I am reading about the advantage/disadvantage dice mechanic in D&D 5.
I don't get it. I mean "I get it" as far as it speeds up play and smooths over aspects of the game, I suppose.
But I don't understand the mad fuss. It allows DMs handwavium over negative or positive modifiers? It forces players to take either a good roll or a bad roll, regardless of all other circumstances?
To me it seems like as case of: "I can't be fucking assed to work out how much of a positive or negative modifier there should be, so roll two dice and I will make you choose the one I want. Oh, it says disadvantage so you HAVE to take the sucky die".
I know that they can cancel each other out, not stack, and on (I read chapter 7 of the Basic) but it just doesn't look to be that "nuanced" or reflective of the many aspects tied into any situation.
And this is coming from someone who never played 3.PF or 4E.
There we go, one dissenting view. Flame on, people!
But you're a KENDER.... covered in BUTTER.;)
What? You want a serious reply? I'll leave the actual cooking to the guys given I'm a nice girl despite what CR says.:)
If you set the DC's right in the first place, all those old +X and -Y's are covered already. No sense double dipping here.
Old method: You want to climb a slanted wall, its easy DC 10, oh but its raining so +3 and someone buttered it, so +2, and well there is a strong wind so +5
New Method: Raining, buttered, wind chased wall. DC 20.
And +2 if you have some cute guys helping you....(DC 20 isn't a cakewalk in 5e for anybody that isn't a bard or rogue).
I maintain that rolling two dice is twice as fun as rolling one. The internet loves to talk about excess dice-rolling "slowing down gameplay" and other made-up theorywank horseshit that I don't buy. A 3-man Taco Bell run slows down a game; a few extra die rolls doesn't effect anyone on a perceptible level, except for the poor wretched assholes who read your whiny RPGnet thread afterwards.
Advantage/disadvantage turns the old staid +/- penalty into a real-world mechanic that translates directly into dice in hand, which is exciting on the player side. Instead of tossing a die and doing 1st grade math, you're tossing TWO dice and eff the math!
I like rolling dice and I think the vast majority of roleplayers do as well. As such I support even more such mechanics, including rerolls, rolling lesser dice and adding, etc.
Just one man's opinion.
Quote from: Raven;771433I maintain that rolling two dice is twice as fun as rolling one. The internet loves to talk about excess dice-rolling "slowing down gameplay" and other made-up theorywank horseshit that I don't buy. A 3-man Taco Bell run slows down a game; a few extra die rolls doesn't effect anyone on a perceptible level, except for the poor wretched assholes who read your whiny RPGnet thread afterwards.
Advantage/disadvantage turns the old staid +/- penalty into a real-world mechanic that translates directly into dice in hand, which is exciting on the player side. Instead of tossing a die and doing 1st grade math, you're tossing TWO dice and eff the math!
I like rolling dice and I think the vast majority of roleplayers do as well. As such I support even more such mechanics, including rerolls, rolling lesser dice and adding, etc.
Just one man's opinion.
And one girl's.:)
I love rerolls and Wild Magic/Chaos Sorcerers and TWO D20 die....lavender and blue for me.:)
I also like that advantage/disadvantage also doesn't change the range of your roll. No inflation of numbers.
It's 2K1 (roll 2 keep 1) and its been a staple mechanic in several RPGs, most particularly AEG's system.
It's also used in Mazes & Minotaurs, Crimson Cutlass and the RPGs found in Space Gamer/Fantasy Gamer such as Battle Born. I am pretty sure I've seen the concept elsewhere, but just can't remember at the moment.
It's a quick and dirty mechanic that does a good job. Also, rolling two dice and picking one and adding modifiers is probably less than a second longer than rolling one die.
I'm not a 5e fan, but Adv/Dis is a solid addition to D&D.
Speed, economy, doesn't fuck with range of numbers and cause power inflation, and it's being promoted by the 800 lb gorilla of the industry.
Those are winners in my book.
Yes, it's not a completely new mechanic, but then there almost never is -- execution matters FAR more than originality.
Quote from: Marleycat;771429And +2 if you have some cute guys helping you....(DC 20 isn't a cakewalk in 5e for anybody that isn't a bard or rogue).
Indeed. :D
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771440I also like that advantage/disadvantage also doesn't change the range of your roll. No inflation of numbers.
