ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:46 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Some RPG-related debates
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 8:23 pm 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Evanston, IL (USA)
Just by way of a warning, if you're not into role-playing games (by which I mean real pen-and-paper-and-dice tabletop games, not MMORPGs), the issues I am about to pose will probably not stimulate you much, and may downright confuse you. On the other hand, I would hope I'm not the only one in the entirety of this forum who likes to drag out them polyhedral bones for some good old-fashioned hack-and-slash every now and then. So, for all you nerds out there,

1. The D20 Open Liscence: Do you think it's helping or hurting the gaming industry? Is this philanthropy on the part of Wizards of the Coast, or just more clever marketing from an Evil Empire? Do you know what it is, or have I branded myself an irreedemable nerd by being familiar with it?

2. Storytelling vs. Combat: What's the right mixture? How much depth does your fighter really need? Is it worth it to spend a few points (or a skill rank, or whatever) on fleshing-out skills like Folk Dancing or Oragami?

3. D&D v.3.x Specific: When choosing weapons, what's going to give you the most bang for your buck (with "buck" in this case being the feats and/or magic enhancements you have to attach to the weapon to make it truly butt-kicking)?

4. GM: One of the boys, or God Omnipotent? Which style works better for you? Would you rather have him easy-going and guiding you along, or getting in your face and challenging you to out-do the nastiest dungeons he can design?

5. Class-based or point-based? Why?

Hopefully that'll keep for now. Again, I may be wasting my time if there are no other losers like me running around out there. Just because it's bad form to pose questions without answering them, let me dash off:

1. On the whole, it's given a lot of decent books (and, to be honest, a lot of crappy ones) a chance to see some big-market action. On the other hand, you still need the D&D core books to use any D20 supplement, so they effectivly make $105 plus tax off of every first-time user of the system, even if it's not a WotC book.

2. Dungeons are probably the easiest way to combine the system. Fill 'em with monsters, but throw in some nasty puzzles, sympathetic but potentially dangerous NPCs, well-detailed "boss" villians, etc. And always remember that, no matter how much fun it is, combat is nothing but a huge time-sump.

3. I've found that a spiked chain, combined with Combat Reflexes can be real trouble--anything that moves within 10ft. of you is fair game, but unlike most reach weapons you can use it on the asshole stabbing you with a dagger as well. At higher levels, adding on the Improved Trip feat (which has the Combat Expertise feat as a prerequisite) is just brutal for a character with a decent STR. Every time you trip them you get an automatic attack, plus they're prone. Then standing up provokes an attack of opportunity, so you do it again...

4. If I can't view my GM as a worthy adversary, I just get bored. Co-op role-playing is not for me. It just feels like an impromptu acting troupe that's too lazy to stand up.

5. Point-based systems allow for vastly more detailed and unique characters, not just in terms of backstory but in terms of distinct fighting styles or magic techniques, but unless they're amazingly well-written it can be pretty easy for experienced gamers to find a loophole and just munchkin out like all hell. On the other hand, class-based systems are better for starting gamers, since they provide a framework that's easy to follow, as well as instilling stereotypes that the player will later try to tweak and alter when he advances to point-based.

My girlfriend's yelling at me again, so 'til next time, peace out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some RPG-related debates
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 9:10 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
1. The D20 Open Liscence: Eh, Whoteva. I judge RPGs byh how their systems function, if they make their own, good for them, like Fallout... mmm, Fallout.

2. Storytelling vs. Combat: I thrive on storytelling, the more complex I can make my 'simple fighter' the more I feel drawn into the game. Also, its gotta be MY story getting told. FF can go fawk itself. That/those character/s be MINE.

3. D&D v.3.x Specific: I love my stick +20000 as much as anyone else... but it gets a little absurd. Bleh... back in my day the only weapon upgrade was turbocharging my plasma rifle down at the L.A Boneyar.... err, I mean.. yeah. Club +10... shiney but... unrealistic.

4. GM: Whot? OH... your talking about bored game RPGs. Sorry, I play real RPGS.

5. Class-based or point-based? Point based. I <3 Morrowind and Daggerfall for being 'class-free' or at least Cast-Iron Coffin Class free. Even NVN allows some flexibility in its 'out-of-class' characters. The hardcore "WIZARD CANNOT FOR THE LIFE OF HIM HOLD A LONGSWORD OMG" type game pisses me off.

