Against the Giants 5e PBP (Full)

[Snarf Zagyg]

A few questions and comments for Group 2 (and please be careful for spoilers for Group 1, who haven't finished yet).

1) I know you all want to keep going, which I love - but please can we take a break until, say January, so I can catch up on a few of my other games? I'd appreciate it.
2) I'd like to use 2024 Rules when we start up again. You okay with that?
3) Level 11 is getting pretty high for PBP - adjudicating spells and such can take a lot of time. Can you try to keep your characters simple when you rebuild them, in particular when it comes to things that fit poorly with PBP like Reaction abilities and features with a lot of moving parts, if you get what I mean. It can be as complicated as you like on YOUR end, but do your best to go easy on me. The exception, IMO, is Conjured Creatures like the recent Elemental. They're actually not that bad, as long as they don't have Reactions (see where I'm going?)
4) On a purely aesthetic level: Should we start whole new thread(s) or just keep going with the ones we have? Any Opinion?

1. NO. YOU MUST WORK HARDER! Ahem. Of course, Fitz. Enjoy the time and the holidays! (FWIW, I am taking an extended absence in February, FYI).

2. Conceptually, I have no issue with that. I am uncertain how to build a gunslinger like Doc in the 2024 rules*, but it would be an interesting exercise. Guess I would have a little time to figure it out?

3. I like my characters like my cocktails, simple.

4. No opinion- whatever is easier. I am fine with new threads, or continuing on.


*Mostly because they changed the Hexblade rules, and Phantom Rogue isn't a PHB Subclass, and I am using the Tasha's gunner feat. And a lineage. I'll have to get my hands into it!

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Mostly because they changed the Hexblade rules, and Phantom Rogue isn't a PHB Subclass, and I am using the Tasha's gunner feat. And a lineage. I'll have to get my hands into it!

When it comes to that stuff, I'll have to have a look. In a pinch, you can use the old stuff, but I'd like to use as much 2024 as possible. I'd be happy to have a look at any of the parts where the gears rub together. Let me know what you come up with, and what you find gets in the way.

 

[Tonguez]

If is 2024 I’ll be using the free online rules, but thats cool. I prefer the narrative end anyway so mechanics are meh and complexity gives me migraines.

4. Do we get better certificates for making more threads?

 

[Steve Gorak]

A few questions and comments for Group 2 (and please be careful for spoilers for Group 1, who haven't finished yet).

1) I know you all want to keep going, which I love - but please can we take a break until, say January, so I can catch up on a few of my other games? I'd appreciate it.
2) I'd like to use 2024 Rules when we start up again. You okay with that?
3) Level 11 is getting pretty high for PBP - adjudicating spells and such can take a lot of time. Can you try to keep your characters simple when you rebuild them, in particular when it comes to things that fit poorly with PBP like Reaction abilities and features with a lot of moving parts, if you get what I mean. It can be as complicated as you like on YOUR end, but do your best to go easy on me. The exception, IMO, is Conjured Creatures like the recent Elemental. They're actually not that bad, as long as they don't have Reactions (see where I'm going?)
4) On a purely aesthetic level: Should we start whole new thread(s) or just keep going with the ones we have? Any Opinion?

1) I m cool with that, but I’ll be experiencing hard core withdrawal, fyi ;-)
2) cool with me, does anyone have access to the free resources? It took me a while to get the gist of high level casters, so I’ll have to go through any new mechanics. I hope I can keep a psionic feel bc I was really enjoying that. Oh, maybe put links to the free resources in the opening posts of the new threads? I hope they give access to stuff for level 11 characters.
3) no prob. I have to take a look at the new rules to see what could be painful for you. I hope you noticed that I never had Gimlak cast silvery barbs exactly for that! Seemed way too complicated and annoying.
4) yeah, maybe separate threads to avoid spoilers G1 vs G2.
Dang, 2 months. I need a life!
Cheers,

Sg

 

[Steve Gorak]

Hey Fam!

Checking the new 2024 rules that are free, I see that there is indeed an aberrant mind sorcerer (yay), but the details aren't free. Could someone DM me just that section pretty please? It's such a small portion of the phb that it would fall under the fair use provisions of Copyright laws, wherever you are (remember that I'm in Canada, and it's not a problem here).
Thanks!

@FitzTheRuke, as we're rebuilding our characters, how do you want to handle elements that have changed. For example, Gimlak is a mountain dwarf, and I picked a magical breastplate as a starting equipment. This is no longer possible, since there are no more mountain dwarves with medium armor proficiency.
So are we free to completely revamp from the ground up (i.e. make bran new characters), or do you want us to keep the base race/classes and have the concepts fit into the new Mould?
Cheers,

SG

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Hey Fam!