You are wise in what you like.
It is a quick way to give a solid boost to a character when their chances of success should increase significantly (ir significantly fall). It also makes the whole pricess simple, which is great for those of us who do not use use a frid and good for new GMs and players. I feel like it takes attention away from tallying numbers and puts more emphasis on what is going on in the game world. So all for this one. It isn't super complex or brilliant but it is an effective and simple solution, and I believe that is a good thing in game design.
Quote from: Raven;771433I maintain that rolling two dice is twice as fun as rolling one. The internet loves to talk about excess dice-rolling "slowing down gameplay" and other made-up theorywank horseshit that I don't buy. A 3-man Taco Bell run slows down a game; a few extra die rolls doesn't effect anyone on a perceptible level, except for the poor wretched assholes who read your whiny RPGnet thread afterwards.
Advantage/disadvantage turns the old staid +/- penalty into a real-world mechanic that translates directly into dice in hand, which is exciting on the player side. Instead of tossing a die and doing 1st grade math, you're tossing TWO dice and eff the math!
I like rolling dice and I think the vast majority of roleplayers do as well. As such I support even more such mechanics, including rerolls, rolling lesser dice and adding, etc.
Just one man's opinion.
Yeah it isn't the tossing of the dice that slows down play it's the calculation of too many fiddly modifiers. Rolling two dice at once is just as fast as rolling one.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771440I also like that advantage/disadvantage also doesn't change the range of your roll. No inflation of numbers.
Also great. A way to up the odds without pushing the upper range into the stratosphere. A target number of 40+ on a 20 sided die is ri-gawd damned-diculous.
Another reason I like it:
You can pretend your life or death combat is a tennis match. :D
Quote from: Will;771447Speed, economy, doesn't fuck with range of numbers and cause power inflation, and it's being promoted by the 800 lb gorilla of the industry.
Those are winners in my book.
.
Mine too. I like fast combat. It makes combat faster.
It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
Quote from: JRR;771600It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
As a PC I sure wouldn't be fighting in that scenerio without a lot more information and context.
Quote from: JRR;771600It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
You can just re-roll successes or re-roll failures. This slightly effects crit rates, but all in all, it works fine.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771440I also like that advantage/disadvantage also doesn't change the range of your roll. No inflation of numbers.
I remember noting this when the prototype of the mechanic was introduced in Star Wars Saga Edition.
I do wonder why 5E only includes the extreme forms, though--no 'you can/must roll again, but must take the second roll even if it's worse/better'.
When I saw Ad/Disad in the playtest I stole it immediately for my heartbreaker and its been a staple ever since.
That system used 2d10 so add /disad has a slightly lower effect than vs a d 20 (+3 ish as opposed to +5 ish) and the advantages were immediate and impressive. Everything is just quicker.
Furthermore I have added it as a core element of many rolls. So if you choose to evade or defend as an action you make a roll and a sucess gives your oponent dis ad. However you can opt to add multiple disads to your roll and every one you add adds an additional disad to your oponent should you suceed. Previously to this you would have needed to add a rule for "effect number" or rank of sucess etc which get realy fiddly.
So in the games space combat system the PC pilot was taking 4 disads on his evade rolls (roll 6d10 take lowest 2) to evade a pair of military fighters. Awesome. the PCs set the stakes and the risk increases. Slick easy no delay at the table.
Quote from: Marleycat;771603As a PC I sure wouldn't be fighting in that scenerio without a lot more information and context.
Sometimes you have no choice. In this case they were ambushed as they left the dungeon. Well, they did have a choice - hand over everything they own and walk away naked.
Quote from: JRR;771600It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
Whatever system you use a straight up fight against 100 kolbolds is going to be a PitA. imagine using AoO, flanking, ranks, etc etc ...
Anyway 100 kolbolds wouldn't fight toe to toe, they would dig a shit load of pits and other traps and lure the party into a cross fire.
Quote from: JRR;771600I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
This is one of the major reasons my group rejected a similar system as a house rule in the early 1980s. As GM, I loathed it because it made handling large numbers opponents hard -- which slowed combat, a huge negative for me. My players liked it at first, but soon decide they liked the standard roll one die with modifiers better.