Rawk.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:55 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Just by way of a warning, if you're not into role-playing games (by which I mean real pen-and-paper-and-dice tabletop games, not MMORPGs), the issues I am about to pose will probably not stimulate you much, and may downright confuse you. On the other hand, I would hope I'm not the only one in the entirety of this forum who likes to drag out them polyhedral bones for some good old-fashioned hack-and-slash every now and then. So, for all you nerds out there,

Treespeaker wrote:
1. The D20 Open Liscence: Do you think it's helping or hurting the gaming industry? Is this philanthropy on the part of Wizards of the Coast, or just more clever marketing from an Evil Empire? Do you know what it is, or have I branded myself an irreedemable nerd by being familiar with it?


Let the market speak. Is it successful? Yes? Then Wizards had done a good thing.

Treespeaker wrote:
2. Storytelling vs. Combat: What's the right mixture? How much depth does your fighter really need? Is it worth it to spend a few points (or a skill rank, or whatever) on fleshing-out skills like Folk Dancing or Oragami?


A rules-light system along with heavy emphasis on Storytelling.

Treespeaker wrote:
3. D&D v.3.x Specific: When choosing weapons, what's going to give you the most bang for your buck (with "buck" in this case being the feats and/or magic enhancements you have to attach to the weapon to make it truly butt-kicking)?


Ranger or fighter with two-weapon fighting + ambidexterity, statistically an extra attack is better than an attack/damage bonus. Everything else is gravy.

Treespeaker wrote:
4. GM: One of the boys, or God Omnipotent? Which style works better for you? Would you rather have him easy-going and guiding you along, or getting in your face and challenging you to out-do the nastiest dungeons he can design?


Combination. A GM that does not railroad you at all, but one that challanges you so that threats to your character are real; without that, the game becomes boring ('oh we won, big deal, its not like there was any significant reach')

Treespeaker wrote:
5. Class-based or point-based? Why?


Point, for more freedom. Harder to keep balanced, however.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Just a little procrastination.... -_-;;;
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:47 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1214
Location: Royal Court of Unfounded Speculation
Treespeaker wrote:
1. The D20 Open Liscence: Do you think it's helping or hurting the gaming industry? Is this philanthropy on the part of Wizards of the Coast, or just more clever marketing from an Evil Empire? Do you know what it is, or have I branded myself an irreedemable nerd by being familiar with it?

Definitely clever marketing; d20 is to RPG rules systems what Windows is to PC operating systems. That said, standardization can be nice, and I think that the enhanced ability to go from one gaming system to another (not in terms of porting characters, but in terms of a quicker learning curve for the players) is a plus.

Oh, and while your bit about WotC making a hundred bucks every time they gain a new player is spot-on, they somewhat avoid the Evil Empire Award by providing the System Reference Document online, free of charge. It's not quite the whole thing (they left out copyrighted materials like the Red Wizard of Thay Prestige Class) but it's close enough for most purposes.

Treespeaker wrote:
2. Storytelling vs. Combat: What's the right mixture? How much depth does your fighter really need? Is it worth it to spend a few points (or a skill rank, or whatever) on fleshing-out skills like Folk Dancing or Oragami?

Like Forevergrey said, I'm only really living the game if I can build some intense connection with my character. (I agreed with Forevergrey? WTF? :o ;-) ) That said, I've usually found that such attempts backfire when your story is not the one the DM has in mind for the campaign... but oh well.

Treespeaker wrote:
3. D&D v.3.x Specific: When choosing weapons, what's going to give you the most bang for your buck (with "buck" in this case being the feats and/or magic enhancements you have to attach to the weapon to make it truly butt-kicking)?

Haven't truly thought this one out, but the spiked chain is an obvious candidate for the reasons you mentioned above. The scythe has always struck me as being rather scary as well (crit ×4), but since it would take a feat and a magical enhancement to expand the threat range to 18-20 (and that doesn't even work in v.3.5) its actual utility is greatly lessened.

The Man In Black wrote:
Ranger or fighter with two-weapon fighting + ambidexterity, statistically an extra attack is better than an attack/damage bonus. Everything else is gravy.

Really? Sweet! :D

I've always liked the thought of two-weapon fighting, but had relegated it to a roleplaying thing rather than an effective strategy since most other online analyses I've seen have claimed it to be less effective (damage-wise) in the long-run. But if The Man In Black has spoken... well, they can all go soak their heads. 8) (And two-weapon fighting was made even more effective in v.3.5 - no more Ambidexterity feat [Two-Weapon Fighting does it all now] and you can gain second and third attacks with the secondary weapon earlier [assuming your Dex is high enough]. Basically they turned it back into a fighting strategy which will primarily be open to Rogues, although lightly-armored Fighters [think swashbuckler types] will naturally be even better at it than Rogues are.)

