View Profile: FrogReaver - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Today, 03:08 AM
    Sure. I would just love once to hear their take on the pros of 5e in relation to roleplaying. What can it do that all these other systems can't?
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Today, 02:05 AM
    I think the phonemonen is due to rarity. If your PC wizard was the only person anyone encountered with magical powers then I think it feels magical. By the time the whole party and every major city and a good portion of your enemies are slinging spells then it just doesn't have that feeling.
    20 replies | 440 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Today, 01:07 AM
    Sure. There's pros and cons to all - and often times those pros and cons may be more or less of a pro or con when filtered through an individual. Or as you surmised, some cons might become pros and some pros might become cons to some people. Of course! It depends on your goals, your likes and dislikes etc. This was hilarious.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Today, 12:47 AM
    I think all you have is a few personal experiences that you've spent a lot of time analyzing and trying to extrapolate as general principles for all mankind. So you first. Tell us that you don't actually know everything you've been discussing and talking about all this time. It's okay to do so after all.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Today, 12:38 AM
    I think all they did was define how any apparent success could turn into a failure. Their method was to assert something additional that I didn't claim about the scene. The same can be done with 1000gp to turn it into a failure as well. Basically they aren't arguing that the ruby can't be a success, but rather that giving the player what they want with a major downside isn't necessarily...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:33 PM
    Maybe you just have a much more romanticized view of acting than I do. Actors stand in front of a green screen all day, Repeating the same scenes over and over till everyone gets it just right. They cry on demand. The recite lines. They know how to portray what appears to be genuine emotion even when they aren't feeling those emotions. I don't view acting as roleplaying. The two are not...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:12 PM
    That fact can also point toward personal investment on the issue that could be clouding your judgement. Or point out a more important heuristic that you just so happened to overlook in your zeal dedication to attribute the differences to the system for all this time. You can systematize nearly anything - but it's always going to be at a cost.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 03:28 PM
    But you are looking on the individual level and saying those mechanics help you role play. Im looking at an individual level and saying those mechanics hinder my roleplaying The mechanics are the same but we get two different reports of their effects. conclusion: it’s nothing to do with the mechanics but our individual differences.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 02:35 PM
    you mention extreme mental differences in people. How can you say with certainty that it isn’t those mental differences that prompt you to have such experiences with certain game mechanics. Isn’t it possible that my mental differences could cause me to have totally different experiences with those same game mechanics. If if that’s the case (I think it is) then is it really the mechanics that...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 06:17 AM
    Incorrect. Next time ask my opinion before broadbrushing me. Game mechanics are great for play. They are great for the game aspect. They may even enhance roleplay in certain ways. But they also detract from it in certain ways as well. If you want to talk about the pros and cons of certain mechanics in those regards I'm game. If you want to act like there are no roleplay drawbacks to...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 04:00 AM
    are there never disagreements or difference of opinion about when the rules say to roll?
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 03:15 AM
    DM determining when a check is called for. Likely in a ton of game but it's opened up a whole new world for me.
    39 replies | 1354 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:43 AM
    In terms of in combat support my ratings are: Cleric 1 > Paladin 1 Cleric 2 < Paladin 2 Cleric 3 = Paladin 3 Cleric 4 > Paladin 4 Cleric 5 > Paladin 5 Cleric 6 < Paladin 6 Cleric 7 < Paladin 7 Cleric 8 < Paladin 8 Cleric 9 < Paladin 9
    16 replies | 655 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Thursday, 18th July, 2019, 01:15 AM
    First let's be clear. No one is advocating that a GM turn a successful check into a failure. What is being suggested is that just like there are multiple states of failure there are also multiple states of success. A simple counter-example to establish this point. Suppose a player says, "I search the room for 1000 gold". He rolls a 1. Do you really consider a possible fail state in this...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 06:58 PM
    You seem to be arguing against a position I never took. Order clerics are by far the cleric is recommend for support. But clerics are typically much better off at offense than support, thanks to spirit guardians. I mean really, what good support spells do clerics get that they will be using encounter after encounter after levels 5+
    16 replies | 655 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 02:39 AM
    It's a bit different dragging an NPC or PC along with you and walking around with 100+ lbs of gear.
    13 replies | 450 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 02:38 AM
    Well, I guess by rule every PC is the rock as they all can grapple a willing ally
    13 replies | 450 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 02:36 AM
    The basic manuever seems legit by rule. *** actually the free object part isn't, but he could use an attack to make the grapple then carry/drag. The 30ft of movement was to far. Should have been 1/2 that unless he also managed to dash in there somewhere. Small caveat: I don't think it's flat out picking the ally up so much as dragging them with him. The fighter could do the same with an...
    13 replies | 450 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th July, 2019, 02:19 AM
    You are looking before the dice were ever rolled and saying see this system covers all possible resolutions. The rest of us are looking at it after the dice are already rolled - and at that moment the range of possible resolutions are restricted. But even in this belabored exchange, the more important point seems forgotten - that the GM typically has the power to call for a check or not call...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 09:16 PM
    FrogReaver replied to Double Dash
    Monks already get an inherent speed boost. So they are the fastest dashers. I let let them double dash. The rules never forbid it and my players seem to enjoy it the few times it comes up.
    113 replies | 2768 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 09:11 PM
    Yea. I just foresee the cleric doing more spirit guardians and less actual support. Multiclassing considerations can help the paladin a lot.
    16 replies | 655 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 02:25 AM
    I think a charisma based paladin has a lot of potential for your goal. Variant human + inspiring leader. Good access to party buff spells. Built in healing that scales better than cure wounds. Paladins also get wrathful smite which is a great debuff spell. The fear spell is really top notch for control as well (which at least 1 subclass gets). IMO, you could make a really good support...
    16 replies | 655 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 11:30 PM
    Yep and if you fail to balance the later levels and balance the first, then you might as well not have balanced the first levels either, as players will tend toward the classes that are good later (if all else is balanced) even if they may never hit those levels. Call it the "just in case" paradigm.
    16 replies | 574 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 11:25 PM
    How about you ask the guy that suggested it was a problem to begin with... your buddy chaochou
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 08:35 PM
    You most definitely can create diversity by limiting players abilities to make a choice. You may dislike that method but it accomplishes the goal. What if I think strength and con are the most important stats for a fighter and that they should be more important for any fighter than intelligence or charisma If your point is that such characters wont be as strong as their 20 stat...
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 08:04 PM
    Accusing each other of misreading each other posts is goina go no where. That said, I think that even Mistwell can agree that "pick any cantrip" doesn't really fit well as a fighting style. So why don't ya both forget the whole thing and start over from that point?
    106 replies | 2369 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 07:58 PM
    @chaochou obviously feels always choosing what's expedient is not a good way to play. I happen to agree with him on that as I believe you do as well. The overall point is that the playstyle I suggest doesn't lead to that unless a player ignores their character conceptualization. You are way to hung up on my definition of always choosing what's expedient as cheating.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:02 PM