We did not call it Advantage/Disadvantage but rolling a bonus die or a penalty die. Whether a bonus or penalty die was rolled was determined by subtracting "disadvantages" from "advantages": a positive result rolled a bonus die, negative result rolled a penalty die. None of this one disadvantage cancels 4 advantages (or vice-versa) 5e seems to use -- so it was not exactly like 5e but it was a very similar idea. As GM, I loathed it because it made handling large numbers opponents hard -- which slowed combat, a huge negative for me. My players liked it at first, but soon decided they like one roll with modifers better.
Quote from: jibbajibba;771677Whatever system you use a straight up fight against 100 kolbolds is going to be a PitA. imagine using AoO, flanking, ranks, etc etc ...
Anyway 100 kolbolds wouldn't fight toe to toe, they would dig a shit load of pits and other traps and lure the party into a cross fire.
Ambushed on a hilltop from range. No flanking, ranks or otherwise. Just 100 short bows at a rate of fire of 2. I rolled 10d20 10 times, kept note of the hits. High ground grants a +1 to hit, so they'd all have advantage instead, meaning I'd have to reroll all the misses, which would be most of the rolls due to the pcs relatively high ac. And then do it all over again on the secondary attacks. Way too much hassle.
I don't use AOOs and rarely a grid.
Quote from: JRR;771600It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
Well, given that in AD&D I'd probably skip rolling hit points for a hundred kobolds and just say they go down after one hit, here I'd cut the corner and either not use advantage/disadvantage or turn it into a straight +2; anyway no D&D is really that good at fights of that size so you do what you can to make it work better.
Edit: Oh I see, massed archery vs. high AC. You ever just figure an average of 5 arrows are gonna hit from 20s, so you roll a d10 to see how many land?
Nonsense, OD&D does it well. AD&D does it a little less well due to multiple die damages. BECMI does it best because it has very few multi-dice weapons but also because it generally streamlines the system.
My Dark Passages neoclone does it about as well as BECMI.
Want to speed it up even more? Give every thing half their hit dice in hit points. And ignore non-kill results on anything with less hit points than the damage die type.
It's the only real advantage to D&D's ass backwards armor and hit point mechanisms and all the designers since AD&D first edition can do is mess with the system's only strength.
Quote from: Imp;771685Well, given that in AD&D I'd probably skip rolling hit points for a hundred kobolds and just say they go down after one hit, here I'd cut the corner and either not use advantage/disadvantage or turn it into a straight +2; anyway no D&D is really that good at fights of that size so you do what you can to make it work better.
Edit: Oh I see, massed archery vs. high AC. You ever just figure an average of 5 arrows are gonna hit from 20s, so you roll a d10 to see how many land?
Eh, not across the board high. 3 fighters in plate, an OA Shukenja in studded and a wizard with no armor.
Regardless, what bothers me about Advantage is that it's hard coded into the game. Too many abilities depend on it to easily remove it.
I would never, ever, bother rolling for 100 enemies.
There are a lot of good rules idea to handle it as a group of mooks. Group them up into a bunch of units. Maybe 1 hit point per enemy or something.
Quote from: David Johansen;771687Nonsense, OD&D does it well. AD&D does it a little less well due to multiple die damages. BECMI does it best because it has very few multi-dice weapons but also because it generally streamlines the system.
My Dark Passages neoclone does it about as well as BECMI.
Want to speed it up even more? Give every thing half their hit dice in hit points. And ignore non-kill results on anything with less hit points than the damage die type.
It's the only real advantage to D&D's ass backwards armor and hit point mechanisms and all the designers since AD&D first edition can do is mess with the system's only strength.
As Imp points out..... 100 bows really ... just work out they need 18s to hit so the average number of hits would would be 15% so make it 10% + 1d10% hits. You will find the actual numbers work out almost precisely the same as rolling hundreds of dice and the more dice you roll the closer it will get. 1000 bows make it 12% +1d6%. 10,000 13% + 1d3%... etc
Even if you used OD&D you woudl have to divide the Kobolds into groups based on who each was attacking then each defender may have different modifiers etc etc ..... so you don't roll 200 d20s and work out hits you rolls sets of d20s based on who each group aims at ... etc etc etc
If a problem with ad/disad is you can't use it to replicate dozens of opponents attacking simultaneously you are using the wrong tools... I will take that over a list of a dozen modifiers I need to apply to eqach roll.