Treespeaker wrote:
4. GM: One of the boys, or God Omnipotent? Which style works better for you? Would you rather have him easy-going and guiding you along, or getting in your face and challenging you to out-do the nastiest dungeons he can design?

What MiB said.

Treespeaker wrote:
5. Class-based or point-based? Why?

Amen to the comments above. Point-based can get dicey (pardon the pun) in terms of munchkin-exploitable imbalances and potential overwhelming complexity, whereas good ol' AD&D's insistence that no, your Rogue may NOT learn to use a battleaxe was just ridiculously restrictive in the opposite direction. I think D&D v.3.x does a much better job of making it unlikely that your Wizard will wield a Greatsword while still leaving it open as a very real (if unusual) possibility.

_________________
Only try to realize the truth...
There is no spoon. Then you will realize
that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.


"Only he who attempts the absurd
is capable of achieving the impossible."
 - Miguel de Unamuno


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:29 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:39 am
Posts: 1756
Location: The border of civilization
I'm feeling left-out for not knowing WTF are some of the things you guys are talking about... Anyway:

1. The D20 Open Liscence: Politics. I don't really care 'couse I probobly won't play it. That's what happened when you live in a third world country (Israel)...

2. Storytelling vs. Combat: The battles must be linked with a storyline, or it's just a 'let's see how many orcs I can kill in one hour' game. But the best adventures are those that are like a story being told, with you as one of the main characters, and the battles are just spice.

3. Weapon of Choice: I remember a filler Poe done, featuring an elf (Can't remember people's names...) wielding a staff with blades on both sides. I thought on this kind of weapon long before I saw Poe's pic. But to tell the truth, there aren't dangerous weapons, there are dangerous people. That's why my usual pick is sorcerrer. Sorcerrers have the most destructive potential of any class. Think for a sec, the only D&D boss that wasn't some kind of spellcaster was the guy from BG1.

4. GM: The best GM I could wish for?... Some kind of wacko that watched too much hentai for the adventurers own good I think. The most important thing is that he won't make your life easy, and that he'll be original.

5. Class or Point Based: Points. Then you'll have an interesting and uniqe characters.

6. What was the worst role playing you saw? :
Mine: We were therd level in a mutalated D&D game. A rogue, a sorcerrer and a druid (I was the sorcerrer). We camped in a forest clearing, and the druid took the first watch and started scribing a scroll. He heard noises from the bushes, but decided not to bother doing anything about that. He was shot in the leg from a nearby tree. The stupit craper woke us, cast a fire-sword spell, and hit a tree with it (the wrong one). I remind you that it was a forest, and that he was a druid. He then started meditating in the middle of the battle, so he could make water for us to put out our burning tent...

_________________
Warning! The owner of this property is armed and willing to defend life, liberty and property.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:00 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Evanston, IL (USA)
Forevergrey wrote:
4. GM: Whot? OH... your talking about bored game RPGs. Sorry, I play real RPGS.


I'm not sure what this means...what's a "real" RPG? I always saw GMs as pretty integral to it, unless you're talking one of those weird, self-run adventure packages or a computer game.

The Man In Black wrote:
Let the market speak. Is it successful? Yes? Then Wizards had done a good thing.


The problem with this is that it creates a market that is sucessful for WotC affiliates. An independent game like Children of the Sun is never going to make it big on its own, because it's a sort of weird world write-up, which is cool, but it comes with its own system instead of using D20 rules, which makes it a)harder to learn and b)hardback (=expensive). End result: it's never going to sell. Which is too bad, because although it gets pretty hippy-dippy in parts, the "dieselpunk" world it pretty neat.

The Man In Black wrote:
Ranger or fighter with two-weapon fighting + ambidexterity, statistically an extra attack is better than an attack/damage bonus.

Actually, in 3.5 there's no more Ambidexterity requirement, making it even cheaper for non-rangers to be two-weapon fighters.

Yevaud333 wrote:
Oh, and while your bit about WotC making a hundred bucks every time they gain a new player is spot-on, they somewhat avoid the Evil Empire Award by providing the System Reference Document online, free of charge.


Now that I wasn't aware of. This does make it a bit less of blatant money-grubbing.

Yevaud333 wrote:
The scythe has always struck me as being rather scary as well (crit ×4), but since it would take a feat and a magical enhancement to expand the threat range to 18-20 (and that doesn't even work in v.3.5) its actual utility is greatly lessened.