    I find it amazing how that when you really dig in deep that you agree with me
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:55 PM
    I'm not suggesting your starting scores be capped. The cap doesn't affect character generation stats, just what can be added afterwards. I like that a lot. Great idea!
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:53 PM
    It's a modular system. You can easily replace random cap with set 20 cap.
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:50 PM
    Sadly - All of them. Even if you get 1-10 or whatever perfectly balanced, if some classes are much better later then they will be chosen more all else being equal.
    16 replies | 574 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:41 PM
    Not ignorance to know a general truth. They are completely wrong when it comes to other systems such as the ones that @chaochou has mentioned. One example works wonders. If it's that easy to disprove me then provide an example that does so.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:33 PM
    Right. Did you expect me to disagree with that? That's precisely what I'm saying. Yes those are possibilities (and occasionaly the last has it's place IMO), but not necessities Well that would be the ultimate goal. If that's not being done at least most of the time then maybe a different system would be better for that player.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:28 PM
    Right, but it did have to do with what chaochou said. In fact he didn't even defend it after I called him out on it. That was his rebuttal to the player choosing. There's nothing else that can be referring to except players that always make the most expedient decision (aka cheating)
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:15 PM
    I don't need to know much specific about China to know there aren't elves there. Nor Do I need to know the specifics of a bunch of game systems to draw general conclusions about them. In short, I can be ignorant on specifics without being wrong.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:08 PM
    I think the best way to address that is to ask, what character from such a system can't be played identically in a D&D type system (assuming same overall setting etc). On a side note: I do think the typical D&D character is likely more basic (maybe more cartoonish) than the ones such systems always produce. So there is the degree of mandating a more complex character that is appealing. But I...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Warpiglet's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:49 PM
    There's more mystery in an imperfect system like 1e. There is more variability in power. Rolling hit points and abilities was exciting! I had a barbarian with 6 12s for hit point rolls...lottery odds! And it became part of his character... i think as as an adult (not a kid) the danger of missed saving throws and the game's deadliness are high stakes excitement. but I must say...
    74 replies | 2825 view(s)
    2 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:29 PM
    Herein lies the problem. You are so convinced you must keep a player from cheating (choosing the expedient option) that you have invented mechanics that police the game to such a degree that those players who won't simply choose the expedient have a far less enjoyable time. If your players need policing to ensure they aren't just choosing the expedient option then those systems you describe...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:25 PM
    I appreciate the actual response! Thank you. I think if what you suggest here is the case then it will be easy for you to show I'm wrong. So let's see what you said. Sounds good so far Remember how frustrated you got when you thought I was putting words in your mouth. Please have some empathy and don't inadvertently do the same to me.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 02:45 PM
    It's interesting to me that a hard decision for a player is being referred to as "not a challenge". To me that's the greatest kind of challenge in an RPG. That said, I'm going to avoid defining challenge and simply look at various situations whether they be challenges or not and how they effect play. Consider a persuasion attempt on a PC. Whether there is risk or not will depend on the...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:53 AM
    Consider a D&D game. An NPC is trying to persuade a PC to do something. The DM states the NPC's case with a high level overview. To provide some context for the players into how persuasive the NPC argument was the DM rolls the NPC's persuasion skill just so they players can gauge how convincing said NPC would be to the average person. Then the players take the NPC's specific argument and the...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:41 AM
    From an optimization perspective - everything. Consider a level 1 fighter with the following stats 16 str 14 dex 12 con 13 wisdom 8 int 11 cha Lets say he rolls a cap on str of 16. A cap on dex of 14. A cap of con of 20. Let's ignore the mental stats for now.
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:19 AM
    It would be, but it would not be a "fighting style"
    106 replies | 2369 view(s)
    2 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:19 AM
    Not familiar with this. Samson's power was God given and not oath given. The oath he took was an oath taken by many. He is the only one who acquired supernatural strength. Breaking the oath broke his promise to God and thus he also lost his strength that stemmed from that promise.
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 05:11 AM
    Another idea. It's magic. So insteadInstead of attempting to compete on the raw damage front instead look for useful effects that aren't directly related to damage. If the effect you decide is most thematic isn't strong enough let the style also add a +1 damage bonus. Magical effects you could potentially produce -Extra reach -5ft teleport -weapon dealing elemental damage (possibly...
    106 replies | 2369 view(s)
    2 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 04:47 AM
    It seems to me that while the mechanics mentioned are miles ahead D&D's mechanics for NPC interaction, that such mechanics when used on PCs will do 2 things 1. Because a human will always be able to outperform a rather simplistic algorithm in judging what is more true to the character in question then this simple mechanical algorithm will inherently produce less fidelity than a PC under...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 01:17 AM
    I don't think Holy Knight is not a narrow concept
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 11:58 PM
    The problem with Paladin isn't that it's a narrow concept it's that the cleric arguably fills the archetype of Holy Warrior better. IMO.
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 03:16 PM
    I like the idea but darkness and Shadowblade are both concentration
    37 replies | 930 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 06:11 AM
    I appreciate the attempt. I guess I'm stuck thinking - If that's his test - and the player is the one that has full control over his chastity then that part isn't really part of the test to begin with as it's never in doubt. Presumably for this test you would need something to entice the player to give up chastity (in which case we are back at my Excalibur example), or to force him via a...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 06:06 AM
    I think a fighting style is worth 2^(-1/2) feats.
    106 replies | 2369 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 05:58 AM
    This is a discussion board. If your not going to discuss with me then stop talking to me.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 05:55 AM
    I love the idea of spells based on chosen terrain. Like land druids! I like being able to adapt to different terrains - but I feel that takes something away from the rangers substance. He's not necerssarily the guy that can go out and adapt... even though his outdoors experience means he probably could. He's from a specific place and his time and familiarity to that place has given him...
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 05:49 AM
    Then I'm confused. In chess you can choose between all choices. Earlier you said that meant something wasn't a challenge
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 05:32 AM
    For favored enemies maybe think more general about why said ranger would be good. Honestly the hunter rangers level 3 abilities are pretty close to what I'd envision as generalized favored enemy styles. Also keep in mind, a rangers range may include more than 1 terrain. Some may include all. Therefore: I'd look to provide benefits more broadly. I'm thinking a list of choices you pick at...
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 05:07 AM
    Thinking it through a little more: Rangers primary purpose is to be a protector of a range. The connection to the place to be protected may have been what prompted said individual to become a ranger or it may have been developed after years of being in that place. I think the important fact is that it's really the only fundamental feature that differentiates a stereotypical ranger from a...
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:54 AM
    I think so.
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:42 AM
