Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I'd like to do something like this when the two new guys get more accustomed to actually roleplaying. Combat seems to draw people in but when the roleplaying ends up being the most fun imo
I've never witnessed someone make that transition. People who like it long term tend to join for the role playing. The combat stuff tends to turn those people off so you risk losing people if there is too much of that and too little role play.
So much this. You will never convert people from one to another style of play. Yeah sure, the odd person might, but I can say that in all my years of playing, I have never met said person.
If you try and force it you will have nothing but unhappy players or DM.
We certainly have role playing and there are rare nights that we have no combat at all, but it is rare. We are a combat encounter focused bunch really.
That does not mean that we have no story or roleplaying.
Both of these happened in game:
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/109/about-ayla
https://daerma.com/history-lore/arg-discusses-the-origins-of-the-power-masters-and-the-ancients/I'd never try to convert them I just need to give them breathing room to open up a little to the RP part of the game. I think I'd actually have a lot more fun DM'ing than I would playing but I need to learn a lot more about...everything practically.
Hard to make a transition when the system actively discourages role play.
It is the players not the system, barring 4e.
Recent editions of D&D are largely a miniatures battle first and an RPG as a way distant second(at best) priority.
While 4e was this, 5e is not. Prior to moving to Chicagoland, I was a player in a D&D group every other Friday in a 3.5e campaign. That campaign was many, many nights of story encounters and the dice were rolled more for skill checks than combat. It all comes down to the players.
If you are interested in story input and role playing from players you probably want to look at other systems. If you are happy with the way things go currently then play on!
This is certainly true. there are definitely other systems out there for a more pure roleplaying/story-telling game.
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it. 3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Players definitely influence what goes on heavily and if you don't have buy in from most or all of the group to a significant degree there is little point in switching things up. Even if another system might support their priorities in a better fashion.
-
If your players like combat and dying... a lot... Dungeon Crawl Classic has this really cool module called Funnel Adventures. Each player gets like five to ten 0 Level characters, they are hilariously weak so they are fun to throw at various insane encounters.
-
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5e -
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
I did 4e last game. I'm going back to 3.5 I think, though. I just like it and have stuff.
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
-
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
I've been thinking of moving to Pathfinder. Need to get the books.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
I've been thinking of moving to Pathfinder. Need to get the books.
I really like what Pazio has done to the ruleset. It's still 100% compatible with 3.5 but they've been adding and updated a lot of stuff. It's a bit more crunchy (or about the same) but if you liked 3.5 you'll love a lot of the additions that Pathfinder adds.
-
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
I've been thinking of moving to Pathfinder. Need to get the books.
I really like what Pazio has done to the ruleset. It's still 100% compatible with 3.5 but they've been adding and updated a lot of stuff. It's a bit more crunchy (or about the same) but if you liked 3.5 you'll love a lot of the additions that Pathfinder adds.
Humble Bundle did a collection of Pathfinder stuff not too long ago that I picked up. The basic system books and a couple different adventure paths. At some point I need to open those up and see what's what.
-
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
I've been thinking of moving to Pathfinder. Need to get the books.
I really like what Pazio has done to the ruleset. It's still 100% compatible with 3.5 but they've been adding and updated a lot of stuff. It's a bit more crunchy (or about the same) but if you liked 3.5 you'll love a lot of the additions that Pathfinder adds.
Humble Bundle did a collection of Pathfinder stuff not too long ago that I picked up. The basic system books and a couple different adventure paths. At some point I need to open those up and see what's what.
Oh darn it, that woudl have been perfect.
-
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@NDC said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
I will admit to ignorance on the 5e front. 4e left a bad taste and I never really looked at it.
Hard to blame you. But when I decided to restart my online campaign, I decided to go with 5e to give it a fair shake.
3.5 definitely has some flexibility and is my sweet spot for D&D though I prefer other systems.
Same for me. I started playing during the 1e years and have moved along with the editions. I really like 3.5e the best of all the D&D editions. That is why I have recently talked to my players and we are migrating our campaign back to 3.5e.
https://obelisk.daerma.com/topic/91/daerma-adventures-is-conveting-back-to-3-5eYou get all the advantages of the Pathfinder community/material as well which is a really nice advantage to sticking with the older version. I still prefer 5E if I have to play D&D though.
I've been thinking of moving to Pathfinder. Need to get the books.
I really like what Pazio has done to the ruleset. It's still 100% compatible with 3.5 but they've been adding and updated a lot of stuff. It's a bit more crunchy (or about the same) but if you liked 3.5 you'll love a lot of the additions that Pathfinder adds.
Humble Bundle did a collection of Pathfinder stuff not too long ago that I picked up. The basic system books and a couple different adventure paths. At some point I need to open those up and see what's what.
BundleOfHolding does a ton of good stuff as well. Definitely something to keep an eye on if you have the "Gotta collect em all" issue that I have.
-
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there were an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the event and in context of the situation.
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the even and in context of the situation.
It's pretty impossible to prepare for another person's imagination for sure. I'm just trying to plan out my arcane trickster and I'm very interested in Phantasmal Force. Seems very useful.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the even and in context of the situation.
It's pretty impossible to prepare for another person's imagination for sure. I'm just trying to plan out my arcane trickster and I'm very interested in Phantasmal Force. Seems very useful.
Certainly a useful spell if you are dealing with PC races or intelligent humanoid races. Less useful versus other creatures.
The key here is to make the illusion believable in context. As long as there is some kind of valid reason for the illusion, I will go with a straight save.
If the illusion is comlementary to the surroundings I will give the target a penalty to the save (disadvantage).
If the illusion is more jarring to the surroundings, I will give the target a bonus on the save (advantage).
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the even and in context of the situation.
It's pretty impossible to prepare for another person's imagination for sure. I'm just trying to plan out my arcane trickster and I'm very interested in Phantasmal Force. Seems very useful.
Certainly a useful spell if you are dealing with PC races or intelligent humanoid races. Less useful versus other creatures.
The key here is to make the illusion believable in context. As long as there is some kind of valid reason for the illusion, I will go with a straight save.
If the illusion is comlementary to the surroundings I will give the target a penalty to the save (disadvantage).
If the illusion is more jarring to the surroundings, I will give the target a bonus on the save (advantage).
That makes perfect sense. So I wouldn't be able to root someone in the ground because it isn't tangible and the logical thing to do would be to try to get out of it, which they would be able to--again because it's not tangible. However, I could do something like put a wall in front of them (fallen rocks, etc) and they would logically try to move around it, not knowing it is an illusion.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the even and in context of the situation.
It's pretty impossible to prepare for another person's imagination for sure. I'm just trying to plan out my arcane trickster and I'm very interested in Phantasmal Force. Seems very useful.
Certainly a useful spell if you are dealing with PC races or intelligent humanoid races. Less useful versus other creatures.
The key here is to make the illusion believable in context. As long as there is some kind of valid reason for the illusion, I will go with a straight save.
If the illusion is comlementary to the surroundings I will give the target a penalty to the save (disadvantage).
If the illusion is more jarring to the surroundings, I will give the target a bonus on the save (advantage).
That makes perfect sense. So I wouldn't be able to root someone in the ground because it isn't tangible and the logical thing to do would be to try to get out of it, which they would be able to--again because it's not tangible.
You most certainly could attempt it. But depending on the surroundings, I might give them advantage on the save. The spell specifically states that they will make up a reason in their mind to explain the illogical happenstances.
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
D&D Question:
I'm wondering how reality breaking Phantasmal force can be. As an example, I know that if there was an enemy on the other side of a cliff I could create a bridge and when they try to walk on it they fall, possibly to their death. Also if I light them on fire with fake flames, they burn because they believe they are burning. This makes sense and has a set amount of damage it will deal. What about the things that aren't so clearly defined like creating tar on the ground, he believes that he is stepping in tar if he doesn't dispel the illusion. Is he slowed? If so, by how much? If you conjure vines that grab him would he strength roll to break them in addition to the intelligence save?
The correct answer here as a DM is, "it depends on the situation."
You cannot create hard and fast rules for things. If you do the game turns into rule lawyering.
As a DM, I always make these calls at the time of the even and in context of the situation.
It's pretty impossible to prepare for another person's imagination for sure. I'm just trying to plan out my arcane trickster and I'm very interested in Phantasmal Force. Seems very useful.
Certainly a useful spell if you are dealing with PC races or intelligent humanoid races. Less useful versus other creatures.
The key here is to make the illusion believable in context. As long as there is some kind of valid reason for the illusion, I will go with a straight save.
If the illusion is comlementary to the surroundings I will give the target a penalty to the save (disadvantage).
If the illusion is more jarring to the surroundings, I will give the target a bonus on the save (advantage).
That makes perfect sense. So I wouldn't be able to root someone in the ground because it isn't tangible and the logical thing to do would be to try to get out of it, which they would be able to--again because it's not tangible.
You most certainly could attempt it. But depending on the surroundings, I might give them advantage on the save. The spell specifically states that they will make up a reason in their mind to explain the illogical happenstances.
IE: If the wall is out in the middle of the jungle, they get a bonus to the save... but if your illusion becomes a wall of vines, they would get a disadvantage on the save since it blends in with the surroundings more?
-
@JaredBusch has the right idea. A lot of the older 3.5 spells (and sadly fewer of the 5e spells) have a broad range of interpretations, which gives the player free range to use the spell in ways that the game system (and the DM) never envisioned.
-
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch has the right idea. A lot of the older 3.5 spells (and sadly fewer of the 5e spells) have a broad range of interpretations, which gives the player free range to use the spell in ways that the game system (and the DM) never envisioned.
Which is super fun. The fact that I could attack someone with their own shadow amuses me
-
@coliver said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@JaredBusch has the right idea. A lot of the older 3.5 spells (and sadly fewer of the 5e spells) have a broad range of interpretations, which gives the player free range to use the spell in ways that the game system (and the DM) never envisioned.
Are you implying this is a bad thing? I find this a good thing. It makes for better players and makes me a better DM.