On that subject, if you don't have the STR to make the chain/Improved Trip combo work, I've always been a fan of a rapier with Improved Critical and one of the exlosive, crit-boosting magic enhancements (flame burst, acid burst, etc.). 2d6+1d10 on a 15-20 is pretty solid, all things considered, and if you play a rogue, the sneak attack can make it really wild.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Just a little procrastination.... -_-;;;
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:21 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 999
Location: Midworld
Yevaud333 wrote:
The Man In Black wrote:
Ranger or fighter with two-weapon fighting + ambidexterity, statistically an extra attack is better than an attack/damage bonus. Everything else is gravy.

Really? Sweet! :D

I've always liked the thought of two-weapon fighting, but had relegated it to a roleplaying thing rather than an effective strategy since most other online analyses I've seen have claimed it to be less effective (damage-wise) in the long-run. But if The Man In Black has spoken... well, they can all go soak their heads. 8) (And two-weapon fighting was made even more effective in v.3.5 - no more Ambidexterity feat [Two-Weapon Fighting does it all now] and you can gain second and third attacks with the secondary weapon earlier [assuming your Dex is high enough]. Basically they turned it back into a fighting strategy which will primarily be open to Rogues, although lightly-armored Fighters [think swashbuckler types] will naturally be even better at it than Rogues are.)


[OT, for Yevaud's pleasure]This is the type of character I normally play, and she has become significantly more powerful in 3.5. I used to use short swords, but have recently found out that rapiers are the single most effective weapon for this strategy. Start as a human fighter. Take Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse, and Weapon Focus(Rapier). Make sure you have Dex 18. By level 11 you should have Dodge, Spring Attack, Mobility, Expertise, Whirlwind, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Critical(Rapier), and Weapon Specialization(Rapier). You now switch to Weapon Master Prestige Class, picking Rapier as your weapon (It's in the Oriental Adventures book, but they also put in in Hordes of the Underdark, so it's Canon as far as I'm concerned). By level twenty, you should also have Greater Two Weapon Fighting, Power Attack, Cleave, and Great Cleave, as well as the benefits from the Prestige Class, which are as follows: 10 times/day, you can make your weapon do max damage. You have a natural, non-magical, +2 to the weapons you wield. You get an extra multiplier on your critcals, as well as +2 to your critical range. Add up all your bonuses, and you're doing +23/+23/+18/+18/+13/+13/+8 to attack, plus your dex mod, which should be +6, doing +2 damage with each strike. If you have a keen rapier, your crit range is 10-20/x3 (18-20/x2, keen makes it 15-20, Improved Critical makes it 12-20, Weapon Master makes it 10-20/x3) (Basically, with that range, hit=crit). You can also choose to instead make an attack on everyone within your range. You kill something, you get an extra attack on everyone in your range. Epic feats only make you that much more powerful. Switch back to Fighter, get Greater and Epic Weapon Focus and Specialization, Perfect Two Weapon Fighting, Overwhelming Critical, Defensive Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Whirlwind Attack, Epic Dodge, Combat reflexes, and Improved Combat Reflexes. You get the idea.

I guess I should at least respond to the debate, so [/OT]

1. I agree with MiB. It's successful, so it must be good. Especially when you can buy a giant book of Prestige Classes that people have come up with.

2. In D20, I'm not sure that there's a whole lot of restriction. You've got alignment to worry about, but that's pretty much it. You can say you do Origami in your spare time, but not well enough to do a +1 at it. In points based, it's a lot more structured in that regard, so I say make an interesting character, then see what fighting ability he'll have. Had a person take so many disadvantages in GURPS that he was a god at fighting, but as soon as he took a step, he would collapse into epileptic fits as his four Enemies swooped in for the kill.

3. See above. That, or a Samurai with a focus towards Iaijutsu. You get one attack that does about 100 damage, then go into normal combat. Or go Monk. Monks own.

4. Both. Our GM almost always plays a character alongside us, and yet that character is almost never the center of attention. That way he can guage our fights for good challenges. He is also god, though, and rules with an iron fist.

5. Honestly, I like class-based more, but I haven't played a whole heck of a lot of points based.

_________________
Go then. There are other worlds than these.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: A little more procrastination.... -_-;;;;;;
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:28 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1214
Location: Royal Court of Unfounded Speculation
Jasper wrote:
<<his insane strategy>>

Dude... scary. :o (I thought I was the only one who planned characters out that far in advance... impressive! [And scary.] )

And as for Weredrake's Worst RPG experience question, let me just reprint something I posted once, long ago. (Because it was just that bad.)