    Those 2 sentences appear to contradict each other. Let me elaborate: At first you say a hard choice isn't a challenge. Then you say you believe a challenge can be made without mechanics. What other method could possibly result in a challenge besides either mechanics or a hard choice?
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:27 AM
    In real life - What about chess? Is Chess a challenge? (assuming two nearly equally skilled players)
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:24 AM
    Honestly 18 cap overall might work out pretty well. Just 1 ASI to max your prime stat and then you can branch out. It's not as bad as I first thought. Decreases overall PC power a little. Can easily be made up for with more magic items if desired so that isn't so bad.
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:20 AM
    Okay Mr Grumpy - can't take a joke - but can belittle others
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 04:02 AM
    Maybe you took my meds this time ;)
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 03:59 AM
    Why lower the cap to 18?
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:54 AM
    I'm pretty much in agreement, though there are some that are insisting you can run social encounters the same way you run combat encounters. I'm not 100% sure if you really can or not (I heavily lean toward not possible as well), but I'm more concerned with that's gained by running a social encounter as a combat encounter. It seems to me that if even possible, that it's an inferior way of...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:50 AM
    Of course, which is why the proposal is to increase everyone's saves not just the fighters. Saves in high level games are too low compared to the normal DC. So much better? I'm suggesting the 8 wisdom fighter should have about a 20% chance of success as opposed to a 10% chance. If he got proficiency and maxed wisdom that would put him at 80% ...Which you are right is still too...
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:40 AM
    So let's just assume for the sake of argument the wizard has 16 con and the fighter 16 wisdom. The fighter still needs a 16+ to save. That's still ridiculously high especially for the investment he's put in. The wizard practically doubles his hp. The most the +3 wisdom bonus gives me is a 25% chance to succeed on a wisdom saving throw.
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:34 AM
    Because no wizard maintains an 8 con, fighters in featless games can maintain an 8 wisdom
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:33 AM
    I've seen a fighter's focus be str, dex and con before with no mental stat focus.
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:32 AM
    Maxperson You said: "You cannot challenge a character without simultaneously challenging the player. " Fog of war style challenges will challenge both the character and the player. These are the challenges I propose as the most fun. I believe there also contests like a game of basketball, a game of athletic ability and skill, that is very challenging (aka difficult to win) provided the...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:14 AM
    I think there is a difference between challenging the player and challenging the character. I think it needs explored whether such you can ever challenge the character without challenging the player. I don't view the character as a character sheet. IMO They exist in the shared fictional world that we have created. They can be challenged in that world the same way I can be challenged in this...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 02:01 AM
    Honestly is something like this could be implemented for character creation as well that would be great!
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:55 AM
    The idea is to roll the stat cap after every other detail has been chosen (including stat assignments and class). I happen to think that people will be willing to take the risk of playing a character they really want as long as they have a semi decent chance of getting a good stat cap. In my proposed system there's a decent chance your primary stat would be capped below 20. I was...
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:46 AM
    My idea? I think it actually increases the likelihood of such characters - provided of course you do the stat capping after everything else has been determined. No system can cover every concept well. I think the half-elf raised by orcs is a great place for you and the DM to get together and agree on a houserule regarding that PC. It's such a minor exception I wouldn't expect that to be...
    51 replies | 1255 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:23 AM
    Yea, you keep getting stuck so much on the trees that you are missing the forest. You just throw darts at the dart board hoping 1 sticks.
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:20 AM
    Where did I suggest that? You are good at inventing strawmen. It's twice now you've accused me of a position I've never taken. I can't. So why don't you spell out the difference? They are banned in the campaign we are in.
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 01:02 AM
    @Flamestrike You have the strangest idea's about optimization, balance and mechanics I've ever encountered To the OP: Conceptually a ranger is a non-holy warrior that protects his range, usually a wilderness expanse but it wouldn't be surprising to conceive of a ranger in a more urban setting protecting particular areas there. They are sometimes depicted as possessing a supernatural...
    352 replies | 12473 view(s)
    2 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 12:43 AM
    Could it be that players often prefer D&D combat over non-combat play largely because DM's can be pretty bad about making out of combat challenges where characters and players actually face risk due to uncertainty?
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 12:38 AM
    It's quite rude to ask someone why they prefer something and then try to argue with them that the reasons they give for preferring it. I prefer to have my character start with all 20's in all my stats. It's a problem if you request other players not have their characters start with 20 in all their stats. See how absurd that is? feats aren't allowed
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 12:03 AM
    I honestly would even struggle to classify an in-combat attack against a PC or NPC as a challenge for them. The combat itself may be a challenge both for the player and the character. But a single attack from that combat is really just a piece of the overall challenge that's occurring The challenge that comes from combat is determining what resources to use when, or whether you should save...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:58 PM
    Slightly less so sure as your base attack goes up in damage slightly as you gain ASI's. But that's really the only negative type scaling provided to the fighter's damage based fighting styles. A fighters weapon damage only goes up a tiny fraction as they level. generally from 9.5 to 11.5 or 11.33 to 13.33.
    106 replies | 2369 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:51 PM
    1. I think the game is more balanced without feats 2. I like to optimize and there's a small handful of feat and class combinations that flat out make that combination better than anything else in a similar category. Thus, removing the means of optimizing to that degree I tend to find most classes are relatively on par with the others and everything becomes available to me as an option -...
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:25 PM
    I wanted to add, it's not just about challenging the player. Everything I've said also applies to the character.
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    1 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:17 PM
    playing Actually run the numbers for a featless game. You'll be surprised how close things are.
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:04 PM
    Often times such characters will already be using such abilities. Faerie Fire. Entangle Web Hold Person Hold Monster Open Fist Monk using flurry of blows Battlemaster using trip attack A greater invisibility buff
    37 replies | 930 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:41 PM
    I've figured out the problem, you only consider games with feats whereas I enjoy games without feats. Monks are one of the best single target controllers for most of the game and get pretty good DPR as well. Thus they already compete with and due to their potent offensive ability combination they likely outdo the fighter whose sole contribution is DPR. They are only slightly ahead...
    71 replies | 2057 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:20 PM
    I really don't understand why @Ovinomancer and others can't grasp this simple concept. Challenges are about risk. Risk is based on uncertainity. However, even in a perfectly deterministic world, there is still uncertainty which means there is still risk which means there's still challenges. Thus, you don't need a randomization method like dice to produce uncertainty. Chess actually...
    701 replies | 19289 view(s)
    0 XP
  • FrogReaver's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:05 PM
    The danger here I think is more in party synergy than in individual PC's. Assuming a party with a PAM + GWM fighter or barbarian you could potentially give the GWM 2-3 sources of advantage which really ramps up their damage output against most foes.
    37 replies | 930 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About FrogReaver

