View Profile: Oofta - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Today, 02:13 AM
    A theme to this thread seems to be "D&D doesn't work with firearms because people won't fight because people won't approach combat the way I expect them to". But end of the day I don't care what tactics my players use, it's up to them. I don't care if they play "the right way" as long as they're having fun. As far as running into a gatling gun, they fire 6,000 rounds per minute. If...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Today, 01:40 AM
    You seem to be handling it similar to a coupe de grace', which honestly is something I've never really liked. I might let it be an automatic critical but that's about it. Normally though I just follow the rules and it would be a standard attack with advantage. There's nothing wrong with what you're doing if you're just narrating part of the story. But where do you draw the line? What if...
    26 replies | 378 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:40 PM
    Which is why my vampire will be a sorcerer with subtle spell and misty step. ;) In all honesty, if the party thinks ahead enough they can stop the vampire from getting away, I never have a predetermined outcome. I make make it difficult to stop the bad guy from getting away, but if the party can stop them more power to them. If the vampire is integral to the plot, either another threat will...
    54 replies | 1546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:30 PM
    I might still let my cowboys wear armor because the world would be different with magic and dragons. Maybe instead of steel it's hardened giant spider silk, needs to be adamantium or even just say that the dwarves make really high quality steel.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:20 PM
    I quoted your posts back to you a few pages ago. If you care to clarify please do.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:19 PM
    Another cool campaign idea. D&D Fallout. Magic suddenly started working in an alternate modern day which caused people to panic and let the nukes fly. In this new version of reality radiation really is magic. I don't think you'd even need to change much. Fallout already uses HP, armor, melee weapons, magic healing, mini-nukes. Well, maybe not mini-nukes but meteor storm is about the same. ...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:13 PM
    Wow. So you've decided that no one anywhere ever ran a wild west game without changing rules? That's either the height of hubris or now your just pulling our legs that you really believe that. I might tweak the firearms a little bit because they should be slightly less effective than the modern equivalent but otherwise I don't see why I'd change a single thing. Well, that and add gatling...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:28 PM
    It means they will not willingly wear metal armor. Can they? Sure. Will they willingly do so? No. That's the rule and trying to squeeze out anything else through word parsing is not "interpreting" the rules, it's twisting them to mean something they don't say.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:25 PM
    It's not that they can't understand, it's that they will not. :P
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:53 PM
    Really? There's no other weapon in the PHB who's purpose is to kill the enemy before they get up close? Have you never played with someone who has archery style and sharp shooter?
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:50 PM
    I have toyed with the idea of a weird west campaign, which is why I wanted to discuss some implementation specifics. All of that has been derailed of course by "guns and D&D don't mix". I think you could also do something like Team Fortress or Halo with either pseudo-modern or futuristic combat. It's really not that far off from D&D with it's classes and archetypes. Plate becomes advanced...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:34 PM
    You've said basically "it won't work because any single shot should kill you". It's been pointed out time and again that the same could be said of any weapon that does damage. You've never been able to clearly state why a gun should be handled differently. Well, other than "because I said so". On the other hand when you come up with some specific house rules for how you would handle it,...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:46 PM
    Or Eberron or ... well any number of fantasy novels. In my world gunpowder exists but as a weapon? Not particularly useful. Want flash/bang stuff that will frighten your enemies? Cast some low level spells. Start to make gunpowder useful? Some wizard somewhere is going to invent a "spark" cantrip that seeks out gunpowder to ruin your day, or just cast heat metal on your gun to have it go...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:44 PM
    So we can just redefine words to mean anything we want? A vegetarian can eat all the steak they want and still be a vegetarian? Cool. From now on proficiency in martial weapons really means that I can shoot laser beams from my eyes. 'Cuz lasers are awesome!
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:59 PM
    There's a couple of problems with that in a D&D/fantasy setting. There are a lot of monsters that won't be stopped by a few bullets. That troll is going to laugh at you while it charges into combat to rip you to shreds. A bullette is still going to pop up in the middle of your party and ruin your day. A T-Rex is still going to eat you. I've played in a few range heavy parties, they still...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:34 PM
    And you can keep repeating that "will not" doesn't really mean they will not wear metal armor an it's still not a rule. Some random person on the internet does not get to decide what is a rule and what isn't. I don't see why a proficiency that restricts access is any less of a rule that allows access. So a vegetarian that regularly eats meat is still a vegetarian? Can't argue...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:27 PM
    I don't remember ever reading that magic users would not use a sword in any edition. Nope. Proficient? No. Will not use? Not there.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:32 PM
    I'm sure that someone somewhere in some game at some point someone has had their PC put on metal armor to sneak into a castle. But there are sooo many issues with that hypothetical. Like ... does the 8 strength wizard put on full plate? Guess you aren't using the variant encumbrance rules. Hope nobody notices the dwarf in a castle run by orcs. That fighter with the +1 plate is going to swap...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:44 PM
    D&D is pretty decent at many things, but being overly realistic simulation of combat of virtually any kind is not one of them. Are there other games that are better at modeling real combat of various types? Absolutely. But being a realistic simulation or supporting and encouraging any specific fighting style whether that's taking advantage of cover and advancing cautiously or mimicking fencing...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 02:34 PM
    Here's where you bring this whole concept up first in this thread that I found So you start with the assumption that every round should potentially kill you. Then you object to my (sarcastically I admit) labeling bullets as magic killing devices. But that's the basis of everything you've posted, that a single bullet can kill you. So what am I missing? You want any single shot to...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 12:38 PM
    No game system can handle every trope. I don't "expect" the PCs to act in any particular way. If I have a scenario where there's a lot of ranged combat (whether that's arrows, bullets or spells) and plenty of cover people can take advantage of it. But you seem to be fixated on this idea of cover. Guess what? Probably 90% of what people use for cover on TV is BS. Cars (other than engine...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 03:45 AM
    When this topic came up I did a bit of googling, and 19th century rifles have about the same effective range as longbows with a few exceptions (such as the Sharps rifle which was the equivalent of a sniper rifle). But your basic Winchester? About the same. Pistols? Close to shortbows. Add in the fact that they used black powder and I don't even see that much of a need for dramatically...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 24th June, 2019, 02:44 AM
    But do you really need to? I think the thing that bothers me most about this "D&D doesn't work with guns" is that unless you assume fully automatic weapons and an unlimited ammo supply, guns are really all that much different in game terms than what we already have. Particularly if you limit to 19th century or earlier tech, they really aren't all that much more effective. Cheaper? Easier to...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Sunday, 23rd June, 2019, 05:16 PM
    I do this because it better suits the pace of my campaign. In my case I just use the optional rules, a short rest is overnight and a long rest is several days. I find it helps balance out the classes a little bit if I have 5-10 encounters per long rest, people that like to nova every fight though may not appreciate it.
    32 replies | 878 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 02:11 PM
    There was a Mythbusters episode on dodging arrows. They had a martial arts expert try to dodge arrows shot from low-powered bows. He couldn't do it even when he knew exactly when and where the arrow was coming from. In addition, it doesn't really matter if you see that grizzly bear about to rip your face off, you're still not going to be able to get out of the way*. Last but not least, you...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 22nd June, 2019, 03:30 AM
    So let me get this straight. HP works for flying arrows, being cut to bits or run through by a sword, bludgeoned by maces, ripped to shreds by dragons bigger than a city bus ... but not for bullets? Real world stories of people being shot 20+ times mean nothing because in some movies of a specific genre bullets are always 100% lethal. Except when it's "just a flesh wound" but apparently we're...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 06:47 PM
    Somebody should tell that to the people that make kevlar. I could also say that there's no defense against getting run through by a sword ... except in D&D there is. Not all bullet wounds are fatal and HP will always be an abstraction of many things, not just how tough you are.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 06:34 PM
    I hate it when video games do they do that. Even worse if it happens during a D&D game. YMMV of course, different people play for different reasons.
    54 replies | 1546 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 05:53 PM
    You mean where he says "If you feel strongly about your druid breaking the taboo and donning metal, talk to your DM." which is followed by"your DM has the final say"? Which, honestly, is true of every rule in the book. Heck, I considered and discussed coming up with a completely custom class because my vision of the PC didn't match an existing one. Ultimately I decided to play a standard...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 05:07 PM
    Good point. Because there's no weapon in D&D that does the same damage of a longsword that has a short range of 150 feet. It's not possible to take a feat that increases range to 600 feet without penalty while ignoring cover.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 05:00 PM