Yevaud333 wrote:
And as far as unkillable baddies go, I'll never forget one of the first enemies we encountered in a GURPS campaign being run by the psychotic freshman roomate of one of my friends. All us players were new to the system, and the GM had us create 'just average' characters as far as points go, so come to think of it I guess we were all members of the "Joe Genero" family.

Anyway, he then pitted us against some soldier in plate armor with two lackeys. We managed to dispatch the underlings, but in the process all but one of us was knocked out or immobilized; my character dropped to a poison dart or somesuch in the first round, and our dwarven fighter managed to critically fail so many times that half of his appendages were in danger of being permanently non-functional. (I don't even remember what happened to the wizard.) In the end we had one rapier-wielding swordswoman against the plate-armored man, and needless to say, she couldn't do a thing through the tin can he was wearing. The GM complained that we were being uncreative and pointed out that she could go for his face, which was completely unarmored. Only problem was that given her skill with the weapon, she had like a 1% chance of actually succeeding at such an attempt. Amazingly enough, she DID manage to nick his neck once, but in the meantime he had crippled her left hand and her right arm. Since she was left-handed, this brought her chances of succeeding at anything to roughly zero.

At this point the GM said that our enemy just turned away with a sneer and some comment about how worthless we were. (It was clearly a last-ditch effort not to have to kill us all outright.) The player of the swordswoman snapped and said, "Okay, I've still got my right hand and my left arm, right?"

"Uhh... yeah," replied the GM.

"Okay. You've been telling us to be creative - fine. I walk up behind the man and lift my right hand with my left arm to where I sliced his neck earlier and I reach in and snap something!"

"Uhhh... okay, he dies," said the GM. (Literally. His hand did not even twitch toward a die.)

At this point the player snapped again, and started going on about how they couldn't kill the guy with swords but could with bare hands, and the GM pointed out that he could always change his ruling, so the player shut up. But by this point we had spent some four hours on twelve seconds of near-lethal combat, and needless to say, no one was feeling particularly charitable toward the GM or his system. We ditched the latter a month later, and the former by the end of the year.

[This RPG-trauma therapy session brought to you by a procrastinating soul who should really be doing his homework. Thank you and goodnight!]

_________________
Only try to realize the truth...
There is no spoon. Then you will realize
that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.


"Only he who attempts the absurd
is capable of achieving the impossible."
 - Miguel de Unamuno


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:39 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 4:24 pm
Posts: 1100
Location: Holy Forest of Unfounded Speculation
I play Dnd once every 2 weeks, if possible. You see a friend of mine talk me into playing, and I liked it, and weve been playing since then. Im a halfling rouge, theres a fighter, and a gnome tinkerer. When I say tinkerer, he started out as a mage, but he only learns basic spells and spends all his skill points at Craftmanship and other apperently useless stuff. He actually made a steam powered crowsbow. The GM said it wasnt possible, but he showed him plan and schematics on how it was. He uses up ammo pretty fast though, and hes so encumbered he can barely move, but he doesnt really need to. Our fighter is a sword freak, seriously. He carries enough swords to arm an army. But hes so focused on mastering all of them, that hes been know to release one if it gets stuck in an enemy and just pull out another one. He can carry them all thanks to the gnome, who mad a special pack for him, since he carries no supplies. And I never really show my face unless Im sure Im killing something. My move silently, Hide, and other sneeking techniques are pretty damn high. Now who ever said over speacialize equals death was pretty damn wrong. Take into example the time that we had to pretty much level a castle. The drawbridge was up, and we had no way of getting through. The gnome made me some explosive using minor fire spells and oil, plus his only chemical mix he made from mage spell ingredients. We sprang from behind the woods and the fighter trew a rope across the trench while the gnome shot rounds upon rounds of crowsbow bolts up making the archers on the wall duck and allowing me run across the wall (High balance plus Dex). Once I got under the wall, I planted the explosives and dived into the water. Down went the wall, archers and all. Using the debris as stepping stones, the fighter ran across and was instantly swarmed by nights and footmen. He was doing pretty good and took out 5 enemies, but then he got his hamstrings slashed and fell to his knees. Just as he was bout to the, the 3 remaining knights were thrown of the horses who ran like crazy. The gnome had spent his time mixing somthing that had a smell that frighten them away. I of course then sprang out of the water and slashed all their throats before the could get up. Thing is, out came this man covered completly in armor and with a giant shield as his breastplate. The fighter was unable to move his legs, I couldn't possibily pierce that armor, and the gnome, well he has no battle value once his bolts run out. Normally at this point we woulda run away, but we could leave our fighter. So the gnome did this, he took out his one remaing explosive and tossed it to me. The boss dude was to close and I couldnt sneak up, so I didnt know what to do, but the gnome told to threw it under the Boss guy. The explosive went off and made a hole in the bridge, and the boss weighted like a ton so he sunk like a stone. The Gm had argued everything we did, but the gnome showed that all the things were possible and following every rule. The Gm was pretty angry he didnt get to kill us, but it was alot of fun. The reason I said this reallly long stury is cause Im rained in, bored, and trying not to do homework.