Basic Information

Age
32
About FrogReaver
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
5,136
Posts Per Day
3.37
Last Post
Players choose what their PCs do . . . Today 03:08 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
51
General Information
Last Activity
Today 06:25 AM
Join Date
Tuesday, 19th May, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

1 Friend

  1. Warpiglet Warpiglet is offline

    Member

    Warpiglet
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 12 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 20th July, 2019


Friday, 19th July, 2019


Thursday, 18th July, 2019


Wednesday, 17th July, 2019


Tuesday, 16th July, 2019


Sunday, 14th July, 2019



Page 1 of 12 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Thursday, 18th July, 2019

  • 04:13 AM - Campbell mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    FrogReaver I think you are starting from a faulty premise. You are assuming that game mechanics cannot meaningfully contribute to play despite having no direct experience of games where the rules are meant to supplement role play. We play these games because we value what they have to say about human nature and how people interact with each other. They help us form mental models of who our characters really are and how they think and feel. They help us get away from the tactical mindset encouraged by games like D&D and help resolve the barrier between smart play and authentic play. I can tell you that I feel like I have had more authentic and immersive experiences playing games like Blades in the Dark, Masks, Monsterhearts and Apocalypse World than I ever have with Dungeons and Dragons. Part of that was our commitment to the characters. Part of it was the lack of certain D&D cultural features. I think the mechanics contributed a great deal.

Monday, 15th July, 2019

  • 10:02 AM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...alist theories of knowledge in this way: you can't get more out of knowledge than you put in. To discover something about my character requires something external to take place. I've given examples in this thread. So have others. It doesn't have to be done through random number generation. There are other resolution systems possible. But it does require some way of establishing salient elements of the fiction other than via decision-making by the player of the PC. To my mind this is actually not a radical thesis about RPGing, given that this type of game has relied on resolution mechanics, including random number generation, to establish external constraints on player choices and interpretation of the fiction from the outset. D&D is (though not necessarily should be) the baseline assumption. If we can't argue from a base of some sort, then there is no argument.By my count, there are only three recurrent posters in this thread who make D&D the baseline assumption: Lanefan, FrogReaver and Maxperson. I'm not interested in talking primarily about D&D. It's not a system I'm playing at the moment, and I doubt think that focusing on it is going to shed any particular light on the questions raised in the OP or subsequently in the thread. If you think that there is some aspect of D&D mechanics or play that will help address those questions, then by all means post it.

Sunday, 14th July, 2019

  • 05:00 PM - Aebir-Toril mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    .... Similarly for the outcome of a Duel of Wits. Which goes back to the point about play experience. Thinking really hard about what you want your character to do, and then choosing it, is not the same play experience as being forced to recognise that your character is not who you thought they were. And this is where the issue of familiarity with other systems and other techniques comes in. Your posts in this thread give the impression that your RPG experience does not extend far beyond AD&D 2nd ed and similar sorts of systems (eg a fairly common approach to 3E and 5e D&D; maybe a bit of GURPS or HERO or even DragonQuest played in a similar style; but not a lot else). If that impression is a mistaken one than I apologise - but I certainly don't get the feel that you've played (say) HeroWars/Quest, or DitV, or Burning Wheel, or any PbtA game, or even AD&D Oriental Adventures with the GM pushing hard on the honour and family systems that are part of that. Yes, this seems to be true for FrogReaver, but I wouldn't know, and it doesn't really matter. After all, I believe that we're talking about the fundamental qualities of what a character is and how character challenges should be resolved in general, not in systems like Burning Wheel, which, to be honest, while fun, are far from as common as D&D. As is always true in these discussions, about half of the participants assume D&D as a baseline, because D&D defines the RPG market. Are you saying that players should not have total control over their characters in every system? To me, both your argument and FrogReaver 's seem hollow and grasping, maybe it's time we agree to disagree after 59 pages.

Saturday, 13th July, 2019

  • 07:36 AM - Esker mentioned FrogReaver in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    Since FrogReaver has't replied, allow me to chime in. We were comparing the expected damage of a Fighter vs. Paladin. His post #171 (top of page 18) show a table he made. We are now discussing how much of a greater impact the Battle Master using precision attack instead of one of the maneuvers that simply add damage. That is why he replied to my post about calculating the value of precision attack in this scenario and mentioned you if you want to do it. I think that about covers it. :) Ah, ok, thanks. Yeah, FrogReaver and I had a very in the weeds discussion about that recently. Since there seems to be no hope of a new thread, here's how I think about precision attack in a nutshell. Suppose you need to roll a natural 9 to hit. The simplest approach is to assume you use a precision die any time you're within x of a hit (where x is the size of the die). So, if you're of a level where your superiority dice are d8s, then you'd use a die on a roll between 2 and 8 (1 is an auto-miss). With no advantage...

Thursday, 11th July, 2019

  • 04:38 AM - Shiroiken mentioned FrogReaver in post Why don't everything scale by proficiency bonus?
    I wish I could sticky the following to the start of this inane thread. tl;dr version OP: I don't like the current system, and feel it's unrealistic Dissenting Commenters: It works out just fine mechanically, and there are some real world justifications OP plus allied commenters: I still don't like the current system, and feel it's unrealistic Repeat ad nasuem, adding various attacks/insults, devolving into strange caricature characters that supposedly prove one side or the other. The simple solution, that should probably have been pointed out about 10 pages back: FrogReaver feel free to houserule your game to add a modifier to non-proficient checks, attacks, and saves. It's probably unnecessary, but if it's what you feel is best for your game, then do it. Customizing 5E is probably the best aspect of it, since it works on a very solid chassis that is fairly modular.
  • 03:41 AM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...y PC, and clack, clack, clack! Oh, look. This time he's an ass, maybe next time he'll be noble. *yawn*The second bit here suggest to me that you're not familiar with the play of any of the non-D&D games that Aldarc, Umbran, Ovinomancer and I have referenced - Fate, Pendrgaon, Prince Valiant, MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic, Bunring Wheel, etc. And the first bit is odd, because the way you find out whether a D&D character is tough enough to beat Orcus in a fight is (among other things) to roll some dice. Of course D&D combat is not nothing but die rolls. But nor is a skill challenge, or a Duel of Wits, or whatever other mechanic a system might use to find out whether or not your PC is steely-hearted enough to resist the maiden's wink. Consulting rules makes zero difference here. It's just a question of whether or not you trust the GM to set up the game to be fun. Adding a veneer of rules on top is just a comfort blanket for gamers who really like rulesI certainly find it interesting that FrogReaver and Maxperson are fine with the maiden melting a PC's heart of the GM has written down (i) that the maiden has such a special ability and (ii) it allows a saving throw. Given that there's no rule in D&D that limits the special abilities a GM can place on a creature or NPC, and no rules that limit the number of saves s/he can call for, this seems like a strange view to take - what you call a comfort blanket or even a fetish. You're insisting that there can be no consequences for character unless the player agrees. This just means that character is never at risk. I'm asking to you imagine what happens if it is -- what kind of game is that, how does that work, what can be accomplished? There's nothing wrong with not grappling with these questions, or grappling and finding them lacking, but you've straightjacketed yourself into a narrow view of games by insisting it should not be.This post in particular has some nice accounts of what is involved in putting a character at risk. In hi...
  • 03:30 AM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Lanefan, FrogReaver - you've both made some recent posts which dispute the analysis of action put foward in the OP. Eg you both deny that I melt the maiden's heart with my wink is a true description of a PC's action, and a description of the same action as I wink at the maiden (although obviously a different description). I'm not that interested in turning this thread into an argument in the philosophy of action, but I think that the objections to your claims are overwhelming. (And there's a reason why Davidson remains, even posthumously, one of the leading figures in contemporary philosophy of action.) Just to give one: if the character in fact melts the maiden's heart with a wink, then it is obviously true to say of him/her S/he melted the maiden's heart with a wink. It's also obviously true to say S/he winked. If you deny that these are the same action (under different descriptions) then you suddenly have the person doing two things although she performed only one bodily movement (the wink) with onl...

