EPTRollPlay -- D&D Campaign Show - Page 44
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
McDrizzle
United States131 Posts
| ||
|
Ryalnos
United States1946 Posts
One thing I find is that it's easy for players to forget to take common-sense actions that their characters would of course normally take - e.g. setting a watch when you're sleeping next to a goblin HQ. It would be quite reasonable for one of the characters to search some corpses after a battle, find nothing on them, and take it up with the thief. However, maybe a player who is less loot-focused (since their RP isn't centered around it) might not remember to do that until they get metagame info - livinpink saying that Abigael will loot the corpses. It all looks suspicious in part because we get an abbreviated account of what the party would do after battle - they might sharpen their swords, look around for other potential enemies, check to see their enemies are really dead, etc. so we only get the highlights, like potential confrontations between characters. The clear trigger of a (reasonable) action by metagame information looks all the worse for that. TL;DR One player may be reminded to do something by another player's secret actions, this doesn't mean the result is metagaming. | ||
|
Koibu0
United States513 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Original Message From Fuchsteufelswild: Pretty much all understood except I don't understand why you feel the need to write this bit: when we clearly just have different views and I'm making it very clear by going to extra lengths to make a point of showing I'm just discussing and trying to find out WHY you prefer certain things. I'm very clearly NOT arguing for the sake of arguing and it's disappointing you decided to claim that in a thread full of other people who are determined to ignore all that I say about "Yes it is your world and I'm just asking why and which of these you use" because it's easier for them to just attack the person discussing things, because anyone who writes plenty must be arguing, right? (many people's apparent mentality) So if you understand I'm not attacking you, you really should also grasp that I have no intention of arguing for the sake of arguing. :S With the effort and the amount of detail I like to put into things when having a discussion, I obviously will get crap from people who misunderstand, "white-knight" or can't see big posts without complaining about a lack of TL:DR or spoiler for their lazy benefit (they could just ignore the post...), so please, consider that it's already plenty of time, effort and thought being put in without doing things "just to argue". #_# I don't know why you'd say that, I would say that's just a hit to a critical area that luckily (for the creature/player hit) didn't end up doing much, like rolling a very low damage roll, but just to a more dangerous area. Maybe it's a bludgeoning blow that glanced across the back of the head without any part hitting directly onto the back of the skull when it could potentially have cracked it right open (with better rolls on the critical hit). You can get more creative (though this rigs a character's plot :Þ) and say (for example) "Tudagub, the blade went right towards where your appendix should be, but luckily, you already suffered and recovered from a case of appendicitis as a juvenile half-ogre, so it just stabbed flesh". Maybe the logic of my use of critical hits (which is what I always encountered before say Diablo 3's funky system) would actually rule that the appendix had to be there but was just scratched while the blade tore through less important flesh right next to it. And as for "Aid", well that's the thing, it's not like you have to call it that, like another person said (only they somehow thought their point went against what I was saying), they can do things like stick a bottle in someone's mouth and you grant someone a bonus/penalty, my point then is that that IS an "Aid" and sure they don't "need" to know that or some other specific name (nor do you need to use that term). I was asking if they are aware that they can try actions like that not just for comedy but for bonuses, or if it's only up to chance whether they decide to try to do something like that and then later find out to their delight that you're giving them a little bonus for it. If they know in advance they can get bonuses this way it might open up strategies that they might normally dismiss out of fear that the action would be useless. Ciao! I'm sorry you were offended or put off by my phrasings, they were not designed in that way. The rest of your posts were points of contention that I could see room for discussion, but I thought it was fairly obvious that by the numbers it's better for people to take the biggest weapon they can. As to the comments on criticaling, it seemed to me that you took exception to the idea that critical hits could be something other than hitting a weak point. The way you phrased things made it seem like you