|
On January 08 2015 06:13 ComaDose wrote:If i understand correctly 3.5 was the only one to have the different sized weapons do different damage (by 1 die size like you described). in 3.0 the size just meant which creature could use it one handed if i recall correctly, so small creatures could use medium weapons with 2 hands or w.e. were you were tossing around medium sized daggers last night? 
In 5th apparently its just daggers. a giants dagger would be a long sword or short sword depending on scale. i suppose this would onyl cause problems when trying to go off the scale in one way or another. what would you roll for a pixies short sword? or a collosus's two handed hammer?
|
wait so i could have actually dual wielded the entire time?
i assumed i'd need 2 hands for a med size rapier
(and then i used the small size damage roll anyway because i forgot i was one-weaponing instead)
|
well you can only dual wield light weapons without a feat but you can use a rapier with one hand just like a med creature.
|
PSA - YOU CAN ONLY DUAL WIELD (WITHOUT FEAT) IF BOTH WEAPONS ARE LIGHT.
because I made the same mistake
|
1) Railroading has some negative connotations and so i probably shouldn't have used that term. In this context you're not railroading by making options and goals clear or making dungeons finite all you're doing is speeding up the game. The negative railroading is when other options to the plot seem open, but really aren't. In this case we had a goal, we wanted to complete it, we were not given a path to complete it except to faff about in the dark and hope either we did what the plot required, or the DM fixed the problems essentially by fudging. Fixing the problem of no path to complete the goal isn't railroading, its
Maybe this will make sense. In an adventure you have three basic structures. Choices, Challenges, and goals.
The goal is the end point. Where the players want to end up. Goals, more or less, should be chosen in tandem with the players and DM. In a one shot this doesn't really have time to happen you're just given a goal. No biggie. In a normal plot the DM should provide enough impetus that the players would choose that option. Not choosing the option is almost tantamount to quitting the campaign.
I say that goals should be chosen in tandem because the DM should look at his players motivation and craft a plot/goal that fits with them. If everyone is in it for the money, then saving a village with no reward isn't a plot that the DM should prepare for the players.
Challenges are things you must overcome and are linear in their structure. A fight is a challenge, a cliff you must climb or river you must cross is a challenge. Challenges are scenes for which the adventure plays out. They drive the plot forward, they create the action etc. But other than that they're pretty simple. A challenge, essentially needs to be solvable.
Choices are where you choose what you're doing. You either choose goals, choose challenges, or choose the order of goals or challenges. But in order to do that you need to know what you're choosing between. In the first choice. In this one we have some "correct" answer that brings us closer to our goal, but we don't know which it is. We are not choosing challenges to face, nor are we choosing goals to proceed to. "you can go north which passes the mines of phat loot or south to the village of "needs saving all the time but has no money." is a good choice. We have more choices when we get to each one, do we take the phat loot for ourselves or do we give it to the village that needs saving? Do we take the loot and ransack the village? Do we do one or the other first?
Similarly "you can go north to follow the light tracks, into the easily ambushable canyon, or south to take the long way around" is a good choice. We know our challenges, in one we will probably have to face an ambush, in the other we have to make sure we ride/run fast and hard possibly being exhausted when we hit the other side, where our goal should meet. Maybe we have a third option, the magical path through the forest, only revealed to us by our perception. Which is direct and so would not have to worry about being exhausted, and we are pretty sure the kidnappers didn't take because there are no tracks, but we might have to deal with the spirit of the woods.
There are no railroads in these choices, just challenges, since we have already (well by virtue of one shot) chosen our goal*. The only time players should be faced with choices the challenges or goals are unclear for is when the system is closed and taking an option clearly eliminates it. Dungeons are prime examples, you have a goal which is at the end, but you don't know what is in any of the rooms. All you know is that all of the ways probably get to the end eventually.
Take the first choice for example. Only one choice is "correct" for our goal and so, were we to know it, they would essentially be no choice. Instead we kind of have to make some strange decision where we go one of three ways and have no clue what happens, whether we're closer to our goal, whether there are challenges or not. We are lost and so the characters are lost and being lost leads to inaction.
