Search results

This is a flaw in a lot of modules - they don't deal with any of the obvious "what if"s. The classic example of this: pretty much any D&D module intended for PCs of 5th level or higher never goes into any detail about how to handle PCs who approach from the air, even though Fly is a 3rd-level...

Which is fine for a big outfit like WotC but doesn't do much for a DM banging away in his kitchen at home, which is what I thought this was about.

Ah, but if one does what D&D has for some inexplicable reason failed to do ever since day one and make casters roll to aim their AoE spells, ray spells, and any other spells that aren't on self or by touch, then... :) This time, yes. In the past I've seen casters die outright due to fumbling...

Indeed, though it seems people's results vary on this. I'm with you, in that IME playing online is way slower and less efficient than playing in person. But others have recently posted that their online play is in fact more efficient than in-person play, so :🤷: .

Were I running it I'd want - and expect, going in - the campaign to have a potential lifespan of ten years or more, played weekly (i.e. about 45 sessions a year allowing for the odd one getting missed). Also assumed and expected would be some player turnover during that time, as well as...

Ah, OK. Depends. Are you merely getting the same aggregate number of attacks in fewer rounds (i.e. going through the same total number of bullets each day)? If the weapons they're using are unreliable enough to misfire on average once per 20 shots taken, then yes. The argument is valid from...

Why are you assuming fumbling only applies to martials? Casters should be able to fumble or mess up their spells as well.

Did not vote as I don't run 5e (or 5.5); were I to, I'd tweak it such that each level took numerous sessions to achieve in order to spin the campaign out longer. I'd be unpleasantly surprised if we got through 4th in the first year of the campaign (i.e. 45-ish sessions).

As player: From raw 1st and adventured all the way through? 11th, over a 6-year career in a 3e game (the level-advancement speed was intentionally slowed down greatly by the DM in order to make the campaign run longer). Any character? 13th, in a 1e-adjacent game. Started in late 2011 at 6th...

I should probably note that all my views above assume the module is printed on actual paper and sold as such.

Any use of a weapon or aimed spell has the same chance of fumbling in our system, usually* 1/d20 confirmed by 1/d6. This applies to everyone: PCs, NPCs, monsters, the whole lot. * - some effects e.g. Bane or anything that gives you a net minus to hit can increase these odds case by case.

Why does the misfire rate double from 5% to 10% here? For me, if you misfire 5% of the time per attack at one attack per round you should also misfire 5% of the time per attack at 4 attacks per round. Ditto if the misfire rate is 1% or 10% or whatever. And if this means you're going to...

You ain't seen my wild magic surge tables, have you? :) Yes, spells can backfire; usually on interruption, but you can also fumble with an aimed spell.

About 3/4 of the items in the "Unknowns" list are fairly easy to categorize into something that already exists. Hydras are an oddball and the answer there is probably to assign an xp number per head slain rather than to the creature as a whole, treating the body as just one more head. Head...

Things that make modules easier to run: --- detached maps, preferably on cardstock, a la many of the earlier TSR modules. Bonus points if the cardstock is three-fold and can double as a DM screen. --- monster stats in short form (but complete) baked into the encounter write-up where they...

Hey, I'll happily cop to being lazy, in that if there's two ways of doing the same thing to the same result I'll almost always choose the one that requires the least effort on my part. In other words, I'm fine with people making this correlation and don't see it as a negative.

Each edition changed quite a bit between the start and end of its run. Comparing at-release 1e with at-release 2e is IMO valid, as is comparing end-of run 1e with end-of run 2e. For me the most jarring difference netween 1e (both as-written and our homebrew version) and 2e was 2e's IMO...

The chance of misfiring within a given round gets higher but it's ironclad sure that's not what they were looking at. Instead they were looking at the chance of misfiring per attack, without regard for how closely or widely spaced in in-game time those attacks might be. Put another way: if...

Odd, in that the more dice you roll at once the less random (i.e. more predictable) the result is likely to be; the law of averages will trend the expected result closer to the middle of the bell curve with every added die. Example: rolling a d16+2 will give an equal chance of any result...

Agreed all round. Change "fun" to "challenge" in that last quote and you're bang on right.