    Resorting to appeal to popularity? Don't like the rule? Change it when you DM.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 04:28 PM
    I kind of like the idea that if the PCs kill off the BBEG an impostor/second in command takes over. Or the BBEG was just a figurehead and by killing them off the real power behind the throne needs to take a more direct approach.
    54 replies | 1546 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 04:18 PM
    This is the thread that never ends ... Well, you know how the rest of it goes. Good gaming.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 03:47 PM
    Even lesser known fact, 10% of spontaneous combustion cases are caused by lowkey13 being forced to play a paladin. Yeah, that's right it adds up to more than 100. Just because percentages will not exceed 100, doesn't mean that they can't! :rant:
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 03:41 PM
    So I'm a vegetarian as long as I'm not eating meat? So I've been a vegetarian since last night's supper because I ate oatmeal for breakfast? Good to know. So let me clarify: vegetarians will not eat meat. Oh wait, that's not much of a clarification is it? I guess I'll just stick with my original point. Druids will not wear metal armor. Therefore a PC that wears metal armor is not a...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 03:15 PM
    I don't want to derail this too much because I think this can be/should be it's own thread, but I do occasionally do have templates that I slap on low level monsters. It varies by campaign, but for example that ogre may be a berserker ogre has "frenzy" which grants them advantage on all attacks, double the number of normal attacks while granting advantage to attacks made against them. I may add...
    51 replies | 2035 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:38 PM
    Personally I always thought high level minions were a bit odd, it reinforced the whole "levels are just a treadmill" idea. I liked the concept, just felt odd in practice. So if I want a low level monster to be a real threat I'll use mobs. Or this guy:
    51 replies | 2035 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:21 PM
    Vegetarians will not eat meat. If my vegetarian nephew eats steak he is not a vegetarian. If a PC wears metal armor they are not a druid. I'm done playing word games. Have a good one.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:12 PM
    "Druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal" is about as clear a rule as I've seen in the book. Feel free to run it differently in your game.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:33 PM
    Many villains (and enemies in general) in my campaigns won't fight to the death if they have a choice. That's different from saying that it's guaranteed that they get away. If I really want them to get away I'll give them something such as misty step, ability to polymorph or turn ethereal, etc. For example, a well prepared vampire can be very difficult to kill if you're in their home turf. ...
    54 replies | 1546 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 03:37 AM
    This is the argument that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people started posting it, not knowing what it was, and they'll continue arguing it forever just because... This is the argument that never ends... There's nothing new here. Follow the rules, don't follow the rules, it doesn't really matter. Accept that the taboo for druids is based on whatever fluff the DM...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 02:24 AM
    The situation won't come up because they won't wear metal armor. Might as well ask what happens if that champion fighter shapeshifts into a bear. Unless of course you've chosen to change the rule in your campaign.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:44 AM
    Some people allow druids to wear metal armor. I don't see the point.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 01:21 AM
    I simply don't see the wiggle room other people read into it. They "will not" wear metal armor. Seems pretty darn clear to me. This is getting repetitive: if you don't like the rule ignore it when you're DM.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 21st June, 2019, 12:46 AM
    When a player decided to play a champion fighter they decided their PC was not going to cast spells. When they chose to play a druid the decided their PC was not going to wear metal armor. A DM can always set up a situation the PCs can't win, just like they can always set up alternatives. It doesn't matter if that situation is a group of 1st level characters fighting a tarrasque, the...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 11:25 PM
    I don't put my players into no-win situations. Feel free to run your games differently, just don't expect me to stick around if you force the issue without an alternative.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 10:50 PM
    If this situation ever came up (I've been DMing for decades, it never has) I'll deal with it. There will be an alternative or the group will figure out another way around. Maybe - gasp - the druid will simply transform into a small animal. If only they had the ability to change shape. Or we'll just execute the druid, they believe in reincarnation anyway, right? :uhoh: I would no more have...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 10:31 PM
    And the edge case scenario trope that always gets brought up on this topic that has never actually happened as far as I know goes to .... Sword of Spirit!!!! I'm surprised it only took us to post #77 to bring up this argument. Listen, if this actually did happen, your DM is being an ****. There is no such thing as a scenario like this being forced on the player and DM. The DM controls the...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 10:16 PM
    I agree, it's a silly argument. Because we're familiar with the damage bullets can do some people assume for some reason they're more deadly that traditional D&D weapons. Which is odd because in reality people get shot multiple times and survive. On TV, a throwing knife is deadly 99.9% of the time. Yet somehow having a couple of pounds of metal perforate your abdomen or lopping your head off...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 10:00 PM
    But ... how can I play my gnomish druid paladin? All the other cool kids agree with me! If I can't I'm going to hold my breath until I pass out! Waaaaaahhhhhhhhh.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 09:56 PM
    Yeah, and I would respond "Here's my comprehensive list of house rules*, it's a very, very short list and your list of grievances won't change it. If that's a problem hopefully we can work something out. If we can't you're going to have to find another game." I'm sorry if that would piss somebody off, but life is too short and it's too easy to find new players to hassle with. *The only two...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 09:46 PM
    Heaven's to Betsy! I follow the rules! Oh noes! Seriously - that's your big argument? You personally disagree with a particular rule so therefore everyone else must also disagree? The setting justification is left up to the DM and the campaign. But I don't see this as being any different from any other rule in the book. We know how many spells and what level spell your PC can cast, if...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 08:21 PM
    It's clearly spelled out under proficiencies. Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal) There does not need to be a mechanical penalty, they will not do it. Ipso facto, if your character is wearing metal armor they are not a druid. Don't like it, change the rules. Playing at my table and don't like it? Discuss how to get...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 03:57 PM
    Following the rules printed in the book is "absolutely morally abhorrent"? Don't like the rule? Change it when you're running a game.
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 20th June, 2019, 01:36 PM
    Good grief. This argument, again? In my campaign there's a simple answer. If your PC wears metal armor, they aren't a druid. Don't like the rule? Change it if you're the DM. I don't really care about why or what the consequences are, without a house rule to change things if you wear metal armor you can't take the druid class. End of story. Sometimes the answer is simply "no". I'm not...
    443 replies | 8995 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 08:59 PM
    Care to share any details?
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Wednesday, 19th June, 2019, 07:35 PM
    Probably about the same thing as shooting a grizzly bear if you're using a 19th century pistol. You get a pissed off umber hulk. Using a rifle? Hope you're a really good shot. But you can only take real world as a template for anything in D&D so far. People have killed grizzly bears with .22s, it's just really, really unlikely. Even a modern hunting rifle is no guarantee of stopping a...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 10:35 PM
    Trying to think of anything unique that hasn't already been mentioned. OE/1E: distilling complexity into a relatively simple set of the rules that let me play a fantasy character. Multiclassing even if it was a bit flaky. Probably more but my books are unavailable at the moment and I'm too old to remember back that far. 2E: Specialization and clerical spheres were mentioned so I'll go with...
    51 replies | 2035 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 09:33 PM
    I agree but in all fairness, Captain Obvious could also point out that if you're looking for hyper-realistic simulation rules for just about anything you won't find them in D&D. Which doesn't make it a bad system because quite frequently reality sucks. :D
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 08:34 PM
    Which is one of the reasons I use the alternate rest rules. Well, that and magic band-aids and salves because otherwise a lot of wounds would be permanent, which just doesn't fit with the number of encounters that adventurers normally face. A lot of wounds historically were fatal days or weeks after combat was over, which I just handle as my campaign world having the equivalent of magical...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 07:36 PM
    Anything remotely approaching reality would include disabilities, hindrances, bleeding out, infections, etc. We don't include those in many styles of games because it wouldn't be fun. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy D&D. For all it's flaws, HP works. I just think that many things have to be vastly simplified to work as a game. Whether that's HP or armor or weapons or ease of recovery or the...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 04:00 PM
    I agree ... getting your head chopped off by a claymore is probably going to hurt just as much if not more than being shot with a Colt .45. It's only related to the topic in that if you're talking a genre that has guns, what system would you implement so that people would take guns in the first place if they just do the same damage as bows but are really loud? Unless you're Jack Churchill, of...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 03:32 PM
    Instead of "fundamentally flawed" how about "fundamentally over-simplifies damage" or "fundamentally unrealistic". I'm perfectly okay with HP in whatever game I'm playing as long as it's appropriate. Games have to make all sorts of compromises for the sake of fun and ease of play.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 01:20 PM