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 03:01 PM - Fenris-77 mentioned FrogReaver in post Why don't everything scale by proficiency bonus?
    FrogReaver - I can't think of a good reason why an adventurer should get a general bonus to every skill based on level. If you want general competency you can spread your ASIs out over the stats and you're good. Broad competence or specialization, your choice, plus a range of medium options in the middle, and it's already baked into the rules. Don't take this the wrong way, but is what you're actually after a general competence that doesn't have to come at the expense of any optimizing for class stats and abilities? More pointedly, broad competence that doesn't impact your ability to get one or two stats to 20 by 20th level plus the feat tree necessary to max out your DPR?

Sunday, 7th July, 2019

  • 10:38 PM - Lanefan mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...ple cut down with little trouble by Conan and friends, where is the inconsistency? Consistency is a property of, and often a virtue of, a fiction. Minion rules are a device for establishing the content of a shared RPG fiction in certain contexts. If you mis-use the rules you might get poor fiction. Likewise in Moldvay Basic if you misuse the rules for DEX checks - eg require a DEX check every 10' to avoid the PCs falling down like Charlie Chaplin on a bad day - you'll get stupid fiction. But everyone knows that that's not how you use DEX checks. Mutatis mutandis for minion rules.When a PC is around, minions have 1 h.p. When there's no PC around, they have h.p. suitable to whatever creature type they are. A bar full of minion brawlers can have an ordinary bar fight without a PC present, but once a PC shows up things get weird because the very presence of the PC changes the mechanics for all those minions. Consistency, meanwhile, flies off across the lake... In response to FrogReaver you say: I don't really follow the detail of this. My take away - drawing in part on your earlier posts - is that you don't like a system which permits some mechanism to establish a PC's emotion other than player decision, unless that mechanism correlates to or gives expression to an in-fiction thing that bears the label magic. For me at least, the point is not one of dislike of such effects where there's a mechanism, it's one of dislike of situations where the effects happen with NO mechanism.
  • 10:04 PM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Upthread the notion of roleplaying - what it is, what it isn't - was raised. The closest to a consensus position that was put forward was that it involved playing the role of a character in a fictional world. In a RPG, there is an additional element of advocacy for the character on account of it being a game, where the participants therefore in some sense aspire to do well. A number of posters - with FrogReaver in the forefront - seem to take it that (at least in the context of RPGing) roleplaying also involves or requires establishing and maintaining a conception of the character one is playing. I'm curious about this. Is this a particularly strong or focused version of advocacy? Something else? And why are PC emotional states such a focus of discussion in relation to it? If my character is Conan the Barbarian, who - as we all know - "came . . . black-haired, sullen eyed, sword in hand, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet", then maybe being a throne-treader is more central to my character conception than exercising control over my character's melancholies and mirths (and lusts, for that matter). And going back to advocacy - isn't one typical feature of RPG play to test the player's conception of his/her PC? Am I really as righteous as I think? As resistant to temptation? As cap...

Saturday, 6th July, 2019

  • 08:04 PM - hawkeyefan mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ...hose. Right. It pretty much always goes back to D&D and only D&D with you. It tends to make these discussions that are about RPGs in general a bit challenging. You could add some social mechanics onto 5E relatively easily. The Traits, Bonds, ideals, and Flaws could be tweaked a bit so that in game events that pertained to them could pose more of a challenge. For example, a character could have a flaw of being greedy. So anytime a chance at an easy money grab comes up, the character could make a saving throw or similar roll to see if he gives in to his flaw. A character could have a bond with a specific town or organization. Learning of a threat to that town/organization maybe forces a roll or else the character’s obligation overrides his reasoning. Regardless of how the roll turns out, though, roleplaying is involved. If successful, the player can have the character rise above their flaw....on a failure, the player can have them give in to the flaw. This last bit seems relevant to FrogReaver’s points.
  • 07:17 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    So, at this point, I see that the Maxperson, FrogReaver, Satyrn nexus is doing the following: 1) assuming D&D in their arguments, and 2) confusing choice/authority with roleplaying (at least Max and Frog are). No conversation is possible so long as these are the assumptions, as these are different from the assumption set of the other side, who is talking about all games, not just D&D and is also not confusing authority/choice with roleplaying -- in fact, this difference is the point of the OP, in part.
  • 05:23 PM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    ... that I wouldn't want to play one of those.It's not "out of fiction". The wink occurs in the fiction. The melting of your PC's heart happens in the fiction. No difference from a spell. And the rule that explains how winking works is something written down in a book. Just like the rules for "an accepted part of the game" that "know going into the game." An in fiction wink has no ability to override a PC's normal reaction. Speaking personally, winks do absolutely nothing for me.Mere assertion. As many have pointed out - George Orwell probably most famously in relatively contemporary literature - everyone has their breaking point. It also suggests significant ignorance of the variety of RPG designs out there. For instance, if you really want your PC never to be influenced by another PC's friendly behaviour, you can choose to play a game which allows that particular sort of immunity to be built into the PC. And this also brings us back to the assumption that both you and FrogReaver seem to be making but have not explicitly acknowledged let alone explained: what is the connection between playing a character and getting to decide whether or not that character is the sort of person who might be moved by a wink from another? magic can do anything it says it does, normal person to person interactions don't exert explicit control over a personThis is just more assertion. In real life people influence one another all the time - eg someone calls out to you to stop, and you do; someone goes to shake your hand, and you respond; someone shows you a shocking image and it stuns you; someone you thought you hated smiles at you and offers you a cupcake that they brought into work from their birthday party on the weekend, and now you think you might have misjudged them. In the context of a RPG, these are all infiction events that might occur, just like being ensorcelled. Just as a game system might not always let the player choose whether or not the magic ensorcels his...