Much love.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:38 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:55 am
Posts: 4234
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
The Man In Black wrote:
:snip


I just agreed with everything MiB just said....

3) Ranger with Great Cleave + Whirlwind + two keen Longswords owns all. But you have to be almost lvl 20 to get all that.

_________________
Remember, one always has what they need, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes, we just don't know what we need.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 2:18 am 
Offline
Tourist
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 5:28 pm
Posts: 27
level 20 wizard with a couple spell books, a lab, and alot of time and imagination. A lvl 20 wizard/sorcerer is by far the most power character. Lets face it- spells rule. A fighter may be able to wip out damage, but lets face it- prepare some combat spells, and no other character can stand a chance against you. Well, ok they stand a chance, but one on one the odds are against them.
On the other hand, being a DM = (in my case) Archmage guild/coven/organization whateva! In simple terms, Archmages are mortals who have the extremely rare ability to control magic as part of them, if they are trained correctly. Kind of like uber-god powers. Take that, balanced characters!

Has anyone tried casting permanent symbols on shields, and setting activation conditions as "being struck"? That is such a vile idea.

"Oh, you hit me eh? OK, lets see, symbol of death, pain and insanity. Please start rolling for impossibly high results.......... You lose."


And of course, magic items that are just, well, overpowered. Like a lvl 20 "horrid wilting" ring, with unlimited uses.


Well, ok, to the questions. I haven't actually played DnD, although I will start soon. Well, as soon as me and Chris finish the Evelmor multiverse (We only have the basic 330000 year history worked out so far, along with a fair amount of other assorted info, and some huge map, along with a multiverse that is quite nice) we are going to start playing (we already know a bunch of people we can drag into geekyness).

1)D20...i dunno. I suppose I should look into that.

2)I think it really depends on the adventure and the players. Some people will just want to focus on fighting, some would rather really develope their characters (like me...although I'll be DM. Still works). The adventure also matters alot- is it political manueverings inside of the court with assassination attempts here and there, or just "lets go kill the evil dragon that killed so and so's family" Ok, my answer didn't actually answer anything....meh

3)I'll get back to this......

4)I would not want to put out the nastiest dungeons ever, but I think that the players should be challenged. They shouldn't be able to just drift through the adventure, they should have to earn the successful ending.

5)..........


On another thought.........
Has anyone's character, or someone who they played with, actually became evil and played the role well enough to end up as the evil villian taking over the world? That certainly would be interesting, with PCs fighting a villian, also a PC who betrayed them.....come one, you know your character wants to recruit an army and crush the kingdom (and there is no reason you couldn't be able to). And that, my friends, is the joy of taking advantage of an open ended system.

_________________
DNI'd by BandMan2K


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 7:42 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 999
Location: Midworld
Skjie wrote:
3) Ranger with Great Cleave + Whirlwind + two keen Longswords owns all. But you have to be almost lvl 20 to get all that.


Don't know why you're choosing a ranger specifically. Fighter can do it by level fifteen, sooner, possibly. I'm trying to remember how many prereqs there are for it. Suffice to say my usual fighter character has almost all that at level 10. Would have all quite quickly after that if it weren't for the Weapon Master prestige class only allowing 2 bonus feats.

And Thandorisus, your shield idea is an interesting one, but I see them costing too much to be made. That as well as the fact that a mage shouldn't be using a shield, so what's the point? Same problem with over-pricing for a ring of unlimited horrid wilting lvl 20. Partially because I've never heard of a ring of unlimited anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 10:56 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 869
The Man in Black wrote:
Treespeaker wrote:

3. D&D v.3.x Specific: When choosing weapons, what's going to give you the most bang for your buck (with "buck" in this case being the feats and/or magic enhancements you have to attach to the weapon to make it truly butt-kicking)?


Ranger or fighter with two-weapon fighting + ambidexterity, statistically an extra attack is better than an attack/damage bonus. Everything else is gravy.


Actually, I beg to differ. It depends highly upon the expected chance to hit one's opponent. If one has a less than two-fifths chance to hit (it's been a while since I did this calculation, so please forgive me if it's slightly off) go for a two-handed weapon over two weapons. The great sword is the best weapon for low-level characters, and the great axe is only one-half-point expected damage worse. Low-level Barbarians make mincemeat of low-level Fighters and Rangers. Paladins need not apply.

The best weapon for two-weapon fighters is the kukri, and the second-best weapon is the short sword. (That is presuming the fighter is Medium size, of course. A Small fighter needs a dagger.) The reason for this is that the fighter need take Weapon Specialization only once. Weapon Specialization is indispensible. It is the reason why Fighters are the best fighters, and properly so.

The best weapon for the fighter who wants to be able to equip himself from captured loot is the ordinary long sword. Long swords are also good in many other ways: they require no extra feat to use, they have a higher-than-average expected critical chance, and they have 1d8 damage.

Spiked chains lose much utility at higher levels, when typical opponents also have long reach and are very difficult to trip due to their large size. One size difference equates to eight strength points, and giants and dragons and their ilk are very strong to begin with.

The Whirlwind Attack feat has proven less desirable in play than the Great Cleave feat, and far more difficult to achieve. Again, when fighting single large opponents, neither feat is particularly useful; but when fighting multiple small ones, a higher-level fighter may be able to use Great Cleave to multiply his entire attack routine several times over.

I think that decision really comes down to what good equipment a fighter can expect to garner. True, a scythe Weapon Master is bloody scary, but if he doesn't have a magical scythe because nobody has ever built one, then he will have some trouble against the oni who plague the Shadowlands and he will be easy meat for anything immune to critical hits, like an undead thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: ...
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:28 pm 
Offline
Green Text

Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4126
Location: Clouds, rain, and green fields...
Jasper wrote:
And Thandorisus, your shield idea is an interesting one, but I see them costing too much to be made. That as well as the fact that a mage shouldn't be using a shield, so what's the point?


I'm pretty sure that strategy is slanted towards clerics. If I could add that to my Animated +3 Large Shield that hovers and deflects without me holding it, it'd be pretty neat.

Monks are crazy, and so are rapiers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 4:24 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 676
Location: Minneapolis, MN
My friends and I tried to play D&D, but it crashed and burned. We knew the rules just fine and everything, but after two sessions, nobody came, because it just wasn't fun.

I blame it on my terrible DMing.

_________________
And thus, Grey wins. He's creating worthless drama in a totally unrelated thread even after he's been banned. - Emy

We're not mad. We're just argumentative. And we live in a state of fluctuating contempt for everything. - onion, when talking about herself and shoonra, actually describes the whole of kyhm forums.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 9:53 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 5:29 am
Posts: 96
Location: London, England
Yevaud333 wrote:
Jasper wrote:
<<his insane strategy>>

Dude... scary. :o (I thought I was the only one who planned characters out that far in advance... impressive! [And scary.] )


lol, have you checked out the "character optimization" boards on the WotC forums, those are scary .
Anyway

1) Divided on that whole issue- on the one hand it allows small companies to actually make books and turn a profit, as well as adding a lot of variety to the DnD world, but on the other I really dislike the D20 system, and vanilla D&D even more so. So in that it helps tiny companies I like it, in that it encourages new players and small/medium companies to use a D20l I'm not a fan. However, it did result in Munchkin D20, the funniest roleplay suppliment I've read in a long time, certainly the cheekiest :wink: , and since AFAIK WotC didn't do anything over that, I'll giv em the benifit of the doubt.

2) Story, while building uber-munchkin builds and going on a killing spree can be pretty fun in D&D, that's what CRPG's are for. So I'd prefer a less combative experience, preferably in a more free form system such as GURPS, Storyteller, or even Mind's Eye/ Nobilis; when playing D&D or Inquisitor though, that's about combat for me- and min/maxing of course (well not in Inquisitor, that's pure cinematic cool).

3) Don't care much for weapons. For evil magic combos, there are much more deadly things than dual-weilding. Favourite is using that 10-level cleric from the Book of Vile Darkness in combination with a Mystic Theurge. Vow of Poverty Monks are evil too. Of course the most broken thing ever is the Illithid savant, the mere mention of which will get you thrown out of any sane D&D club.

4) The main aim of a GM should be to make it fun, so of course it's got to be a challenge, but there are limits: see the sign 2nd and 3rd from last on this list for funny examples. Still, for my money if a GM isn't occasionally accused of being the Source of All Evil, he's not trying hard enough.

