unexpected and confrontational or destructive in the generic sense, then you can apply that bonus. The idea is to live out your character traits.

There is a little more nuance with fate points, but I don't think we need to incorporate that.
Ratt
player, 134 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 20:39
  • msg #184

Re: Sleep and long rests

Or, if you want to do 5e...

I am going to fast forward Seth to a campaign I have mostly sketched out. If anyone wants to join his level 2 wizard go to Dryad's Curse.

link to another game

You are welcome to make a level 1 character, or bring a previously used character of your choosing.

Level:
1
Race: Any dnd published races.
Class: Any dnd Published class or class option (including alternate ranger).
Stats: 4d6 drop lowest, arrange to desire. After rolling you may choose point buy instead.
Hit points: 1st, 2nd, 3rd level max, roll thereafter. After rolling you may choose "Book average" (HD/2+1). You may do this separately for each level.
Background: Feel free to make one up using the guidelines in the book.
The World
GM, 170 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 22:56
  • msg #185

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Ratt (msg # 183):

I like the idea of no classes.  I also like the idea of rolling something with a bell curve shape like 4d3-8 rather than 1d20 (which is flat).
Ratt
player, 135 posts
Fri 30 Nov 2018
at 23:31
  • msg #186

Re: Sleep and long rests

4d3-8, clever. Yeah, that is the probability of FATE dice. In the rpol dice roller you can choose FUDGE dice in one of the drop downs, but then you have to add modifiers afterward.

But if you have a modifier, like str +3 for an attack, you can roll 4d3-5.

Theoretically, we can just add 8 to everything and use a 3d4 distribution, but I like the idea of the baseline being 0 instead of 8. I think it makes generating challenges more intuitive.
The World
GM, 171 posts
Sat 1 Dec 2018
at 01:16
  • msg #187

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Ratt (msg # 186):

I also like 0 being the baseline.  2d3-2d3 is also equivalent, but maybe more brain power to subtract dice and have to chose which ones are negative, but I just tested and the rpol dice roller will do it.  I think 1d10-1d10 might look nice.
Zip
player, 70 posts
Mon 3 Dec 2018
at 18:23
  • msg #188

Re: Sleep and long rests

i would be down for any of those options
Matt
GM, 24 posts
Mon 3 Dec 2018
at 19:30
  • msg #189

Re: Sleep and long rests

In reply to Zip (msg # 188):

I would like to revive an old idea, which is that different races should have different distributions. My further two-cents are that you should have three distributions: racially uniform, racially normal, and racially random. Die values are subjective, but an extreme demonstration would be:

Uniform: 9d2
Normal: 6d3
Random: 1d20
Ratt
player, 136 posts
Mon 3 Dec 2018
at 20:35
  • msg #190

Dice rolling game

I second the motion to revive that discussion. The idea being that for each stat (str, dex, con, etc.) you decide if a race would have a uniform, normal, or random distribution and roll that set of dice for stat so a dwarf might be:

str 9d2 (uniformly strong)
dex 3d6 (normally dexterous)
con 9d2 (uniformly constitutional)
int 3d6 (normally smart)
wis 3d6 (normaly wise)
cha 1d20 (randomly charismatic)

Then you roll and what you get is what you get. You can add onto each dice set a modifier, or mins/maxes.

I believe there is a more indepth discussion about this on another game that has two vectors, one being distrubition and the other being talent. So a race can be consistenly high, low, or average in a stat. Or the distribution can be random, but taken as a whole they can be, better, worse, or on par with average. (Some other terms for these concepts are accurate and precise, accurate meaning the average is on target and precise meaning that the distribution is tight, but maybe off target).

You could also, potentially, add modifiers based on class and background or just what you want to stack.

So, maybe you have +6 that you can distribute around. I would say though that maybe it should be 6 points and the cost to get a +1 to any stat (pre-roll) costs 1 for random, 2 for normal, and 3 for uniform, since a uniform roll averages 13.5 with little deviation from the mean. So a +1 represents an high probability of a 15, a min of 10 and a max of 19; and a +2 would be a 16, 11, and 20 respectively.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[The following is what I was going to post, but then saw that Matt had posted]


I was thinking about how you could convert the d20 system (5e, etc.) into percentile (each point = 5%), then rolling dice such that 50% becomes the baseline and adding modifiers in 5% increments.

The most obvious rolling scheme being 1d100 which yeilds an average of 50 with an equal probability of each number rolled. The other options I calculated using the basic form of xdy-x = (average of 50.5, max 100, min 1) and came up with these options:

1d100-0
3d34-2
9d12-8
11d10-10
33d4-32
99d2-98

link
https://anydice.com/program/127e8
Ratt
player, 137 posts
Tue 4 Dec 2018
at 21:37
  • msg #191

Dice rolling game

Or you can just roll 76 and then you win our dice rolling game.
Rose
player, 89 posts
Tue 4 Dec 2018
at 21:49
  • msg #192

Dice rolling game

Though i never use it i prefer the point buy system for fairness and consistency. I would make the cost different depending on ability and race. For example, I'd make the higher strength and con scores cheaper for dwarves. Basically, use the racial modifiers to alter point buy and then drop the modifiers.
Ratt
player, 138 posts
Tue 4 Dec 2018
at 23:47
  • msg #193

Dice rolling game

I don't know what I prefer. I mean, I know what I prefer, which is high stats. I want 18's across the board.

But in theory I like the idea of other things.

I think I have brought this up before, but I like the idea of having an array where you get a good prime requisite stat (16), a really good stat in a non-prime requisite (18), and the rest be average (maybe just roll 3d6, or 4d6 drop lowest).

So, like really smart barbarians. Really strong wizards. Super charismatic monks. Etc.

I think you would have to exclude dex and maybe con, because of universal appeal.

One issue, of course, is that you can make a build that plays to the strength, so it would be difficult to identify a fair dump stat. Maybe. Here is a try

Barbarian: Int
Bard: Wis
Cleric: Int
Druid: Cha
Fighter: Int
Monk: Cha
Paladin: Int
Ranger: Int
Rogue: Wis
Sorcerer: Str
Warlock: Wis
Wizard: Str
The World
GM, 172 posts
Tue 4 Dec 2018
at 23:57
  • msg #194

Dice rolling game

I think we should create our own rule book, and not burden ourselves with actually having to ever play the game we create.

One running joke we have in our office is the perfect project is the one that goes all the way through design and then loses funding and never gets built.
Matt
GM, 25 posts
Wed 5 Dec 2018
at 22:18
  • msg #195

Dice rolling game

In reply to The World (msg # 194):

Everything works perfectly until the actual work starts.
Ratt
player, 139 posts
Wed 5 Dec 2018
at 23:06
  • msg #196

Dice rolling game

I am pretty sure the best job in the entire world is to be a researcher at a think tank.
Matt
GM, 26 posts
Thu 6 Dec 2018
at 01:25
  • msg #197

Dice rolling game

In reply to Ratt (msg # 196):

This is essentially what I have sold myself to be inside of Amazon.
Ratt
player, 140 posts
Thu 6 Dec 2018
at 18:25
  • msg #198

Dice rolling game

Option 1: 5e and decide on a creation process or import a character
Option 2: Use homebrew/FATE system

Polls are now open.
Matt
GM, 27 posts
Thu 6 Dec 2018
at 19:00
  • msg #199

Dice rolling game

In reply to Ratt (msg # 198):

My non-playing vote is option 2. I'd participate in homebrewing.
Ratt
player, 141 posts
Tue 11 Dec 2018
at 00:53
  • msg #200

Dice rolling game

I added Adam to Dryad's Curse, so maybe I will make thread for people to post into.
link to another game
Ratt
player, 143 posts
Thu 30 May 2019
at 18:32
  • msg #201

Dice rolling game

If you give me the link to morgrims character sheet I could potentially run his turns.
The World
GM, 175 posts
Thu 30 May 2019
at 19:21
  • msg #202

Dice rolling game

https://drive.google.com/open?...BaoYumewebbfAHtaR7sI

I think I also added the link to the character description, which I think you should have access to...
This message was last edited by the GM at 19:22, Thu 30 May 2019.
Ratt
player, 144 posts
Thu 30 May 2019
at 21:24
  • msg #203

Dice rolling game

Google says not found.
The World
GM, 176 posts
Fri 31 May 2019
at 20:14
  • msg #204

Dice rolling game

In reply to Ratt (msg # 203):

https://docs.google.com/spread...7sI/edit?usp=sharing

Try that one
The World
GM, 186 posts
Wed 5 Jun 2019
at 20:52
  • msg #205

Dice rolling game

Joe had a bunch of questions that we resolved over text.  Here are the answers.

The ladder up or down the tower is difficult terrain.  Towers are 20' tall so going up or down costs 40' of movement.

Attacking from the tower requires peeking above and around crenels enough times within a turn, in addition to having to pop out for a shot that you have 3/4 cover if you attack.  You can get full cover at the tower crenels as long as you don't make an attack.  So you can still see what's going on, or take another action that doesn't require exposing yo-self.

Spending a turn at half cover to get a better shot will give you advantage.

Looking at the orc band they have about 2 javelins a piece.

We are using the Forgotten Realms pantheon.

Let me know if anyone has any other questions.
The World
GM, 196 posts
Mon 10 Jun 2019
at 19:24
  • msg #206

Dice rolling game

In reply to Ratt (msg # 355):

I guess climbing already costs extra movement, without it being difficult terrain.  I think if it were difficult terrain it would cost 3 ft per 1 ft.  So the ladder is just a ladder, and it costs 2 ft per ft to climb up or down.

In this case though, Rose had almost 20' to get to the ladder, and then another 20' up the ladder.  No matter if it's jumping or climbing, is just under 40', so no matter how you traverse the vertical distance it is going to take a move and dash to get all the way up.  Getting to the ladder and then climbing costs just under 60'.  Getting to the ladder and jumping costs just under 40'.

I don't think jumping higher helps as you can just take another jump up to your movement.

I think a Dexterity(Athletics) check is appropriate to stay on the ladder, not knock the ladder down, etc.

So yes, I think you can climb a ladder faster by jumping, but jumping higher doesn't help, because you can take as many jumps as you need.  But it's harder to stay on the ladder if you are jumping, or maybe we could call it fast climbing, skipping rungs or something.  Let's say for the future it's a DC 12 to fast climb a ladder.  If you fail, you slip and cover only 1/2 the distance of normal climbing (4 ft per 1 ft), and if you succeed, you cover twice the distance of normal climbing (1 ft per 1 ft).

If you want to jump further or higher than normal, you can roll a Strength(Athletics) check.
Ratt
player, 158 posts
Fri 21 Jun 2019
at 18:59
  • msg #207

Dice rolling game

Point of order, I forgot to roll a concentration check when I got tagged, which I have rolled now, and failed, so I would have had to recast hex, which means I am out of slots, and that I would not have been able to transfer hex at the end of the round, so you may need to reroll the climb check for that one orc (8?), unless you know what his first roll was.
Ratt
player, 160 posts
Mon 24 Jun 2019
at 17:51
  • msg #208

Dice rolling game

During my adventures looking up mottes and moats:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Bourtange


Zip
player, 85 posts
Sun 30 Jun 2019
at 20:48
  • msg #209

Dice rolling game

question: when rollong with advantage as a halfling do you still re roll ones?
The World
GM, 217 posts
Mon 1 Jul 2019
at 04:23
The World
GM, 223 posts
Wed 17 Jul 2019
at 02:01
  • msg #211

Dice rolling game

Question from Joe posted here in case anyone else has a similar question.

Joe:
Hey, I was thinking of going back up the tower, and jumping down to the motte. Does it seem possible in a turn? Is it possible to do without taking damage? What would the roll be?


Climbing the ladder to the top of the tower is 40' of movement.  With a move and dash of 60' one could climb the ladder and jump down in a single turn.

It's a 20' drop from the tower to the motte, so that's 2d6 fall damage.  The motte is designed to be hard to climb, so I'm going to say very hard to land and not fall into the moat, DC 27 Dex/Acrobatics.

You have just enough room for a running start, so if you have a strength score of 10 or more you can clear the motte (and the crenels) and land in the moat.  As I understand there are no RAW for landing in water.  Here is my proposed homebrew.

Jumping/Diving into Water
heightDC (Dex/Acro)SuccessFail
0-10'--no dmgno dmg
10-19'7no dmg1d4 dmg
20-29'14no dmg2d4 dmg
30-60'16no dmg1d4 every 10'
>60'181/2 dmg1d6 every 10'

This message was last edited by the GM at 02:12, Wed 17 July 2019.
Sign In