thought a critical hit should, by definition, be dealing more damage by striking a weak point. That's not the case in this system. I said Are you bothered that people say "Critical hit! oh shit, it didn't do much "? because it seemed that your exception to the system was the language about the word "Critical".Again, this is a house ruled version of 2nd edition. Please don't impose assumptions from other D&D systems, Pen and paper games, or video games (you've mentioned D3 a few times in posts). I grow frustrated having to explain the crit system. And "Aid"? No, there is no Aid ability. The shoving a bottle of wine down the goblin was not aid. He made an attack roll to do that. He did aid his friend, but he didn't Aid his friend. Notice the distinction between lower and upper case aid. True to Pen and Paper gaming, players can take any actions they want. Many actions have bonuses, but there are almost no actions they can take that give bonuses without having to make some sort of die roll (full defense being the exception). I want to avoid a numbers game, where players think about the bonuses and work from there - I want RollPlay to be about immersion and not "gaming the system" with actions like, "For my turn, I'm going to Aid Bregor against the ogre he's fighting". I want the players to say, "I try to distract the ogre by doing x,y,z" which may or may not aid his Bregor. The ogre may ignore it, may change his course of action, may be caught off guard, etc., but there is not 1:1 "Aid" to bonus relationship. I hope this clears things up for you. | ||
|
Mandini
United States1717 Posts
| ||
|
Koibu0
United States513 Posts
| ||
|
Mandini
United States1717 Posts
On April 13 2013 04:04 Koibu0 wrote: If you roll a 1, you make a save vs. death. If you fail, some sort of bad effect. The worse you fail, the worse the effect. In normal campaigns, players roll the save vs. death. On stream, I roll it to make things go faster (although I've been thinking about changing that). I feel like that would be better from a spectator perspective, its always nice to know how badly they have screwed up, or how close they came to an adverse effect, etc. | ||
|
Grettin
42417 Posts
Great week and loving the show all around. | ||
|
Dark Lord
United States38 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
I applaud you! | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
| ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
On April 15 2013 02:07 Ramong wrote: think you mean halberd Neal has said repeatedly they're not halberds in that universe, but rather halabreds. I don't get it, but Scrubwave isn't wrong. | ||
|
willoc
Canada1530 Posts
| ||
|
Koibu0
United States513 Posts
On April 15 2013 02:04 Scrubwave wrote: Neal, you mentioned that daggers can be thrown 2 per round. What about speed of other weapons, say a short sword vs a halabread? Weapon speed doesn't translate to attacks per round. You get one dagger attack per round in melee, but two throws per round. in 2nd edition, each combat round was ~1 minute, which was meant to imply lots of feints and attacks and blocks, etc. and the one roll you make is for that opening you get. So, with a dagger, you'd get one shot per round to stab a bitch, but if you were throwing, you wouldn't have to worry about feinting, blocking dodging, etc. so you could throw two daggers. Some people argue, "Well, why don't we just roll for all those attacks?" which is a valid point, and why D&D moved to 6 second rounds later on. | ||
|
imJealous
United States1382 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
Think he got 2 hits with an hit penalty to the offhand weapon | ||
|
McDrizzle
United States131 Posts
On April 15 2013 04:57 imJealous wrote: So Neal, I've been wondering how it would work if someone tried to use a weapon in each hand, like a pair of daggers or short swords perhaps. Would they get two attack rolls per turn? one attack roll with extra damage rolls? or they can only attack with one "hand" per turn? off hand would get penalty if you do not specialize in dual wielding weapons. They would get 2 attack rolls that turn. Edit 3 and a half hours more =x (estimated). | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On April 15 2013 00:56 Dark Lord wrote: OP updated and slightly redone. Links to all current videos are now up to date. I would appreciate a better picture for Neal as DM. I would try to photoshop something myself, but I'm not really sure how to make a picture to depict an all powerful creator/destroyer of worlds. If you make something cool feel free to pm me or post it here. I plan on adding more useful information to the OP in the future. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/0/229/92105-67800-galactus.jpg) That might help ^^ just photoshop neals face onto it. | ||
|
Daogin
Canada2308 Posts
| ||
|
daemir
Finland8662 Posts
On April 15 2013 05:07 Ramong wrote: Didn't Geoff do that in on episode? Think he got 2 hits with an hit penalty to the offhand weapon Yes he did | ||
| ||