Quote from: Silverlion;771428If you set the DC's right in the first place, all those old +X and -Y's are covered already. No sense double dipping here.
Old method: You want to climb a slanted wall, its easy DC 10, oh but its raining so +3 and someone buttered it, so +2, and well there is a strong wind so +5
New Method: Raining, buttered, wind chased wall. DC 20.
There's no difference between those methods.
I would treat 100 archers firing like a large damage area of effect spell with a dexterity save for half damage rather than individual attacks.
Quote from: JRR;771676Sometimes you have no choice. In this case they were ambushed as they left the dungeon. Well, they did have a choice - hand over everything they own and walk away naked.
Makes sense but you do know I as a player will get you back in some way in game down the line for that dick move? Never giving a chance for parley is just asinine. As I said give me context (what level am I? What class am I? What race am I? Because if I'm a Warlock or Sorcerer or Bard with the right party mix I may teach you a lesson instead of you doing so).
Quote from: Raven;771433I maintain that rolling two dice is twice as fun as rolling one. The internet loves to talk about excess dice-rolling "slowing down gameplay" and other made-up theorywank horseshit that I don't buy. A 3-man Taco Bell run slows down a game; a few extra die rolls doesn't effect anyone on a perceptible level, except for the poor wretched assholes who read your whiny RPGnet thread afterwards.
Advantage/disadvantage turns the old staid +/- penalty into a real-world mechanic that translates directly into dice in hand, which is exciting on the player side. Instead of tossing a die and doing 1st grade math, you're tossing TWO dice and eff the math!
I like rolling dice and I think the vast majority of roleplayers do as well. As such I support even more such mechanics, including rerolls, rolling lesser dice and adding, etc.
Just one man's opinion.
Sheesh, i'm late for this...
I manages to agree and disagree at the same time:
Excess die-rolling DO slow down gameplay.
However.
So do at-the-table-math.
And if the extra die is rolled at the same time as the original, then the die-rolling is not excessive, as I see it.
And if it is followed up by the simple mechanic "Take Highest/Lowest" instead of math, then it is not much slower at all, and it is clearly faster than those that follows up with Math.
So, the example given is clearly faster, because the "Excess dierolling" really isn't excessive, and the math is decreased.
Quote from: JRR;771684Ambushed on a hilltop from range. No flanking, ranks or otherwise. Just 100 short bows at a rate of fire of 2. I rolled 10d20 10 times, kept note of the hits. High ground grants a +1 to hit, so they'd all have advantage instead, meaning I'd have to reroll all the misses, which would be most of the rolls due to the pcs relatively high ac. And then do it all over again on the secondary attacks. Way too much hassle.
I don't use AOOs and rarely a grid.
I would do the same thing that I do for large numbers of enemies in classic D&D:
roll in groups, the size depending on the total number of troops. So if there were 100 kobolds on a hill I would have them shoot in volleys of 10.
10 attack rolls with advantage. Easy as pie. :)
I used the same kind of system when I adapted and ran Master of the Desert Nomads for 3.0. There were 80 bandits attacking a large caravan. Ten groups of eight worked out just fine.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771710I would treat 100 archers firing like a large damage area of effect spell with a dexterity save for half damage rather than individual attacks.
I sorta like this.
I would also use the target's AC to determine % that hits, to then figure damage to save against. Like unmodified attacks v. AC 4, a.k.a AC 16, is 20% success. Then that result times the damage roll average, save for half.
i.e. AC 4 is 20% of 100 attacks of 1d6 arrows. Thus 20 attacks by 3.5, or 70 damage, save for half.
Quote from: Opaopajr;771754I sorta like this.
I would also use the target's AC to determine % that hits, to then figure damage to save against. Like unmodified attacks v. AC 4, a.k.a AC 16, is 20% success. Then that result times the damage roll average, save for half.
i.e. AC 4 is 20% of 100 attacks of 1d6 arrows. Thus 20 attacks by 3.5, or 70 damage, save for half.
I would probably have just done 20d6. Mostly because its fun to roll an absurd amount of dice occasionally. Also, because if you are getting peppered by 100 archers, you done fucked up, and there is something satisfying about illustrating how fucked up they got by rolling a ton of dice.