Take the path to the wolf fight "that is the way to the solution to the problem... But its guarded" we only really have one option. Go towards where our goal is, but its presented as if we have 3 options. The other three options are non options, they aren't alternate paths that take longer or have different challenges, they're just paths that lead to nowhere as far as we know. They're just there for the sake of being there and slowing down the decision making process.
2)No, i didn't take a shield because they're OP as shit(and i didn't want the "feel" of playing a shield user). Being easier to hit (and most enemies knowing this) is a side advantage.
*Here is an example of how you can put that together into a "false choice" situation which works for the DM and players
a) Fork in road; North to mine, south to village
b) Regardless of above choice, ambush(?)/spirt(after check)/difficult road -> end at village/mine whichever was chosen. Change ambush type to fit plot of whichever goal was chosen.
c) get to mine/village choose to ransac or save. You can prepare the same encounter for every encounter here, players will never know, just tweak it a bit for flavor(who you're fighting essentially) depending on what you choose to do.
Players get to choose the challenge and choose the goal. No railroading. But also little time spent wasted wondering what to do. Any arguments on what to do are roleplaying focused not "we don't know what we should do focused"
|
On January 08 2015 05:56 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2015 05:48 wei2coolman wrote:On January 08 2015 05:46 jcarlsoniv wrote:
As far as I know, 5e doesn't care at all about weapon usage with characters of varying sizes.
I think something that is 2 sizes larger than another creature gets advantage (and vice versa with disadvantage), but I could be making that up/confusing that with something else. IIRC like a "long sword" for a small character has a smaller damage roll compared to a long sword of a large character, and stuff like that. I think being small relative to a big person also adds on to their AC? I don't remember the specifics. No. but the size of the weapon matters. if its a long sword made for goblins its not going to be as powerful as a long sword made for giants. its scale of weapon not creature. also keep in mind with goumindongs interpretation of PnP adventures every character is aware of the game and the game mechanics down to understanding how dice rolls work. so its not that you are in a world, but you are in a game with a world to him.
No. My interpretation is not that, but that you know the general effects. You know hitting with a longsword does slashing and not piercing damage. You know that hitting with a longsword two handed is more damage than one handed but less than a greatsword. You know that some armor is better and makes you harder to hit/take less damage and can reasonably identify those types of armors. You know that wizards exist and cast spells and can recognize when a wizard casts spells even if you can't identify what spell it was or whether they're a cleric or wizard or sorcerer or bard or druid absent obvious indications, none of which matter because the other aspects that matter will be immediately obvious(like wearing armor, which weapons are strapped to them etc)
In 5e there is no size distinction on weapons. Small/Medium characters can use the same weapons unless that weapon is considered heavy (then small characters cannot use it iirc). DM digression on larger equipment.
Halflings can wield longswords just fine in one hand and do the same 1d8 as humans do and can dual wield shortswords just as a human would. And can dual wield longswords just as human would if they also had the requisite feat
|
i was supposed to track him for you as a ranger but... there was magic afoot
e: small can use heavy weapons with a disadvantage
|
On January 08 2015 06:28 ComaDose wrote:
i was supposed to track him for you as a ranger but... there was magic afoot
e: small can use heavy weapons with a disadvantage
Ahh yes, that is what it is. Though disadvantage basically means you can't use the weapon
|
I can't tell what people actually thought of the squirrel shenanigans.
Some people thought it was funny, some people thought it was because I don't know how to play/RP, some people thought it added or detracted from the story/situation...
I wouldn't mind some feedback on my personal performance I suppose to clear things up? (less from a strictly technical standpoint I suppose because there is no way I will ever play the way GMD seems to be outlining, though obviously as I'm new there will be ways for me to learn/interact better within combat and without)
|
the concept of "damage" doesn't exist in a roleplayed world dude. thats what i mean. no one knows oh this does Fire damage or force damage or slashing or whatever. you know a longsword is a slashing weapon, but you can slash with a dagger too its not always piercing damage. :/ you game-ify the world far too much. it makes it uninteresting to discuss and talk about the way you do. if i want a numbers simulator i play a CRPG and minmax it. i dont play DnD to look at a world of magic and history and see dice and damage types.