Thursday, 4th July, 2019

  • 08:15 AM - pemerton mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    FrogReaver - I pretty much agree with Ovinomancer's most recent post about what roleplaying is (post 139 on my count). If I'm told to play an angry person, I can do that. If I'm told to play a person who is pulling the trigger to assassinate the duke, I can do that. If I'm told to play a person whose heart has just been melted by a wink, well I can do that to. Being told "The magician has ensorcelled you - play that" is no different from being told "The maiden's wink has softened your heart - play that." In some ways the latter is actually easier, I think, because it's closer to a genuine human experience! (Unless you've spent a lot of time in the company of Svengali!) I also want to go back to the Apocalypse World example that I posted and that Ovinomancer mentioned. The player establilshes that her PC is looking for an escape route. She makes her check and fails. So the GM narrates that she is looking at her barred window, thinking about how maybe she might be able to escape through it...
  • 03:46 AM - Elfcrusher mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    FrogReaver: is a first person shooter not a first person shooter when you aren’t actually firing a weapon?
  • 12:51 AM - Ovinomancer mentioned FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Roleplaying is simply taking on an imaginary role in a shared fiction. There are a number of ways of doing this, including acting, therapy, and playing games. A roleplaying gane is one where the players roleplay a character(s) in the game and where the player is expected to advocate for their character. None of this is impacted by a GM being able to declare actions for a PC in some situations, especially if the action declaration is due to a failed attempt at action by the player. This varues by game. In 5e, the expectation is that players have absolute authority to declare thin actions, except in specific cases, usually magic. But, in other games, where players often have much more control over the scene in general, this is countered by tge GM having control of PC actions in failure conditions. This does not reduce the roleplaying in these games. I'll leave this here again for FrogReaver, as he seems to have missed it on his last pass.

Saturday, 29th June, 2019

  • 12:50 PM - Oofta mentioned FrogReaver in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    As far as average damage ... I think there's a whole lot of complexity being ignored for a difference of what, 6% increase in average damage in the sample from FrogReaver? I get it. Some people like to eke out every drop. Just put me in the list of people that think it doesn't matter and is highly situational. Besides, there's other fun things you can do like dual throw hand axes like my now retired fighter did. It was handy and made him decent at close range.

Wednesday, 19th June, 2019

  • 02:35 PM - Umbran mentioned FrogReaver in post Missing Battle Master Manuevers
    That why I asked you not to post in my threads. FrogReaver, let us be clear: EN World does not have a strong concept of thread ownership. It isn't really *your* thread. You don't get editorial power. You don't get to say who posts in it, or what they say. Mistwell, that said, you could do to learn to limit how much you lay a wet blanket on other people's ideas. You made a suggestion for a change in direction. That suggestion was rejected. You should probably just move on, rather than argue over it.

Saturday, 8th June, 2019

  • 11:29 PM - Blue mentioned FrogReaver in post The Overkill Damage Fallacy
    FrogReaver, Serious reply, not an "instant naysayer". I'm commenting to improve your calculations so we can get a clear view. I see two things I don't think were taken into consideration and I would be interested in how much or how little they impact the end results. First issue is that overkill is about damage wasted. The calculations shown do not differentiate for the twice-attacker between if the kill is done by the first attack or the second attack. Because if done with the first attack, then there is an additional attack that can be used to start damaging the next. If that's ignored, that's being treated as "overkill" (wasted") damage just like any extra done by the killing blow, but it actual play that is the opposite of overkill, that's damage that can be redirected to another target. Perhaps a better way would be to see how many can be killed in 5 rounds. Or if you want to keep it on killing, then assume 5 opponents and count how many are (statistically) alive each round to ma...

Thursday, 11th April, 2019

  • 04:53 PM - Benny89 mentioned FrogReaver in post Elven Accuracy Samurai Archer vs Xbow master battlemaster analysis.
    ...ving more than 3 is a tiny percent chance. Analysis You will turn about 80% of misses in a day into hits with precision attack. Without elven accuracy the Samarui will turn 25% of his total attacks into additional hits. With elven accuracy it's about 35-40%. This still makes precision attack better and that's without factoring in the difference in going crossbow expertise vs going elven accuracy. So let's do an actual analysis at level 11. BattleMaster 11 vs Samauri 11. I'll assume 6 combats a day that last 4 rounds each. Samauri will be a half-elf with elven accuracy + sharpshooter + 20 dex (uses a longbow) Battlemaster will be variant human with sharpshooter + crossbow expertise + 20 dex (uses a handcrossbow) At level 11 I'm getting that the battlemaster does about 20-30% more damage per day than the Samauri. (That's without crits calculated which will give the samauri a small advantage but not overly much. So maybe 15-25% estimated) Btw. do you have AnyDice math for that FrogReaver? I would like to save that somewhere and also show a friend who asked for it. Thank you!


Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
No results to display...