Checking the new 2024 rules that are free, I see that there is indeed an aberrant mind sorcerer (yay), but the details aren't free. Could someone DM me just that section pretty please? It's such a small portion of the phb that it would fall under the fair use provisions of Copyright laws, wherever you are (remember that I'm in Canada, and it's not a problem here).
Thanks!

@FitzTheRuke, as we're rebuilding our characters, how do you want to handle elements that have changed. For example, Gimlak is a mountain dwarf, and I picked a magical breastplate as a starting equipment. This is no longer possible, since there are no more mountain dwarves with medium armor proficiency.
So are we free to completely revamp from the ground up (i.e. make bran new characters), or do you want us to keep the base race/classes and have the concepts fit into the new Mould?
Cheers,

SG

I would like them to be the same characters, but it's not strictly necessary. If you want to play someone other than Gimlak, that's okay - there's plenty of reason to believe that someone else might join up to help out during the time we skip. I'm also happy to give over any named NPCs to "graduate" to PC status - though if you want to play a spellcaster, we haven't introduced any of those as NPCs.

You could also swap out Gimlak's magic item for something that follows the new rules, or we could ignore that little inconsistency and just give him medium armor training. (I believe that the new rules have it so that you could theoretically have paid an NPC to teach you using downtime, which we can handwave as having happened somewhere during his lower level adventures).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Hey Fam!

Checking the new 2024 rules that are free, I see that there is indeed an aberrant mind sorcerer (yay), but the details aren't free. Could someone DM me just that section pretty please? It's such a small portion of the phb that it would fall under the fair use provisions of Copyright laws, wherever you are (remember that I'm in Canada, and it's not a problem here).
Thanks!

@FitzTheRuke, as we're rebuilding our characters, how do you want to handle elements that have changed. For example, Gimlak is a mountain dwarf, and I picked a magical breastplate as a starting equipment. This is no longer possible, since there are no more mountain dwarves with medium armor proficiency.
So are we free to completely revamp from the ground up (i.e. make bran new characters), or do you want us to keep the base race/classes and have the concepts fit into the new Mould?
Cheers,

SG

I'm viewing it as a challenge. I'm trying to get as close as possible to the old Doc with the new rules.

Obviously, I had to discuss the reborn lineage with Fitz, but other than that (and perhaps having to claw back the gunner feat from Tasha's) it's a fun exercise to see how to make a character with a ... backwards compatible set of rules.

(I've been noodling over the changes they made because the Hexblade patron is gone, but pact of the blade invocation --- that's weird --- largely takes the place of it, and seeing what I need to do about the Phantom Rogue bit. It's a good mental exercise to keep my mind off of, you know, other stuff.)

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm viewing it as a challenge. I'm trying to get as close as possible to the old Doc with the new rules.

Obviously, I had to discuss the reborn lineage with Fitz, but other than that (and perhaps having to claw back the gunner feat from Tasha's) it's a fun exercise to see how to make a character with a ... backwards compatible set of rules.

Yeah, it's an interesting exercise. Ultimately, when it comes to backwards compatibility, if we HAVE to, we can just use the old rules for things that are missing. But I think that's a last resort (only because of desire, though, not because of lack of ability. It works fine, with a few minor gears grinding.

(I've been noodling over the changes they made because the Hexblade patron is gone, but pact of the blade invocation --- that's weird --- largely takes the place of it, and seeing what I need to do about the Phantom Rogue bit. It's a good mental exercise to keep my mind off of, you know, other stuff.)

Yeah, we all need distractions and as much escapism as possible right now I think... no reason.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Funny how it’s complicated given it’s supposed to be backwards compatible. I guess the compatibility is you can use old rules and continue to level up a pc using old rules and they should still be competitive with characters made with the new rules…instead of trying to retrofit an old into a new.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Funny how it’s complicated given it’s supposed to be backwards compatible. I guess the compatibility is you can use old rules and continue to level up a pc using old rules and they should still be competitive with characters made with the new rules…instead of trying to retrofit an old into a new.

I've said it before in many-a-thread, but the main thing that they wanted out of backwards compatibility is to have their back catalogue of adventures to run smoothly, and for the game to "feel" essentially the same. I think that they achieved it. Also, I've found that it's pretty darn easy to just "use what you like" - if you don't like the new rule (whatever it is) just keep using the old one. As long as the table understands what you're up to, it really doesn't matter much. Heck, I personally don't think it matters all that much if you're even consistent with whether you use an old rule or a new one, but that opinion could be controversial.

For our purposes here, I'd like to try to use as much new as possible, but if we find too many grindy points, we can use the old rules to fill in the gaps.