5) Well in a crazy combat/munchkin game it has to be class based or there's no challenge, but otherwise I prefer points based systems since that way, you desing the concept first, then build a character around it, whereas a D&D character used to be a variation on the stereotype, and is now just a combination of classess, neither of which has much appeal to me. I certainly hate the old D&D system of one class, the 3e one is fun, but for a long, deep campaign I'd prefer GURPS.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 7:39 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:55 am
Posts: 4234
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Jasper wrote:
Skjie wrote:
3) Ranger with Great Cleave + Whirlwind + two keen Longswords owns all. But you have to be almost lvl 20 to get all that.


Don't know why you're choosing a ranger specifically.


Apparently I missed this....

I choose Ranger for:

1) RP, Mysterious Stranger is always enjoyable.

2) Favored Enemy.

3) In 3.0 DnD, Rangers got Ambidexteriety free, and I respected that.

_________________
Remember, one always has what they need, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes, we just don't know what we need.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 7:56 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 5:29 am
Posts: 96
Location: London, England
Tamayo wrote:
I think that decision really comes down to what good equipment a fighter can expect to garner. True, a scythe Weapon Master is bloody scary, but if he doesn't have a magical scythe because nobody has ever built one, then he will have some trouble against the oni who plague the Shadowlands and he will be easy meat for anything immune to critical hits, like an undead thing.


Bear in mind that the GM has a good deal of control (total if he/she should so choose) over the loot, and what enemies your facing. So you shouldn't have the problem of not having a sufficient weapon to harm enemies unless your GM is really malicous. On the other hand if they feel its powerful enough already they won't give you anything particularly nasty, and may throw crit-immune enemies in your way if you get cocky. So its munchkin-potential is limited (unlike a Vow of Poverty monk, etc) but it doesn't have to be particularlyweak.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Just a little procrastination.... -_-;;;
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2004 7:36 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Evanston, IL (USA)
Jasper wrote:
I've always liked the thought of two-weapon fighting, but had relegated it to a roleplaying thing rather than an effective strategy since most other online analyses I've seen have claimed it to be less effective (damage-wise) in the long-run.


This is totally system-dependent. In D&D, it kicks a fair ammount of ass, especially now that you don't have to waste a feat on Ambidexterity. In GURPS, it's more expensive to pull off, but can be great if you do; same goes for the HERO system 5th edition or any of the Champions books based on it. In White Wolf it's pretty damn crappy, but it doesn't matter--if you can't build a broken White Wolf character, you will never be able to min-max. Ever.

Jasper wrote:
You now switch to Weapon Master Prestige Class, picking Rapier as your weapon (It's in the Oriental Adventures book, but they also put in in Hordes of the Underdark, so it's Canon as far as I'm concerned).


Actually, it's now in the Complete Warrior 3.5 handbook that came out recently, so it's totally canon.

Okay, looks like I'm running out of time faster than I'd like...I'll get more in on other folk's posts later (this was going to be one of my signature "respond to every reply since my last post" jobs, but I'm late for class). Peace out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2004 11:58 am 
Offline
Expatriate

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Evanston, IL (USA)
Okay, to finish what I started...
Ancient wrote:
<snip>

...thanks for sharing.

Thandorisus wrote:
level 20 wizard with a couple spell books, a lab, and alot of time and imagination. A lvl 20 wizard/sorcerer is by far the most power character. Lets face it- spells rule. A fighter may be able to wip out damage, but lets face it- prepare some combat spells, and no other character can stand a chance against you. Well, ok they stand a chance, but one on one the odds are against them.


There's two problems with this: some practical, in-game issues, and, more importantly, the fact that very, very few role-players really get off on telling the GM "Okay, I'm spending a month pouring power into a ring." You don't get EPs and swag for that. Hell, you have to spend EPs and swag for it! On the in-game side, you run into the problem of multiple encounters. After watching you take out a couple of Great Wyrm red dragons or whatever, the GM is just going to replace them with the Horde of Neverending Random Encounters. When you get nailed by a small kobold army three or four times a day, you start running dangerously low on big-ticket, area-effect spells, and the personal spells are just plain wasted--who wants to do 20d6, fort save for half (or whatever) to a kobold? Higher-level magic-users are awesome against "boss" monsters, but are still extremely suceptible to expendeble swarm tactics. Contrarywise, a high-level fighter can still lay a reasonable ammount of smack-down on a dragon, while being able to Great Cleave his way through a simply ridiculous ammount of smaller monsters.

Additionally, I tend to agree with Jasper on the shield-symbol idea. It's neat, but it costs a lot, and you can't use it yourself anyway, so what's the point? You can sell it to a fighter and get a lot of gold...but the fact that the fighter can buy it proves that you don't have to be a magic user (or sacrifice EPs) to make that much gold, so there isn't a lot of point.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group