    Well, I only pay attention to the sage advice that's in the official document and I don't see a clarification there (and honestly I ignore/override some of those), so I'll give you my ruling. So let's start with the definition: " tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the monster and the source of the vibrations are in contact with...
    19 replies | 666 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:57 PM
    I could list a dozen video games off the top of my head (hmm...do individual games in a series count?) set in current or sci-fi settings that use HP where you're perfectly fine until you hit zero and then die. It's a really, really common trope of fiction no matter what weapons are used.
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:52 PM
    Most people are level 1 commoners with 4 HP. How many hits with any D&D weapon do you expect them to survive? As far as who's level 12, well obviously they're the protagonists of an action movie that have Hollywood magical plot armor. Or you justify it exactly the same way you justify getting hit in the face with a club by an hill giant a dozen times and walking away. You don't. ;) Any...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 17th June, 2019, 12:10 AM
    Well, in the "real" shootout at the OK Corral (which didn't take place at the Corral) there were about 30 rounds shot in 30 seconds. So 30 attacks in a 5 round combat? Sounds a little low for the number of attacks, but it's in the ballpark. The whole concept of standing 20 yards away from each other and ending a fight with a single shot was a convenience for old westerns that rarely had the...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Sunday, 16th June, 2019, 12:19 AM
    I like Eberron's take - what would a more advanced magical world be like. I integrate some of that into my own campaign, I don't quite go to the steam-punk level but my world is full of wonder and magic. Might even get to the Eberron level if I stopped blowing up the world every few centuries. :heh: Other than that, I've toyed with the idea of more of a wild west setting, just because my...
    366 replies | 9529 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 04:01 PM
    The temp HP are permanent until used, but people do have to be in the aura when the spirit appears: in the aura when the spirit appears gains temporary hit points. I see no reason why they would go away if not in the aura. In addition, it's kind of odd ... if you leave the aura and come back do you get new temp HP? On the other hand, if you want the other benefits you have to be in the...
    10 replies | 416 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 13th June, 2019, 03:52 PM
    I liked different editions for different reasons so I've picked up different things from different editions. From original editions (lumping together a bit because I'm old and they blur together). The embrace of a wide variety of fantasy tropes and sources that I could use in my own campaigns. Conan? Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser? Lord of the Rings? Pick your style. The pantheons that I...
    68 replies | 2220 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Wednesday, 12th June, 2019, 11:02 PM
    My view of the gods has been heavily influenced by Harry Harrison's The Hammer and The Cross series. Basically the gods are real-ish in that they are powered by peoples belief and worship in them. They are real in the sense that they have their own agendas, thoughts and ideas and indirectly manipulate people and events. However, in other ways they are not real in the sense that they are given...
    31 replies | 1097 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Tuesday, 11th June, 2019, 03:51 PM
    I'd set it in a poor part of town (every city has one) and take the fight to the rooftops. Lots of jumping between rooftops, balancing while fighting on slanted roofs and other environmental hazards. Plenty chances for ambushes and traps where parts of the roof have been strategically weakened and so on. Warehouses are great as well as long as you don't mind the cliche. Or do it in stages,...
    13 replies | 493 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 10th June, 2019, 02:42 PM
    For visuals, I replace "match" with "cutting torch" and leave it there for couple of seconds for higher level spells. You're still not going to catch many things on fire although wood will char, cloth that is not in movement may start on fire and so on. But even with fairly high heat if the application is relatively short there will be damage but not fire. I do allow spells to start things...
    32 replies | 797 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Sunday, 9th June, 2019, 01:28 PM
    There is no great way of doing this, the best way I've found is to roll for items. Long ago in a campaign and edition far, far away, we tried to use a "logical" scheme. Problem everyone was always "you get the magic weapon because you're a fighter but Bob the wizard so he gets the ring of protection". I could have started a magic weapons shop because who really needs a +1 trident to add to the...
    14 replies | 501 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 10:03 PM
    So ... you don't accept that some people found THAC0 painful? You keep asking people to explain it to you. It's simple. Some people find it more difficult. Period. End of story. You ask "why" ... well the answer is that apparently not everyone thinks like you do. My wife started playing D&D with 2E and she hates THAC0 because it makes her subtract and she finds the numbers (especially...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 8th June, 2019, 04:19 PM
    So am I understanding this right? That one of the "advantages" of THAC0 was that you had a character sheet where you pre-calculated what AC you hit based on your D20 roll? Which you could do with any system that uses a reasonably small range of numbers to determine whether you hit or not? As far as subtracting being more difficult, it's the combination of adding, and subtracting that you...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Friday, 7th June, 2019, 12:16 PM
    I kind of liked flat footed, surprised and facing. It added a bit more tactics. Never cared for calculating THACO.As far as the "only people who didn't use it dis it" ... umm ... no. My wife learned to play with 2E and was quite happy with the change in calculation with the advent of 3, as were several other people in my group at the time. It accomplished the same goal while being more...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 06:17 PM
    Maybe we should have a poll "how do you pronounce THAC0". Of course you would only need two options, "THACK-OH" and "The wrong way". ;) Kidding aside, I never met anyone who didn't pronounce it THACK-OH. Maybe it's a midwestern thing.
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 06:08 PM
    I'm not saying 3.x didn't have issues. Or any edition for that matter. Just that you're conflating having half a dozen modifiers with the move away from THAC0 (which by the way is pronounce THACK-OH and everybody else is just saying it wrong :p ). They're different topic. Of course I didn't have a problem with 3.x either, although it did get a bit crazy when I had to have a grid with all...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 05:49 PM
    I'm just relating, like, my experience man. :cool: Several people I played with were relieved when we switched to 3 that they no longer had to do what they considered "backwards math". Maybe you and people you played it didn't think it was bad because it was a self-selecting group. Personally I didn't hate THAC0, but I wasn't fond of it either. D&D has enough idiosyncrasies and sacred cows...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 05:39 PM
    Numbers got crazy in 3/4, but I've never seen an AC of 30 in 5E. They could exist in theory but it would be easy enough to just set a max AC of whatever you want. I don't see any link between THAC0 and limiting AC to a reasonable number. Whether we should limit AC to some number (20, 30, sky's the limit?) is a separate topic.
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 05:25 PM
    All I can say is that for some people, THAC0 was a stumbling block. It never really bothered me but it is easier to add than subtract, especially into the negatives. But some people have enough problems adding two simple integers. I don't see how it could really affect the end result all that much but "high is always better" and one concept for attacks/saves/checks streamlines things. In...
    166 replies | 5937 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 04:59 PM
    My simple answer has always been that I consider torture evil and I don't allow evil characters. Whether it should work in real life or the game (people will eventually tell you what they think you want to hear) is not relevant. There are plenty of ways to intimidate someone without resorting to evil acts.
    68 replies | 2813 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 01:07 PM
    The question is, does thread necromancy have sunlight sensitivity? :cool:
    27 replies | 24279 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Monday, 3rd June, 2019, 06:11 PM
    Yes and no. Yes, I have things that happen off-screen often without the input of PCs. Either because the group didn't follow that path, it wasn't relative to the PCs at the moment or because it's happening between campaigns. For example in a recent campaign, the PCs overthrew the "false" king and put in place one of the PCs who was a legitimate heir to the throne. We did some wrap-up stuff...
    44 replies | 1489 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Sunday, 2nd June, 2019, 06:28 PM
    I have considered the TWF paladin option myself simply for the additional nova damage. Smite twice on the same round (or three times if hasted)? Could be fun against the BBEG. I don't really care if it "balances out", but when my vengeance paladin wants to he could get VENGEANCE!!! :mad: So that would work for me. On the other hand, simply allowing two weapon fighting style for a paladin...
    217 replies | 7464 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Sunday, 2nd June, 2019, 03:25 PM
    The difference in damage potential is minimal as others have pointed out, the other aspect is the +1 to AC from dual wielder and the flexibility it gives. My wife's swashbuckler thinks it's great that she can not only get two chances at sneak attack but also avoid attacks from two opponents when moving away even if the second opponent doesn't take a lot of damage. Is it as good as a...
    217 replies | 7464 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 08:02 PM
    I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I have a pet peeve about what I bolded. It bugs me when people support their play style with "I know better than you and if you want your game to be better, do this. Different styles work for different people. P.S. This is just free advice and as such probably worth what you paid for it. Take it, leave it, I don't really care.
    106 replies | 3893 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Oofta's Avatar
    Saturday, 1st June, 2019, 02:34 PM
    The players and the DM need to work together to make stories that work for everyone. So in my campaign world (which I've been running for decades with multiple groups, multiple editions) some things make sense, some don't. So I don't care if you want to play a drow that dual-wields scimitars and has a pet cat. In my world drow are the boogeymen that rise from the darkness and murder people for...
    106 replies | 3893 view(s)
    4 XP
More Activity
About Oofta