Quote from: JRR;771600It's a shit mechanic. For instance, a while back in my 1e game, the pcs fought an ogre who had coerced a trribe of kobolds into sending him 100 warriors. How the hell do I run that if they have advantage or disadvantage? I can't just roll a handful of dice using the ADHD mechanic.
Add +4 or +5. With a 100 opponents it is close enough. If you want to be exact about it just make a chart with the equivalent bonus based on the actual chance of success and use that. In the end it boils down to the numbers.
For example in most editions of Runequest doesn't depend on the exact percentage of a skill. Most of the mechanics treat everything in +5% increments. Yes I know there are some, like skill improvement, that don't. This means you could play Runequest exactly how it written by using a d20. It may not be satisfying as a d100 but the odd will be the same.
The same thing with this. It all boils down to the odds. If the actual mechanism of generating those odds proves cumbersome in a given circumstances than it needs to be changed to keep the game going. It is fair because you are still using the same chance of success (or failure) but in a different way to speed up play.
A lot of games have rules for treating groups as single monsters.
Torg, for example, gave groups a bonus to defense and attack, with the bonuses dropping as you killed individuals (naturally).
Personally, as a GM, I have no interest in rolling more than the entire rest of the group.
Quote from: Marleycat;771719Makes sense but you do know I as a player will get you back in some way in game down the line for that dick move? Never giving a chance for parley is just asinine. As I said give me context (what level am I? What class am I? What race am I? Because if I'm a Warlock or Sorcerer or Bard with the right party mix I may teach you a lesson instead of you doing so).
A dick move? First of all, they had there chance at a parley. Throw down everything you own and walk away, they get to live. Ogres and kobolds are not known for compromise, at least in any game I've ever played in. It was not a lesson. It was merely one encounter, and one right out of the adventure module. Fame has consequences. Besides, killing the ogre forced a morale check anyway.
I can't just roll a handful of D20's, whether it's 5 or 100. Each roll has to be tracked. If it's 5 orcs, I can't just roll 10 d20 and take the best 5.
Quote from: JRR;771828A dick move? First of all, they had there chance at a parley. Throw down everything you own and walk away, they get to live. Ogres and kobolds are not known for compromise, at least in any game I've ever played in. It was not a lesson. It was merely one encounter, and one right out of the adventure module. Fame has consequences.
As I said you did not supply context. I told you straight up in that situation I would not be fighting I would be parlaying or something else. So no you wouldn't have stripped me naked.
The only scenerios more trite then "you meet in a bar" is "you're in a jail cell completely naked or chained to a dungeon wall completely naked...". Followed closely by 'you are seriously outnumbered and no you cannot parley". I suppose the wizard to meteor storm the whole thing but that's a pretty dumb solution to the situation in my opinion.
I like games where you can just straight up say 'hey, I'm going to be putting you in a tight spot, here are some points as compensation, are we cool?'
Fate compels, and I hazily remember something along those lines in Buffy Unisystem.
Otherwise, it can bring up bad blood about GM/player power balance.
Quote from: Will;771842I like games where you can just straight up say 'hey, I'm going to be putting you in a tight spot, here are some points as compensation, are we cool?'
Fate compels, and I hazily remember something along those lines in Buffy Unisystem.
Otherwise, it can bring up bad blood about GM/player power balance.
GM has all the power.
GM avoids asshattery.
Works great.
Quote from: Marleycat;771840As I said you did not supply context. I told you straight up in that situation I would not be fighting I would be parlaying or something else. So no you wouldn't have stripped me naked.
The only scenerios more trite then "you meet in a bar" is "you're in a jail cell completely naked or chained to a dungeon wall completely naked...". Followed closely by 'you are seriously outnumbered and no you cannot parley". I suppose the wizard to meteor storm the whole thing but that's a pretty dumb solution to the situation in my opinion.
Naked was a metaphor, I seriously doubt an ogre and his kobold minions are interested in pc's clothing. It's the armor and magical gear, they want. The players are free to try and parley, and they did try, but the ogre wasn't having any. He was cocky, and confident his 112 minions could easily take the party and what did he care for the loss of a few score kobolds? They are easily replaceable.
And 5th level wizards do not cast meteor swarm.
I'll just say 100 archers vs a party is kind of a silly thing anyway.
You know what a group of 5 adventurers do if they fight 100 archers without cover while the archers have the high ground. They die. Period.