On January 08 2015 06:53 WaveofShadow wrote:
I can't tell what people actually thought of the squirrel shenanigans.
Some people thought it was funny, some people thought it was because I don't know how to play/RP, some people thought it added or detracted from the story/situation...
I wouldn't mind some feedback on my personal performance I suppose to clear things up? (less from a strictly technical standpoint I suppose because there is no way I will ever play the way GMD seems to be outlining, though obviously as I'm new there will be ways for me to learn/interact better within combat and without)
it was super out of the blue, and it kind of seemed like you were confusing what you was going on. because we had started to walk down this magical path, but the ranger saw us walk through a tree. then without words goumindong knew to tie a rope around himself and throw it back to the ranger, leaving this rope trailing him the rest of the day. an then you picked up a squirrel on the magic path and tossed it outside the path like you expected it to do something special.
On January 08 2015 06:20 jcarlsoniv wrote:
PSA - YOU CAN ONLY DUAL WIELD (WITHOUT FEAT) IF BOTH WEAPONS ARE LIGHT.
because I made the same mistake
You missed your chance to be a badass with two hand crossbows and a bunch of loaded hand crossbows stored on your person.
|
We had already gone inside the tree?
I think I was really confused then because I thought we hadn't gone in yet. There was a lot of random as hell checking going on in the beginning and I think I got lost mentally if that was the case.
|
On January 08 2015 07:04 WaveofShadow wrote:
We had already gone inside the tree?
I think I was really confused then because I thought we hadn't gone in yet. There was a lot of random as hell checking going on in the beginning and I think I got lost mentally if that was the case.
I, too, had thought you all were still outside the path
|
yeah maybe. we also didnt know it was tree. no one else saw the illusion but the ranger and he never told us what he saw either. when a lot of stuff is happening i take small notes to avoid getting lost. maybe try that next time? 
|
I honestly thought you were doing it just so you could also roll a million checks at literally nothing like all the cool kids did
|
You couldn't even see the tree lol only i could.
you followed the sparkly path. i couldn't see it so i held onto the rope and uncomfortably stepped through what appeared to be the solid wood of a tree.
like we were not inside a tree... there was just an obscured path that the magic users could see clearly through and i saw trees and bush in the way but could walk through them uncomfortably.
I think asmo was clear that we started moving again and said something like 30ft behind you when talking about where the "wooden portal" was that wave mentioned. maybe at that point it should have been clear he didnt understand exactly the sitch and a step back with an explanation would have helped.
|
In conclusion, maybe fewer checks for fucking everything and a little less confusing location-based RP?
|
i think visual aids from asmo would have helped a lot as he was describing what we saw. even crude drawings give everyone a common ground.
and sorry about the history checks and stuff, i like to know background as would my character. and i figured any knowledge of whats happened in the past in the area and what we might be facing would be beneficial. like we were looking for a kidnapper, and if there was like a longstanding feud between him and a neighbor we'd know who might have done it. ect.
|
I thought most of your checks were pretty reasonable
|
On January 08 2015 07:11 PrinceXizor wrote:
i think visual aids from asmo would have helped a lot as he was describing what we saw. even crude drawings give everyone a common ground.
and sorry about the history checks and stuff, i like to know background as would my character. and i figured any knowledge of whats happened in the past in the area and what we might be facing would be beneficial. like we were looking for a kidnapper, and if there was like a longstanding feud between him and a neighbor we'd know who might have done it. ect.
Oh don't get me wrong, I totally get exactly what you were doing and why, but at some point I think maybe if Asmo knows that it isn't going anywhere he needs to do something to curb it a little/movr us along so stupid shit (squirrels included?) doesn't get out of hand.
|
I never gave up on looking for tracks but that seemed reasonable to my character at the time. Maybe i should have even rolled more knowledge nature but the couple times i tried it was obvious i wasn't in my woods anymore so i let the more learned men take the lead on that.
had a sweet flute jam sesh tho
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