Saturday, 20th July, 2019

  • 05:28 AM - hawkeyefan quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Sure. I would just love once to hear their take on the pros of 5e in relation to roleplaying. What can it do that all these other systems can't? I play D&D all the time. From a rules standpoint, it doesn’t do a whole lot to help roleplaying. In 5E, you have your class which defines your overall role as part of the party. You have your race and background which give some idea of your role in society. You have your alignment which gives you your overall moral views. There’s a bit of overlap with them, but that’s what these things do. In addition to that, 5E has Traits, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws. These things give you some more specific facets of your character. This is the kind of thing I think most long time players have always done to some extent, but now it’s formalized as part of character creation. So these are the elements of the 5E D&D rules that pertain to roleplaying. You certainly can come up with a limitless combination of them to create a unique character. But none of them have st...
  • 05:05 AM - Ovinomancer quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Sure. I would just love once to hear their take on the pros of 5e in relation to roleplaying. What can it do that all these other systems can't? Is that all? You want someone to tell you what 5e does well? Sheesh, you're like that character Warren from Empire Records that holds up the record store because he wants a job there -- your approach is wildly divergent from your goal. As I have disagreed mightily with you this entire thread but yet also run a weekly 5e game, I should be well qualified to answer this: 5e does exploration well. It's designed on the premise that the PCs will be acting in a GM built world and exploring the fictional contours the GM has in mind. And, it does this well. It's structure of strong GM authority give the GM the needed control to curate the experience. With a skilled GM, the play is exciting and surprising for the players. 5e does zero to hero well. If you want to play a character that goes from nobody to demi-god, it's hard to find a better ...
  • 03:41 AM - pemerton quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    are there never disagreements or difference of opinion about when the rules say to roll?Here is some rules text from Apocalypse World (which is one of the games Campbell was referring to), pp 12 and 194. The rule for moves is to do it, do it. In order for it to be a move and for the player to roll dice, the character has to do something that counts as that move; and whenever the character does something that counts as a move, it’s the move and the player rolls dice. Usually it’s unambiguous: “dammit, I guess I crawl out there. I try to keep my head down. I’m doing it under fire?” “Yep.” But there are two ways they sometimes don’t line up, and it’s your job as MC to deal with them. . . . Second is when a player has her character take action that counts as a move, but doesn’t realize it, or doesn’t intend it to be a move. For instance: “I shove him out of my way.” Your answer then should be “cool, you’re going aggro?” “I pout. ‘Well if you really don’t like me…’” “Cool, you’re trying to m...
  • 02:34 AM - Lanefan quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    On a side note: if you can fail forward... I suppose it's also possible to succeed toward escalating conflict. We could have a whole discussion around that idea. At some point there's a very blurry dividing line between 'fail-forward' and what I call 'succeed-backward'. Depending on context, finding a 1000 g.p. ruby instead of 1000 gold coins could fall into any of: full success, succeed-backward, fail-forward, or outright fail. That's your assertion yes. It's interesting to note that all the systems with good to have experiences are not D&D. It's almost as if all of this is just a subtle way to tell everyone that they are having badwrongfun, without actually needing to call it that. <snip> But it seems that anything positive said about D&D is just crapped on here as if the OP suggesting that all RPG's have pros and cons really means all RPG's except D&D have pros and cons. In fairness there's certainly been some support from that quarter for D&D 4e over time, and even in this thr...
  • 02:22 AM - Lanefan quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Maybe you just have a much more romanticized view of acting than I do. Actors stand in front of a green screen all day, Repeating the same scenes over and over till everyone gets it just right. They cry on demand. The recite lines. They know how to portray what appears to be genuine emotion even when they aren't feeling those emotions. Ah - you're thinking movie actors where I was thinking live-stage actors; and yes, there is a difference. But portraying a different emotion than what one really feels at the time? That's common to both stage acting and RPGs. If my PC has reason to be mad at someone about something then I'm going to portray it - through my words, expression, and tone - as being mad, never mind how happy I-as-player might be feeling at that moment because someone just fed me a slice of yummy pizza. I don't view acting as roleplaying. The two are not mutually exclusive as I think some of the best actors likely do roleplay to some degree. But roleplay isn't a requiremen...
  • 01:05 AM - Ovinomancer quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    I think the more important question is, do you think it's possible to roleplay that same character in a system without such systemization mechanics? If not, why not? I'm going with no. Putting aside a theoretical possibility that you could, if everything was perfect, do so, I think that the incentives involved prevent any reasonable or even unreasonable assumption that this is possible. To explore this, look at how the Powered by the Apocalypse game Blades in the Dark does characters. When you create a character in Blades, you have things you must have that are characterization related. You must have a heritage and background. These are similar to race and background in D&D. You also have to pick a non-PC close friend and a non-PC rival, which don't have a close analog in D&D. Also a vice, which could map to a flaw in 5e. Finally, a Playbook and Crew, which are like a class and a class for the whole party. Now, to go to the incentives, here's the only ways to earn XP in B...
  • 12:59 AM - Tony Vargas quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    That fact can also point toward personal investment on the issue that could be clouding your judgement. … see, that's not cynical, at all... (I shouldn't talk, I'm totally cynical.) Or point out a more important heuristic that you just so happened to overlook in your zeal dedication to attribute the differences to the system for all this time.TBH (not just cynical), denying that system makes a difference strikes me as pointless. Obviously, systems are different, and those differences can't be quite meaningless. You can systematize nearly anything - but it's always going to be at a cost.Now, to turn around the prior cynicism: The "cost" can include no longer being able to abuse or leverage that lack of systematic coverage. Which, to everyone not already doing so, is really more of a benefit. I think the more important question is, do you think it's possible to roleplay that same character in a system without such systemization mechanics?Obviously. It's possible to RP the sam...

Friday, 19th July, 2019

  • 12:43 PM - pemerton quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    The players control the fiction by what they have their characters (try to) do.But on your own account this isn't true. Because the GM can always narrate something else. As you're presenting it, all the players get to do is make suggestions that the GM may or may not follow up on. I suppose another way a GM might have handled a success roll would be to have the PCs find some financial papers in the desk that weren't incriminating at all.How is that possiby a success, given the declared action? It's obviously a failure - the PC has not got what s/he wanted (namely, incriminating financial documents). Why would the GM know any better than the players what is good for the fiction?Why wouldn't she? And sometimes she'll be right, and sometimes she won't; and the same can be said for the players. <snip> Isn't a GM allowed to have an occasional cool idea and throw it in? Or supply a twist? <snip> what about unintended and-or unexpected results? Are these not allowed?So when do the p...