The idea that this is something characters should be able to survive at all is dumb (and if the system allows it as an actual thing rather than a fluke, I think its a bit bonkers).
The right idea in the situation would be to run back into the dungeon, make the kobolds try to take you inside, where their numbers aren't as much of an overwhelming advantage. The truth is, if you ever let them get 100 shots off at you in a round, you've made a huge mistake.
Quote from: Will;771842I like games where you can just straight up say 'hey, I'm going to be putting you in a tight spot, here are some points as compensation, are we cool?'
Fate compels, and I hazily remember something along those lines in Buffy Unisystem.
Otherwise, it can bring up bad blood about GM/player power balance.
That is fine. I was in the situation in 2e but the GM had already taken me aside and explained the what the deal was going to be. Given it literally took my character from a multiclass F/M to just a single class fighter for multiple sessions. And in 2e that isn't a small thing.
I did send a dnd party to the Nine Hells naked in one campaign.
But the players adapted; instead of complaining about lost magic items, they ambushed some abishai devils, and skinned them with the devils own weapons to make leather armor.
Fortunately they had a monk or they would have had to spend precious spells that could not be regained with no spellbook and inability to regain priest spells in Hell.
That game was a blast as the characters rebuilt their power adventuring in Hell.
Quote from: JRR;771850Naked was a metaphor, I seriously doubt an ogre and his kobold minions are interested in pc's clothing. It's the armor and magical gear, they want. The players are free to try and parley, and they did try, but the ogre wasn't having any. He was cocky, and confident his 112 minions could easily take the party and what did he care for the loss of a few score kobolds? They are easily replaceable.
And 5th level wizards do not cast meteor swarm.
Well I know I would be running back to the dungeon to find a chokepoint or just charm the Ogre if they didn't want to talk. I do think the scenerio is silly though and very hamfisted.
Quote from: Marleycat;771857Well I know I would be running back to the dungeon to find a chokepoint or just charm the Ogre if they didn't want to talk. I do think the scenerio is silly though and very hamfisted.
The ambush was a good half a mile or more from the dungeon. There was a bit of cover, gravestones and such. Charming the ogre would have worked, instead the paladin charged and they killed him in one round. The kobolds got off one volley, and fled. Mounts died, magic user and shukenja almost died, the warriors took some damage and that was it. It was not some huge screwjob like you are accusing me of.
Anyways, this is getting way off topic, apologies for the thread getting hijacked.
Quote from: Will;771842I like games where you can just straight up say 'hey, I'm going to be putting you in a tight spot, here are some points as compensation, are we cool?'
Fate compels, and I hazily remember something along those lines in Buffy Unisystem.
Otherwise, it can bring up bad blood about GM/player power balance.
Thats great for story based systems.
But in games when the narrative can go fuck itself and this is just what is happening in the world right now it is simply deal with the situation as it unfolds or don't play.
I think you can infer from my use of 'I like' that I think strict 'deal with whatever I tell you or get out' games can go fuck themselves.
Quote from: Will;771842I like games where you can just straight up say 'hey, I'm going to be putting you in a tight spot, here are some points as compensation, are we cool?'
Fuck that shit. If you don't want your characters to be in tight spots, let them stay at home. The game world doesn't exist to be "fair" or mollycoddle characters. If you character is in a tight spot,deal with it.
I'm not opposed to fate points, or their use as a last-ditch survival mechanism, but you should have to do more than simply turn up to the game and want to have them.
In case it was missed, I'm talking about stuff that smacks (or is completely) GM fiat. Like 'you wake up naked, shackled below decks on a slave barge.'
Stuff that feels like GM bullshit 'this happens 'cause.'
Quote from: Will;771885In case it was missed, I'm talking about stuff that smacks (or is completely) GM fiat. Like 'you wake up naked, shackled below decks on a slave barge.'
Stuff that feels like GM bullshit 'this happens 'cause.'
What can be tricky, is when events in the game would lead to that, but the players have not deduced why it happened yet.
However, I agree in general, that a gm should not humiliate the characters just out of sadism.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771852I'll just say 100 archers vs a party is kind of a silly thing anyway.
You know what a group of 5 adventurers do if they fight 100 archers without cover while the archers have the high ground. They die. Period.
Nahhh, it's D&D, that sort of thing is the kind of over-the-top danger a mid-to-high-level group may well endure from time to time and live to tell about it, though hopefully they don't want to repeat it regularly. You need a lower-power game if you really think this business should be entirely out of the question.
Quote from: Will;771885In case it was missed, I'm talking about stuff that smacks (or is completely) GM fiat. Like 'you wake up naked, shackled below decks on a slave barge.'
Stuff that feels like GM bullshit 'this happens 'cause.'
Oh, yeah, that's generally going to be rubbish, unless there's a logical chain of events leading up to it, or you're doing something like an episodic sword and sorcery game.
Quote from: Imp;771889Nahhh, it's D&D, that sort of thing is the kind of over-the-top danger a mid-to-high-level group may well endure from time to time and live to tell about it, though hopefully they don't want to repeat it regularly. You need a lower-power game if you really think this business should be entirely out of the question.
Bounded accuracy in 5e keeps those 100 kobolds dangerous.
Also, its funny that people want to decry certain editions as "fantasy superheroes" while at the same time thinking that in their preferred editions, the PCs should be facing 100 archers, with no good choke point in site, and it not be a near automatic TPK.
If you got the drop on them, and they were marching in tight formation, and you had a spellcaster or two with nice aoe spells, you would stand a chance. But otherwise you really shouldn't be able to take them on, and if you do, that does smack of fantasy superheroes.
a) that's pretty much a case of where you want to draw the line; if 100 kobold archers spell death but 50 are just dangerous, would I revolt? Probably not
b) sounds like 5e would be an improvement for you, then
Quote from: BarefootGaijin;771425I don't get it. I mean "I get it" as far as it speeds up play and smooths over aspects of the game, I suppose.
There are several features of the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic:
(1) It doesn't require any math. Just pick up a second die and roll it. IME, this is universally faster than a modifier. (This makes the mechanic more likely to be used.)
(2) Rolling extra dice is fun and (arguably) more notable than a +2 or -2 circumstance modifier. (This encourages players to actively seek out sources of advantage, which helps to make play interesting and specific to the situation.)
(3) It's conveniently capped: Multiple sources of advantage/disadvantage don't stack. (I have some issues with the logic of this, but the upside is that GMs and scenario designers can be liberal in awarding advantage/disadvantage without worrying about weird stacking exploits.)
(4) It also doesn't change the potential range of your roll: Advantage makes it more likely that you will succeed at stuff you can normally succeed at, but doesn't mean that you can suddenly do stuff that would otherwise be impossible.
The net result of all this is that the concept is a really useful mechanical hook that can be used in lots of different ways. It also contributes substantially to maintaining the bounded accuracy that's a major selling point of 5E's design.
Good Grief, I hope they have a better selling point than that. At the very least they should make a point of the fact that there are wizards and dragons in the game. :]
Dungeons & Bounded Accuracy just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;771957Bounded accuracy in 5e keeps those 100 kobolds dangerous.
.
With pack tactics, they're downright deadly. Every one of those kobolds would get +5 bonus to hit (pack tactics grants +1 to hit for every ally within the area, up to +5). With bounded accuracy, a +5 bonus to hit is huge. Can you say pincushion?
I suppose they could have nerfed it like they did with the goblin's bushwacker trait, but I hope not.
Quote from: JRR;771850Naked was a metaphor, I seriously doubt an ogre and his kobold minions are interested in pc's clothing. It's the armor and magical gear, they want. The players are free to try and parley, and they did try, but the ogre wasn't having any. He was cocky, and confident his 112 minions could easily take the party and what did he care for the loss of a few score kobolds? They are easily replaceable.
And 5th level wizards do not cast meteor swarm.
I don't think its a dick move, if there are 100 kobold then there are 100 kobolds. However they woudl have fuck all use for armour they can't wear and I suspect taking the party's clothes and eating them all woudl probably be the better option.
I still wouldn't roll 100d20 though cos its fucking tedious :)
Quote from: David Johansen;772115Good Grief, I hope they have a better selling point than that. At the very least they should make a point of the fact that there are wizards and dragons in the game. :]
Dungeons & Bounded Accuracy just doesn't have the same ring to it.
I can't speak for others, but Bounded Accuracy, and the background/feat system in 5e are enough to make me buy the game.
I am pretty sure wizards and dragons will be in there.