Basic Information

About Oofta
Location:
Twin Cities, MN
Disable sharing sidebar?:
No
Sex:
Male
Age Group:
Over 40
My Game Details

Details of games currently playing and games being sought.

Town:
Minnetonka
State:
Minnesota
Country:
USA

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,112
Posts Per Day
3.00
Last Post
If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be? Today 02:13 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
4
General Information
Last Activity
Today 03:04 AM
Join Date
Friday, 25th September, 2015
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

2 Friends

Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2
My Game Details
Town:
Minnetonka
State:
Minnesota
Country:
USA
Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast

Wednesday, 26th June, 2019


Tuesday, 25th June, 2019


Monday, 24th June, 2019



Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Sunday, 16th June, 2019

  • 05:21 PM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Oofta in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    Oofta I’d also add that any of those alignments could be attached to a character who just hates slavers, and will try to free slaves if they can, or a character whose main priority is group cohesion and the good of their party memebers (or 1 specific member), in a group that features 1 or more members who deeply care about the fate of these slaves.
  • 05:19 PM - doctorbadwolf mentioned Oofta in post Chaotic Good Is The Most Popular Alignment!
    Oofta I’d also add that any of those alignments could be attached to a character who just hates slavers, and will try to free slaves if they can, or a character whose main priority is group cohesion and the good of their party memebers (or 1 specific member), in a group that features 1 or more members who deeply care about the fate of these slaves.

Thursday, 9th May, 2019

  • 06:10 AM - Hussar mentioned Oofta in post What does it mean to "Challenge the Character"?
    *ducks back in, waving a white flag* Totally, totally not trying to start anything. Honest. I just want to point something out iserith. When three different posters, at least, at three different times - myself, Oofta and now Tony Vargas, all come to the same, or at least very similar conclusions based on what you are posting, perhaps, and I'm not saying this is true, but, perhaps, the point you are trying to make isn't as clear as you think it is. I mean, you're dismissing Tony Vargas because apparently he's been scarred by edition wars. You dismissed oofta so hard that he's still on your ignore list. You dismissed my points as well. I'm not saying you're wrong here. I'm not trying to pick a fight and my horse in this race is long dead. I'm just saying that perhaps, just maybe, your point could be misconstrued. I mean, heck, once you actually pointed out an actual example, I realized that there is not much difference between your table and mine, I just don't insist on such strict adherence to formula - I skip steps. Otherwise, the end results between your table and mine are probably pretty close. However, it took an actual example to see that. I guess what I'm trying to say is...

Wednesday, 8th May, 2019

  • 08:49 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    If you don't allow an insight check because you know the result ... you're giving away information the characters don't have. The players now know the NPC is telling the truth. Yet somehow asking for a perception check that may result in the player not getting any new information is something I should be ashamed of? :confused: Next stop... 2000 posts! Nice going, Oofta! :P I like to think I take the middle road as described in the DMG but your game seems to be much, much more in the "ignore the dice" realm. If it works for you, great. I accept that different people play for different reasons. Personally I enjoy getting into the mindset of my PC, even when that's different than my own. It's a wide road. Apparently. We can all ride there in the middle. In our respective lanes.
  • 07:54 AM - pemerton mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ... hellplant looks like it is being more demanding than was intended by the GM, then in the approach I'm describing here the GM might manipulate things "behind the scenes" to compensate - whether reducing the threat posed by some later planned encounter, or fudging one of the checks made to deal with the plant, or whatever other device this sort of GM has up his/her sleeve. I personally don't play in the style I've just described - in a different current thread in General, I've been discussing (with Chaosmancer and others) what I think are ways of getting the REH-like dramatic pacing and consequnces but with less reliance on GM-side determinations. But I think that the sort of approach I've described in this thread is a widely-adopted one. I'm hesitant to project my own account of the approach too readily onto individual posters each of whom has his/her own unique way of playing RPGs, but with appropriate caution and no intention to cause offence, I would conjecture that Chaosmancer, Oofta and Yardiff can all recognise some aspects of how they approach GMing in what I've set out in this post.