Thursday, 18th July, 2019

  • 04:25 PM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Life Cleric, Arcane Cleric or something totally different?
    In terms of in combat support my ratings are: Cleric 1 > Paladin 1 Cleric 2 < Paladin 2 Cleric 3 = Paladin 3 Cleric 4 > Paladin 4 Cleric 5 > Paladin 5 Cleric 6 < Paladin 6 Cleric 7 < Paladin 7 Cleric 8 < Paladin 8 Cleric 9 < Paladin 9 I think most of that is reasonable. I'd give Cleric 3 > Paladin 3, since a single casting of Aid is worth the same HP as the Paladin's entire lay on hands pool (it's better in some ways since prebuffing is better than healing, and worse in others because you have to divide it evenly among three PCs), and then after that the Cleric still has one 2nd level and one 1st level slot that the Paladin doesn't. From 6-8 I think it just depends how much you value the passive auras vs the Cleric's spell options. It's totally reasonable to value the auras more, in which case the Paladin has the edge. I think it's also reasonable to value the spells more (for at least Order Clerics and maybe War Clerics), but it's a different kind of support.
  • 04:00 PM - Manbearcat quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    But you are looking on the individual level and saying those mechanics help you role play. Im looking at an individual level and saying those mechanics hinder my roleplaying The mechanics are the same but we get two different reports of their effects. conclusion: it’s nothing to do with the mechanics but our individual differences. My posts on this subject over the years (and in this thread) involve pretty intensive analysis on why resolution procedure/GMing technique/reward cycle/play ethos/PC build setup (a) objectively provides a different experience than(b) in many different areas (from table handling time to distribution of authority to intraparty balance to party: obstacle balance to cognitive workload and on and on). I think you’re rather short-shrifting all of that with a single heuristic. How about this? Do you think it’s possible to systematize the experience of reading letters from a loved one and the fallout you incur while you’re in the field (a tour of duty of some kind......
  • 03:15 PM - Manbearcat quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    U you mention extreme mental differences in people. How can you say with certainty that it isn’t those mental differences that prompt you to have such experiences with certain game mechanics. Isn’t it possible that my mental differences could cause me to have totally different experiences with those same game mechanics. If if that’s the case (I think it is) then is it really the mechanics that enable that play or rather your pre-disposition for such mechanics? We’re complicated animals who live complicated lives. And these games, all of them, are complicated, relatively speaking. Nothing is ever one thing. But I think the line of evidence that I love running something like Dogs, something like 4e, while having many times more experience (and just as much enjoyment) with Moldvay Basic and AD&D1e is a pretty strong one.
  • 02:03 PM - Manbearcat quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    A question for you: Is it possible that you just find it easier to roleplay in games you like? Is it possible that I am right and that such mechanics don't actually enhance roleplay any at all other than the simple fact that it's easier to roleplay in a game you like? I’m not Campbell, but I’ll throw some words at this from GMing perspective. Its definitely true that most people almost surely enjoy the experience of games they like, and through their affinity they develop or have a natural aptitude for better play. Humans have pretty extreme neurological diversity, so I would say that it’s trivially true that cognitive predispositions and mental frameworks (be they inherent or earned through tenured environmental exposure) can make it less likely that people change significantly over time or pivot from one thing to another, and back, through the course of time. But that is as far as I’m willing to go. Different system tech absolutely enables inhabitation of an experience in ways that other...
  • 10:36 AM - Lanefan quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    Acting is not roleplaying.I was with you all the way to here, but this is where you lose me: acting very much is roleplaying. An actor, pretty much no matter what else might be involved, universally does one thing while on stage or screen: plays a role.
  • 06:47 AM - MNblockhead quoted FrogReaver in post What are your favourite single game mechanics?
    DM determining when a check is called for. Likely in a ton of game but it's opened up a whole new world for me. Sorry for my ignorance, but was that not the case in other editions of D&D? I played 1e in the 80s and I don't have the 1e DMG anymore, so I'm not sure if it was a rule that the DM called for rolls, but I recall playing that way. Or maybe my memory is being shaped by my recent experiences with 5e. I never played 2nd though 4th edition.
  • 04:41 AM - Ovinomancer quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    First let's be clear. No one is advocating that a GM turn a successful check into a failure. What is being suggested is that just like there are multiple states of failure there are also multiple states of success. A simple counter-example to establish this point. Suppose a player says, "I search the room for 1000 gold". He rolls a 1. Do you really consider a possible fail state in this example to be "you find a ruby worth 1000gp"? If you think that's a valid failure narration then you stand alone. Yes. That you don't see a way is somewhat telling. The ruby is cursed. The ruby belongs to a powerful entity who now declares enmity. The ruby.... so many ways to make finding exactly what the player wanted into something that the character suffers for. So then with it established that there are multiple success states, why would a DM pick the one that a player didn't specifically request. A few possibilities: 1. His chosen success may move the story further along at some lat...

Wednesday, 17th July, 2019

  • 07:28 PM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Life Cleric, Arcane Cleric or something totally different?
    You seem to be arguing against a position I never took. Order clerics are by far the cleric is recommend for support. But clerics are typically much better off at offense than support, thanks to spirit guardians. I mean really, what good support spells do clerics get that they will be using encounter after encounter after levels 5+ I agree that after about level 9, a conquest paladin has more support options than an order cleric, though they can't use the options they have as much as the cleric can. Slow stays relevant through high levels, outside legendary resistance. Guidance stays relevant out of combat. Bless stays relevant and Aid scales well (both are available to both classes, but the Cleric's spell slot advantage gives them the edge). At level 11 the Cleric gets Heroes' Feast, which is amazing if have some idea of when you'll face bosses. Upcasting Banishment can be good. The Conquest Paladin gets a bunch of good 3rd level concentration options at class level 9: Aura of Vitality, Cru...
  • 06:09 PM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Life Cleric, Arcane Cleric or something totally different?
    Yea. I just foresee the cleric doing more spirit guardians and less actual support. Multiclassing considerations can help the paladin a lot. I mean, just because you have spirit guardians doesn't mean you have to use it. If you're a support-focused cleric you might prefer to concentrate on, say, Slow (which Order Clerics get), or even just Bless. The problem with multiclassing as a support Paladin to up your spell slots is that you really want Paladin 6 for the aura, and then if you multiclass into a full caster (Divine Soul Sorcerer, say), it's level 11 before you get 3rd level spells, which is two levels later than a single classed Paladin (although you do have a lot more slots to use). Plus, Lay on Hands scales with Paladin level, so if you're multiclassing you give up the healing advantage you have over the Cleric. Compare an Cleric 6 to a Paladin 6. The Order Cleric has 4/3/3 in spell slots; the Paladin has 4/2. If the cleric uses one 3rd level cure wounds and one 2nd level cure wounds, t...
  • 01:24 PM - pemerton quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    the GM should have some latitude to narrate what form that success takes if something workable other than the player's direct intent suggests itselfWhy? You are looking before the dice were ever rolled and saying see this system covers all possible resolutions. The rest of us are looking at it after the dice are already rolled - and at that moment the range of possible resolutions are restricted.In a relatively traditional RPG a GM gets to establish a lot of fiction: much of the setting; many of the NPCs; the framing of many situations; the narration of failures; maybe other stuff too that I'm not thinking of at present. What is the function of successful checks if the GM also gets to establish what happens there too? in my example the PC does achieve what she hoped for: she found incriminating evidence against the Duke. That the evidence didn't take the exact form specified in the action declaration doesn't reduce the successI was just responding to what you posted: Player: I...
  • 03:24 AM - Ovinomancer quoted FrogReaver in post Players choose what their PCs do . . .
    You are looking before the dice were ever rolled and saying see this system covers all possible resolutions. The rest of us are looking at it after the dice are already rolled - and at that moment the range of possible resolutions are restricted. But even in this belabored exchange, the more important point seems forgotten - that the GM typically has the power to call for a check or not call for a check and if he has that power then nothing is permitted that the GM doesn't permit. Do some systems avoid giving the GM that level of control? I'm sure some exist - but to what detriment? Wait, you're asking what detriment exists if you don't gate everything through the GM's approval? I'm going to need to sit down awhile on that one. I mean... but... really? But most importantly, the dice add nothing to my character conception (because as noted, every conceivable character possible in a dice based game is also possible without the dice), nor are they some divine tool which unlock the a...

Tuesday, 16th July, 2019

  • 07:11 PM - Esker quoted FrogReaver in post Life Cleric, Arcane Cleric or something totally different?
    I think a charisma based paladin has a lot of potential for your goal. Variant human + inspiring leader. Good access to party buff spells. Built in healing that scales better than cure wounds. Paladins also get wrathful smite which is a great debuff spell. The fear spell is really top notch for control as well (which at least 1 subclass gets). IMO, you could make a really good support paladin. Good call. I'd go Oath of Conquest for the fear effect and the fear spell at 9th. All Paladins also get Bless, Aid (which stacks with inspiring leader), Aura of Vitality, Crusader's Mantle... I think the main drawback compared to Cleric is that a lot of your support abilities are spells or Channel Divinity, and you get fewer of both than the Cleric.


FrogReaver's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites