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.
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.
-
@JaredBusch said in Gaming - What's everyone playing / hosting / looking to play:
@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.
Not at all it is a wonderful thing, it has the potential to develop the story in ways that a strict ruleset never could.
I'm implying that 5e doesn't do this enough.
-
Just played some Overcooked with the kids.
-
Snagged TitanQuest on Steam for $4, I think it was.