Tuesday, 7th May, 2019

  • 03:53 AM - pemerton mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ... rolls in secret and players are rewarded for having high (normal) Perception. 4) Traps are random consumers of resources by causing damage in unavoidable ways. Now, a lot of those options are pretty common in D&D, historically. Over the years I've played using all those mechanisms. But, since the "board game" insult has been used by others, those all feel a lot more board-gamey to me. You roll your dice, move your piece, and maybe you land on somebody else's Hotel. Or the lich's death-trap, as the case may be. So really this comes back to the "player skill" or "challenging the player" thing: I'd just rather play (and DM) where the human players have to pay attention for hints and then use those hints to make meaningful decisions. And by "meaningful decisions" I mean informed decisions with risk:reward tradeoff that will impact the game state either way.I think there's another possibility. To me, it seems to lie behind some of the posts in this thread (eg Chaosmancer, maybe Oofta) although of course I could be drawing mistaken inferences from what they've said. 5) The presence from time-to-time of "random"/"untelegraphed" traps - some of which are triggered, some of which are narrated in advance by the GM to those players playing PCs with certain Passive Perception skills - reinforces the players' sense of setting and/or story. Used in this way, traps aren't about rewarding players for skilled play or skilled build, nor about consuming resources. Their function is about establishing a certain fiction/feeling, not about "beating the dungeon".

Sunday, 5th May, 2019

  • 11:03 PM - Harzel mentioned Oofta in post Want to shake things up: Doorways, Scouting, Caution
    Actually it does, since Fireball does half damage on a successful Dex save. Half cover gives +2 to AC and Dex saves, 3/4 cover gives +5 to AC and Dex saves. Granted, cover won’t save a creature from taking damage from Fireball, but it will give them a better chance of reducing the damage by half, which is better than nothing. Which is important for determining the affected area, but it doesn’t say it ignores cover. Cover is something you have relative to the caster, not to the spell’s area of effect. Wouldn't cover be counted from the initial point of the spell effect? While I do think you could have cover from a fireball (such as having a waist high wall between you and the initial point of the spell), having cover relative to the caster doesn't really matter does it? As @Oofta points out, it is RAW that cover is determined from the spell's point of origin. Although I, too, had the initial impulse to grant the DEX saving throw bonus to cover even to Fireball, it seems like that cannot have been the authors' intent, since it leaves you with the following quandary. Because Fireball goes around corners*, a creature can have full cover from Fireball, but still be in its area-of-effect. So if you give the +2/+5 bonus for half/three-quarters cover, what do you do with that creature that has full cover? You can certainly come up with solutions. For instance, you could grant auto-success on the save. But at that point, you are clearly ruling/house-ruling. EDIT: Also, granting the DEX save bonuses for Fireball​ means that the "goes around corners" property makes no difference in the partial cover situations, which seems odd. * While thinking about this a while back, I noted that the use of the word "corners" is itself problematic. I'm pretty sure the in...

Wednesday, 1st May, 2019

  • 01:25 PM - robus mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...g for how I played. I even went so far as to invite folks to call my way house ruling if it helped. IOW, while I might have gotten sucked down into some argument, I certainly started off by saying, "That's cool but I prefer to handle it this way". I dunno, your very first post in thread definitely took an aggressive stance: #37 All this equivocating or "letting there be leeway for error" is just a player screw job AFAIC. Yeah, I'm not big on playing silly buggers to try to increase difficulty. So definitely stepping into the realm of going after others method right off the bat. Your second post in thread #42 gets a bit more passive aggressive: I always find it surprising how many DM's insist on only the DM calling for skill rolls. Maybe I'm just too gamist in my approach. @Bawylie engaged with that though in post #46 but rather than dogpiling, gave a brief history of the game discussing the different approaches to action resolution encouraged by the different editions. @Oofta joins in with post #49 and increases the temperature with this little nugget: While I encourage people to state things in-character, I don't see a need to treat every action like Jeopardy where things have to be said using the correct structure. No need for a wording gestapo if the intent is clear. (my bold) And we’re off to the races... Edit: and I see Charlaquin beat me to it.
  • 03:22 AM - Hussar mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    Y'know, I have to apologize for the "talkie talkie" thing. I thought it was funny and cute, totally not meant as a shot or anything like that. I see that it has very much taken on a life of its own, and that's totally my bad. Sorry about that. When I say, talky talky or talky bits, I'm simply meaning those parts of the game that revolve around the social pillar. As opposed to the hacky bits or looky bits. :p Yeah, humour is always tough. But, honestly Elfcrusher, I've never seen this as you folks needing to defend anything. iserith is 100% right in saying that this is what the 5e books expect. It is right there in black and white. I can't really argue with that. My point has always been that anyone, like me or Oofta, saying that we have a way that works better for us is immediately dogpiled on as coming from dysfunctional tables or not understanding other approaches or whatever.

Tuesday, 30th April, 2019

  • 10:21 PM - Chaosmancer mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...t’s not at all what he said. Not even close. Really? "There is an implicit value judgment here that a clear delineation between player and DM roles is something “for inexperienced players.” (There is a clear judgement that marking the line between player and DM is something for new players) You are mistaking your preference for more give-and-take of narrative control between the players and the DM for a more refined taste that players and DMs will naturally grow into with experience. (You are mixing up your preference for a "give and take" style for a more refined style that players will grow into with experience)" How is "your preference" vs "a more refined style" not saying that their preference is less refined? Add in that this more refined style naturally comes from experience and there is an implication that lacking that more refined style is either choosing to play as if you were inexperienced, or comes about from being inexperienced. Seems pretty dang close to what Oofta was saying about Charlaquin coming across as feeling superior in their style. “More refined” is what I was saying Hussar was mistaking his playstyle preference for, as opppsed to simply a preference. By saying that the playstyle the 5e rules promote is for inexperienced players, it was him suggesting that his playstyle was more refined. It’s the equivalent of saying “[thing I don’t like] is for babies.” I was merely pointing out the bias in Hussar’s wording. I don’t think either of our tastes are more refined, or “for more experienced players,” I think they are simply different preferences. Ah, I see that now. Be easier to spot with some clearer subject-verb usage, it gets a little muddled and I think it could be read either way. There isn't much daylight between Charlaquin's position and mine, plus I have the other poster blocked, so my mistake there. But that poster has been continually railing about my position as well or what he or she can read of it in quotes ...

Saturday, 27th April, 2019

  • 05:17 AM - pemerton mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    One could assume that their judgement call would be based off of the information they have been provided by the DM, including descriptions of the environment so far, the general tone of the campaign, and their basic understanding of the worldThe description of the environment was simply that the building is decrepit. How is "judging" whether or not the GM will decide that the chandelier in a decrepit house might fall if leapt on any different from guessing that same thing? And if the answer is that the possiblity is implict in the situation and the player's knowledge of the GM's taste and table practices, then it no longer serves an example of the consequences not being known to the player! Which is what it was presented as (by Oofta). I believe the reference to coddling was in the idea of telling the player the consequences for all challenges or actions taken by their character. So it's "coddling" to tell it to the players, but it's not "coddling" to wink it to them (by way of descriptions of the environment so far, the general tone of the campaign, and their basic understanding of the world)? That's not a contrast I find easy to follow. Particularly in the context of interpreting a poster who was making a big deal of not telegraphing traps. Let's look at it another way: The player knows chandeliers, in general, may fall under human weight. The player also knows (because the GM said so) that this building is run down. That increases the prospect that the chandelier might fall when leapt on. The player, knowing all this, declares that his/her PC wants to leap onto the chandelier and swing across the room to pursue the assassin. The GM calls for a check, which gives rise to a chance of failure. How i...

Thursday, 25th April, 2019

  • 04:17 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Oofta in post What does it mean to "Challenge the Character"?
    One thing that makes discussions like this challenging is that participants often take slight differences in positions and exaggerate the other side to an extreme. (I think that's what you're calling out here.) I sincerely apologize if I stepped in something between you and Oofta ! I honestly don't see the crux of the disagreement. AFAICT, if anything, the prevalence of (what I think you guys are referring to as?) Player Challenges was even higher back in ye olden days, when "player skill" was something to be tested (see also, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, more puzzles in adventures, etc.). But, again, I think I'll bow out as I can't quite fathom the distinction in these positions. :)
  • 03:26 AM - Hussar mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    Well, Oofta, the fact that no consequence was ever posited points to the notion that there was no consequence. And, at that point I think we all agree, regardless of approach, you just tell the players they climb over the wall and move on. Same goes for pretty much any sort of obstacle where time will overcome it. I have to admit, I have no idea why 5e removed the "Take 20" rules. I suppose, at the end of the day, they don't really need them - you're not supposed to roll anyway, so, just get on with it. I always did think, though, that Take 20 was a nice mechanic in the game. Too much power to the players maybe? I would like to say, that as I read this last page of the thread, I find myself nodding with pretty much everyone. Well done you folks.

Tuesday, 23rd April, 2019

  • 07:00 PM - Elfcrusher mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    Please don't call this out as bad form. I've made many of my fake internet points by witty* paraphrasing delivered in quotes. I'd hate to see that practise demonized. * by witty, of course, I mean "vaguely humorous to somebody somewhere. Maybe. Hopefully. Please click laugh" Fair enough. I may unfairly be lumping Oofta in with some others, and thus mistaking humor for denigration. If so, my apologies, Oofta.
  • 03:25 PM - 5ekyu mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...nner. DM: Sets the DC for Athletics check based on the player's statement. The DC could be anywhere from automatically successful (i.e., using a ladder) to impossible (bare-handed while trying to carry everyone else in the party on his back up a wall made of ice). Player: Rolls if necessary. DM: Narrates the success or failure of the action. Now maybe that is what you meant, but then you misunderstood/misrepresented the person you were responding to. The point they and others were making is that you cannot make a roll much less determine the chance of success unless you have a clear understanding of the player's goal. This interaction loop applies to combat, social, and environmental interactions. The only real difference is that for combat, many of the variables are already predetermined (AC, to hit bonus, damage to be applied, etc.). The other two pillars have many more undefined variables that cannot be set until a clear statement of action is made.I admire Hussar and Oofta for their persistence in agsin climbing down the morphing shifting rabbit hole offer up, but hey, evetybody's got to have a hobby. I find the ladder funny and just tha latest swerve retread so I will toss in a line or two which I am sure clearly shows I misunderstand the wonders of the approach. I (and Hussar I suspect and many others) consider cases in which **as GMs** we provide a wall the PCs might need or want to get over **and** a ladder they can just pick up (or crates they can stack) and use as **not an obstacle** or **not a challenge**. Its the equivalent to "I get out of bed" or "I eat lunch" and so on and so on. They dontvrise near the level of challenge, obstacle or as I tend to specify "challenge that matters." The only way these have significance worth their "resolution" is if something else makes it a challenge - like bad guys en route do you havevtimevyo stack or are you better off preparing to fight using crates stacked up as cover - not ladder. In all my years of g...

Thursday, 18th April, 2019

  • 05:17 PM - DM Dave1 mentioned Oofta in post 5e Capping AC and to hit
    Might be obvious to most, but worth mentioning that a nat 20 will always hit regardless of AC or to hit. High level monsters with multi-attack and perhaps advantage are going to crit at some point. If not, try some different dice. :) Piggybacking on Oofta's point: High AC characters can be challenged by spells or other monster attack abilities that require saves. No character is going to have proficiency in every save, so choose certain monsters for some encounters accordingly. Also, I agree with this sentiment: Even if I were to see numbers like you do, at extreme high levels, I'm okay with that. Let epic pcs be epic, that's what I say.

Monday, 15th April, 2019

  • 06:40 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...ur game, if there is no cost to failure then the action can just be narrated as an automatic success or an automatic failure. We don't bother with rolling if there is no meaningful consequence to failing. Silly example: With no cost of failure: Player: My character howls at the moon to see if the Goddess of the Harvest will respond. DM: Ok. Cool howl. The Goddess does not respond. Now what would you like to do? With a cost of failure: Player: My character howls at the moon to see if the Goddess of the Harvest will respond. DM: Ok. Make a Charisma (Performance) check. DC 15. If you fail, the wolves that you've been hearing in the distance will take offense. Player: On second thought... At our table, knowing that any action might have a meaningful cost of failure does not discourage creativity - in fact, it is quite the opposite in practice. Creativity is often rewarded with lower DCs, Advantage, or automatic success, depending on the situation.This. Oofta you've said multiple times that you see asking for a check as only being stylistically different from the goal and approach method, yet we've shown there are clear differences in both methid and design. Are you now willing to acknowledge that there are clear differences in the styles, or will you continue to maintain you see liitle difference?

Sunday, 14th April, 2019

  • 09:31 PM - Chaosmancer mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...he roll, and things went from there. A better phrasing might have been, I wouldn't have let the players actions fail. OR I wouldn't have called for a roll. Or any number of things. But, after defending myself so many times against something I never disagreed with because people think I disagreed with it, I'm getting sloppier in my responses. Mostly cause I'm getting tired of defending myself against something I never once said. No, all skill checks need to be rolled because rolling a d20 and adding an ability modifier (and potentially a proficiency bonus) and trying to beat a target number is the definition of a skill check. If you’re not rolling, then a skill check is not what you’re doing. If we want to get pedantic, a Rogue with Reliable Talent still rolls the die, they just change the result to (10 + Ability + Prof) If the die comes up less than 10. Okay, first I'm really curious why every time after the first that you quote me, it shows up as you quoting Oofta. It doesn't matter, but it is starting to get weird. But, on to pedantry. That's the point. In the strictest since, a roll is being made, but the result is changing so that it doesn't matter what is rolled. So, if we decide not to roll the dice because the result is a known factor... is that an ability check? What if you want to flag down the waitress? It could be seen as a DC 5 charisma check. But, considering how minor in importance that moment is, and the high likelihood of success, we choose not to roll the dice. There is little to no uncertainty and no stakes. But does that mean there is not an ability check that could be rolled? So, if the Rogue's Reliable Talent is an ability check, which is must be since that ability only works on an ability check, even if we do not roll the dice... then why must flagging down the waitress not be an ability check? Why is there a division between these two events, where they are both situations where no roll is made for speed ...

Saturday, 13th April, 2019

  • 08:00 PM - Satyrn mentioned Oofta in post Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
    None of that contradicts my point: players do not necessarily benefit from being overly granular in declaring actions at my table. "I search the study" is as good as and possibly superior to a series of more specific declarations. Similarly, on topic, "I try to determine if he's lying" is good enough. You and Oofta are far better at gleaning your e players' intentions than I am. I see ""I try to determine if he's lying" and I know you, the Enworld poster, are suggesting the method described in PH in the Insight description because this thread is all about that. But at the table, if Insight hasn't even been mentioned during the session, I wouldn't know that you're trying to read his body language or do something else. I might guess you're trying to determine he lying by questioning his aide sitting beside him, or checking the reference library if recorded facts could show the NPC was lying. I'm not likely gonna know what you mean if you don't tell me what you mean.

Monday, 8th April, 2019

  • 03:25 PM - pemerton mentioned Oofta in post If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
    ...d that The Falcon's Claw was not found (in a subsequent session it turned out to be in the possession of a nemesis NPC who had been hanging around the tower), but that the search did reveal something else - in the ruin's of the older brother's workroom, which the mage PC had never been allowed to enter while a pupil of his brother, was a stand of cursed black arrows like the one that the elf wore around his neck! This was a shocking revelation for both PCs: for the mage, it suggested that his brother was not evil because possessed by a balrog, but rather had been possessed by the balrog because he was already evil; and for the elf, it suggested that rather than aid his companion to redeem his brother, he needed to take revenge on the brother who had made the arrow that had killed his master. If I've understood you correctly, then I would expect that you would see my (1) and (2) as similar to what you're talking about (one a success, the other a failure). I think perhaps some of Ooftas perspectives follows a similar vein of "shroedinger's dungeon" - all the minutiae of a scene is not pre-designated, just enough to illustrate the key parts and the degree of understanding the PCs can get. <snip> But I could be wrong.I don't get that vibe from Oofta's posts myself - I get the feeling that Oofta uses a "pre-stocked"/pre-described dungeon. But I could be wrong too!


Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
No results to display...

Wednesday, 26th June, 2019

  • 07:25 AM - Maxperson quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    A theme to this thread seems to be "D&D doesn't work with firearms because people won't fight because people won't approach combat the way I expect them to". But end of the day I don't care what tactics my players use, it's up to them. I don't care if they play "the right way" as long as they're having fun. As far as running into a gatling gun, they fire 6,000 rounds per minute. If targeted on an individual, I doubt many PCs could survive a hundred ranged attacks per round. Which is one of the things I'd have to think about from an implementation standpoint. If we are discussing westerns, gatling guns fired 200-900 per minute or 20-90 per round, depending on caliber. 6000 is for modern versions, and would be 600 per round, not 100. :)
  • 04:23 AM - Tony Vargas quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    As far as running into a gatling gun, they fire 6,000 rounds per minute. If targeted on an individual, I doubt many PCs could survive a hundred ranged attacks per round. Which is one of the things I'd have to think about from an implementation standpoint. FWIW, in one instance I statted a minigun as an Area Effect that attacked everyone/thing in its beaten zone.
  • 02:32 AM - Sacrosanct quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Another cool campaign idea. D&D Fallout. Magic suddenly started working in an alternate modern day which caused people to panic and let the nukes fly. In this new version of reality radiation really is magic. I don't think you'd even need to change much. Fallout already uses HP, armor, melee weapons, magic healing, mini-nukes. Well, maybe not mini-nukes but meteor storm is about the same. You could always re-flavor spells as tech if you wanted to, but I don't think you need to. I may have to run some mini campaigns to play with some of these ideas. A few years ago, I started work on this project and I just never got around to more than the outline and concept art I commissioned. But I’ve really been thinking of apply 5e rules to this setting. Sentient machines as PCs? Yes please 107259
  • 01:52 AM - Maxperson quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    So a vegetarian that regularly eats meat is still a vegetarian? Can't argue with logic like that. Literally. There's no point because it defies all logic and definitions. Just applying your analogy to 5e druids. You see, 5e druids are still druids if they wear metal armor. There is no rule or even fluff that says they stop being druids. If you're going to make the False Equivalence of comparing druids to vegetarians, I'm going to point out the illogic and take the False Equivalence all the way. Huh. Last time I checked, the DM was the arbiter of the rules. Did they change that when I wasn't looking? Hmm. Nope, intro of the DMG: "as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them." If the DM is a jerk when he arbitrates, he will lose his players.

Tuesday, 25th June, 2019

  • 11:58 PM - Ohmyn quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    Who has said “great, this thread again”? Names. This feels like a necro post... Good grief. This argument, again? That's just in the first few pages. If you want to find more names, feel free to go through the rest of the pages, but I'm not digging that much. I know it's been said at least a few more times in this thread, but two examples from the start of the thread should suffice. You are totally wrong in saying lore aren’t rules. Imagine my surprise. They are rules. LITERALLY how rule is defined in the dictionary. They are part of the design process, just as important as mechanics. Just because they're part of the design process does not mean they are mechanical rules of the game. At most the lore can be enforced as a RAI, but the discussion is about the RAW. Clerics have deities in their lore, but because there's no mechanical penalty that forces them to worship a deity in this edition, nor is their a mechanical penalty for if they denounce the deities in general, punishing a Cle...
  • 11:45 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    I'm talking about how in a hp-based game you can* act like Conan the Barbarian and just stride up to your opponent - your hit points protect you. Actually they are there for that purpose. You can, in D&D, at a point. That point is reasonably high level, and if you're willing to have your Conan be more the later REH version, in full armor. If you're insisting on the oiled-up bodybuilder movie version, you'll really need a whole lot of hps, more than D&D typically gives you. Well, and if you have some way of dishing out the sheer volume of attacks to build yourself a pile of dead bodies to stand on... less-than-1HD enemies in 1e, or Great Cleave or whatever. If you want characters to move and act "naturally", not exposed, behind cover, it is perfectly understandable to want to explore other games than hp-based ones. Games where not just the last bullet poses the threat.... that has very little to do with "realism" or "firearms should be deadlier than axes" The only two factors there...
  • 11:18 PM - MarkB quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Wow. So you've decided that no one anywhere ever ran a wild west game without changing rules? That's either the height of hubris or now your just pulling our legs that you really believe that. I might tweak the firearms a little bit because they should be slightly less effective than the modern equivalent but otherwise I don't see why I'd change a single thing. Well, that and add gatling guns for my ogres. Because I want to replicate super mutants from Fallout. Indeed, it can work very well that way. The Shadowrunesque game I ran made absolutely no changes to the base classes, only introducing some new optional subclasses and backgrounds.
  • 11:10 PM - CapnZapp quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Really? There's no other weapon in the PHB who's purpose is to kill the enemy before they get up close? Have you never played with someone who has archery style and sharp shooter?How does it help to bring up bows and crossbows?
  • 11:08 PM - OverlordOcelot quoted Oofta in post Villains that are supposed to escape
    If you really need a villain to get away, then just have them escape. The PCs may not even know the method they used, and not all magical effects are listed in the spell list. But most of the time, especially in modules, it's more fun to have them play by the book and see if the players can stop their escape. You can always have someone take over their role in a future encounter. If I really want them to get away I'll give them something such as misty step, ability to polymorph or turn ethereal, etc. For example, a well prepared vampire can be very difficult to kill if you're in their home turf. Hurt them enough? They turn into gaseous form and disappear into vents that are scattered around their lair. Just a note that a druid can hard stop that plan with moonbeam (2nd level spell) and someone who can grapple - if you hold the vampire in a moonbeam, he can't move and can't change forms to get out of the grapple. Add in some counterspell fun and even a spellcaster vampire has a hard time...
  • 10:55 PM - CapnZapp quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    You've said basically "it won't work because any single shot should kill you". It's been pointed out time and again that the same could be said of any weapon that does damage. You've never been able to clearly state why a gun should be handled differently. Well, other than "because I said so". On the other hand when you come up with some specific house rules for how you would handle it, feel free to start a different thread. Don't think it will ever work and we should use a different system? Then why you shouldn't be posting to a D&D board.My entire point is I'm not saying "basically". You're simplifying to the point of insult. You either can't or won't get my point, so I certainly won't repeat them. Read my existing posts. PS. They're not about houserules. They're about the fundamental properties of hit point based games.
  • 09:46 PM - Ohmyn quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    It means they will not willingly wear metal armor. Can they? Sure. Will they willingly do so? No. That's the rule and trying to squeeze out anything else through word parsing is not "interpreting" the rules, it's twisting them to mean something they don't say. The problem with this is that being a Paladin of Devotion means they will not willingly lie. Can they? Sure. Will they willingly do so? No, but it's acknowledged that ultimately it's up to the player to decide, and that sometimes they might, because fluff and lore do not dictate the actions the player is capable of performing. If there are consequences in the rules for their actions they can deal with those when they oppose their taboo, but if the system has no consequences, then nothing in the game actually stops them unless the DM rules otherwise. It's silly that the Druid be the only class people feel this concept need not apply to.
  • 09:41 PM - coolAlias quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    It means they will not willingly wear metal armor. Can they? Sure. Will they willingly do so? No. That's the rule and trying to squeeze out anything else through word parsing is not "interpreting" the rules, it's twisting them to mean something they don't say. That's exactly right. That is RAW. However, we both know that as written, it will not actually prevent a player from playing a druid that decides to wear metal armor, just as a Paladin might break their oath or a Cleric turn away from their deity. The failing of this particular rule is not that it exists, but that it doesn't offer any explanation at all for what happens if it is broken, again because a druid *can* wear metal armor, they just choose not to (until they don't - players are great that way). Of course this is a decision for the DM to make at that point, and the player had better be willing to suffer the consequences of their choice, which may even mean giving up their class as described in the Paladin oath-breaking ...
  • 07:10 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    Really? There's no other weapon in the PHB who's purpose is to kill the enemy before they get up close? Have you never played with someone who has archery style and sharp shooter?I'm not sure which is more out there, the denial that ranged weapons can & do kill in D&D (ask any number of imaginary orcs with imaginary elven arrows sticking out of them - the death toll over the last 45 years must have been staggering), or the denial that people /do/ close with gunmen in spite of being shot at, or even actually hit several times?
  • 06:48 PM - Derren quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    You've said basically "it won't work because any single shot should kill you". It's been pointed out time and again that the same could be said of any weapon that does damage. You've never been able to clearly state why a gun should be handled differently. Well, other than "because I said so". On the other hand when you come up with some specific house rules for how you would handle it, feel free to start a different thread. Don't think it will ever work and we should use a different system? Then why you shouldn't be posting to a D&D board. The entire point of guns is to kill someone before he comes close. In a D&D/HP system that is simply not possible. You can set up any amount of level appropriate ranged combatants and barring environmental obstacles like cliffs you will never be able to kill someone before he can punch you in the face. That changes the usage of guns completely compared to real life. Melee weapons on the other hand still work like they are supposed to. You g...
  • 05:39 PM - CapnZapp quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    D&D is pretty decent at many things, but being overly realistic simulation of combat of virtually any kind is not one of them. Are there other games that are better at modeling real combat of various types? Absolutely. But being a realistic simulation or supporting and encouraging any specific fighting style whether that's taking advantage of cover and advancing cautiously or mimicking fencing along a 45 ft long line does not necessarily make for a more enjoyable experience for the majority of people. Reality can be quite boring, I prefer D&D's simple to run reasonably fast paced combat.This is a straw man. You don't need D&D or hit points to run reasonably fast paced combat. Nobody has called for an "overly realistic simulation". The difference is instead the hit points itself. The presence of absence of a "backpack shield generator" informs how your characters act during play. Neither is bad. But disregarding criticism against one as merely a call to "modeling real combat" is.
  • 03:28 PM - Sadras quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    So a vegetarian that regularly eats meat is still a vegetarian? Yes, but a really bad one. :p Kind of like a politician who tells the truth, an Italian who doesn't like pasta, or a Muslim who drinks... you get the drift.
  • 02:23 PM - 5ekyu quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I'm sure that someone somewhere in some game at some point someone has had their PC put on metal armor to sneak into a castle. But there are sooo many issues with that hypothetical. Like ... does the 8 strength wizard put on full plate? Guess you aren't using the variant encumbrance rules. Hope nobody notices the dwarf in a castle run by orcs. That fighter with the +1 plate is going to swap out for the chain mail that's standard for the guard, right? When I've run across similar scenarios, someone polymorphed, did an illusion of some kind, hid in a bag of holding, pretended to be a prisoner, climbed a rope the others threw down, or one of a hundred other ways of dealing with it. This scenario will never happen in any game I ever run and over decades of running and playing games with more DMs and players than I can count I've never seen it. But it still doesn't matter. The DM not giving you an option? Like I said before, they're being a **** DM. It's their game they can make some...
  • 02:07 PM - Maxperson quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I'm sure that someone somewhere in some game at some point someone has had their PC put on metal armor to sneak into a castle. But there are sooo many issues with that hypothetical. Like ... does the 8 strength wizard put on full plate? Guess you aren't using the variant encumbrance rules. Hope nobody notices the dwarf in a castle run by orcs. That fighter with the +1 plate is going to swap out for the chain mail that's standard for the guard, right? So who said the whole party was sneaking in? And if the castle has orcs, everyone in the party is having issues. None of these "examples" changes mine at all. You don't get to alter the scenario. But let's say the druid ignores the clearly stated rule is willing to wear the armor in this one oddball niche scenario and the DM allows it. So what? That doesn't mean he will wear armor any time else. Sneaking into a castle does not justify wearing the armor at other times. A vegetarian will not eat meat ... but if he's starving to deat...
  • 01:39 PM - Paul Farquhar quoted Oofta in post Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented
    I'm sure that someone somewhere in some game at some point someone has had their PC put on metal armor to sneak into a castle. I remember a 1st edition game when the MU had to use a magic sword because it was the only weapon that could harm the enemy and the fighter was dead.

Monday, 24th June, 2019

  • 07:28 PM - Tony Vargas quoted Oofta in post If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?
    My points is that hit points are intrinsically linked to the question of tactics in the gameplay.Sure. Focus fire is the obvious example - hp damage imposes no penalties, so, focusing on one enemy at a time is always the best tactic, and accepting hp damage in return for enabling some other objective is often a pretty easy choice. That is, you can always skip minding cover if all you stand to lose is a couple of hit points. Yes, in the long run you can't afford to lose hp carelessly, but skipping cover is a definite choice to weigh against getting to your destination quicker. Nod. That kind of pedantic player calculation, though, actually can enable a genre-appropriate action on the part of the hero - apparent 'risk taking' or 'bravery' (the /player/ know the PC will just lose some hps - but lose some hps, in the fiction, looks like taking a deadly risk and barely getting away with it). PS. As always, that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with using hit points for a gunpowder gam...


Oofta's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites