This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Quirky in what way?

Like all non-humans? Thats as old as D&D, probably older.

Or they all had weird and overly elaborate backgrounds? Thats been around too. Just not as overwhelming as it feels modern games seem to obsess over.

Thanks. That was my question too.
2
Yes and no. If you use the modern 4 person adventuring party, one is probably going to be useless except for that one fight where he uses sleep.

But back in the day if you had 6 to 12 people in the party, he could hide in the back throwing darts or whatnot until sleep was needed.

This was my experience as well. A clutch sleep or charm person was the main contribution. The secondary contribution was as a pack mule.

Our usual approach was for a wizard to find* a wand of magic missiles pretty early in their career, and give them something to do/use when their big spells would be wasted.

*GM discretion when placing treasure.

Fantastic idea. That never occurred to us.
3
With regard to magic users, we need to take a look at how they started out. In original pre-supplement OD&D there were only three classes. The fighting man got 1d6+1 hit points and the magic user and clerics each got 1d6, not exactly a huge disparity there. Since there were no bonuses to hit or damage for STR the fighting man only had a 5% edge in attacking in combat and EVERYONE did 1d6 damage on a hit  regardless of weapon. In fighting ability the cleric and magic user user fought as 1 man and the fighting man fought as 1 man +1. The cleric and fighting man could both wear armor while the magic user couldn't. Before skill systems and other assorted baggage was added, all characters were assumed to be equally competent general adventurers. Everyone could climb, ride, survive in the woods, and sneak around (if not heavily armored).

So in retrospect the original magic user wasn't particularly weak in relation to the other classes. Then comes:

- massive STR bonuses for fighters
-reordering the combat tables to leave magic users fighting as normal men for 5 LEVELS. In OD&D the magic user fought as 2+1 man at level 4.
-variable weapon damage leaving magic users with only d4 weapons
-reducing magic user hit dice to d4 while promoting the fighter to d10
-introducing a specialist thief class that gave the impression that other classes suddenly couldn't sneak around anymore.

So I firmly blame AD&D for making the magic user into the ultimate pussy.
4
Yes and no. If you use the modern 4 person adventuring party, one is probably going to be useless except for that one fight where he uses sleep.

But back in the day if you had 6 to 12 people in the party, he could hide in the back throwing darts or whatnot until sleep was needed.

This was my experience as well. A clutch sleep or charm person was the main contribution. The secondary contribution was as a pack mule.

Our usual approach was for a wizard to find* a wand of magic missiles pretty early in their career, and give them something to do/use when their big spells would be wasted.

*GM discretion when placing treasure.
5
The way WotC is marketing this is just weird.  It's like they are trying to have their cake and eat it too.  They want to make a new edition but they don't want to alienate all of the 5e players.  So it's 5e but it's also not 5e.  It's the same but different.  It's okay if things go away because they will still be there?  What the fuck?  Either it goes away or it doesn't go away.  Is it 5e again or is it different?  If it's 5e again, why does anyone need it?  Are they removing things or not?  Why can't they just tell us what this product is going to be?

Because if they told us we'd wouldnt buy it. Perkins has already stated the DMG will practically push storygamer screeds like "The DM is there to serve the players and every player is a DM!" What DM is going to buy a book that tells them they have to be the players slave?

Slave is a banned word at Wizards of the Woke. The DM will be referred to as the facilitator of player fantasies while players are editors of their own unique stories. That is woke speak for slave to to a bunch of narcasisstic wanna-be actors.
6
I'm still on the fence with Perkins. On one hand, all of the evidence in front of my face. On the other, this dude has a true and deep love of the game. From being an absolute pest until getting his stuff published as a teenager to DM'g on stage for years and years despite reportedly suffering from crippling anxiety, my current status with CP is...complicated.

I'm taking a wait and see with this one. Although, if I pushed my chips in...my guess is he'll make all the concessions he needs to the overlords and we'll have Soy D&D.
7
You could view an adventuring party more like one of those "lost expedition" type media ("starring Doug McLure") where the professor (the "magic user" in D&D's case) is the specialist who has no combat skills whatsoever (and fights with his umbrella, in one example) but is needed for their knowledge of archaeology/anthropology/botany or whatever. Magic users aren't just spell repositories - they should have an understanding of magical stuff that the fighters and other adventurers don't have.
8
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

That's getting into what the D&D attributes actually represent, which is a whole other can of worms. I see no reason why a wheelchair-bound character could not be an expert marksman, at least with a crossbow or firearm. But I'm also not giving them a dodge bonus to AC. Where that gets complicated is that the Dex bonus to AC theoretically incorporates both parrying and dodging. While being in a wheelchair would badly hinder your ability to fence, it doesn't make parrying impossible, so maybe limit on the max AC bonus they can get from Dexterity would be in order. I'd penalize the shit out of their reflexes-based saving throws, too.

If the wheelchair got suddenly vaporized they would be prone, and that would do whatever it otherwise does in the game rules.

Agreed.  You can have an 18 in dex and be completely helpless in combat with a horrible AC because your (lack of) mobility overrides the general rule of dex and AC just like being restrained.  The dex still has full effect both regardless of whether you're in a wheelchair for appropriate ranged attacks as well as other potentially picking locks or crafting intricate items.
9
Yes and no. If you use the modern 4 person adventuring party, one is probably going to be useless except for that one fight where he uses sleep.

But back in the day if you had 6 to 12 people in the party, he could hide in the back throwing darts or whatnot until sleep was needed.

This was my experience as well. A clutch sleep or charm person was the main contribution. The secondary contribution was as a pack mule.
10
Just like Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, there isn't a new edition... until a few years from now, we've always been at war with Eurasia and they admit there is a new edition and your old stuff isn't compatible.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10