OneDnD Bard Playtest discussion

[Haplo781]

Yeah they can.

Wizards get two spells of their choice per level and have done since 3E. There's no requirement those spells come from like, the Wizard's correspondence course or something.

Bards and Sorcerers pull magic from entirely different sources to Wizards, but cast exactly the same spells. That actually hard-proves you're wrong. If arcane spells weren't "floating around the ether", a Sorcerer wouldn't cast Magic Missile, he'd fire an energy blast like a Pathfinder Kineticist or something. You can't even argue with that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Except you have virtually nothing to go on. Hell, you don't even know that either or both of them are demons without PC knowledge. You're assuming that a horse is a shark, because you found them on the same plane.

Nope. I already addressed why the character's would know both are demons. So, I have a demon, traits for that demon, and then the assumption that another demon shares the traits. Unless you can tell me why it is impossible for someone to use that logic, then I can use it.

Whether you have encountered them or not doesn't mean that a bunch don't live there.

And yet, it doesn't matter that they live there, if no one encounters them there. I'm sure there is an elf living in the Abyss too, but that doesn't mean that I have to account for the elf living in the Abyss.

"Arcanaloths were rumored to have originated within the Abyss but had been driven out by the demon lords due to their deceptive nature."

It's a big place. Some almost surely still live there.

So, you've now given me another reason to consider the demons. So why is it a problem? I now hav reasons to think Arcanaloths are really demons.

All of them do. As I said, the Abyss is infinite and has an infinite variety of creatures on it. Just because the DM would have to make them for 5e, doesn't mean that they are not there.

So now I have to consider homebrew before I'm allowed to use logic to determine how I act? How many times have you considered the My Little Pony Homebrew when planning your actions?

I've provided multiple tactics with dozens more obvious ones out there. I'm not going to provide more just because you refuse to see them.

Look, I'm stressed right this second, and not going to go trawling back through. If you feel I've missed something, let me know, I responded to what you said.

Chain mail isn't the only armor the ability affects. Dex would 1) be a part of AC for most creatures, and 2) would be a part of many creatures with ACs or hides as thick as chain.

And so the magic would tell them about that. Again, this isn't that difficult.

 

[Maxperson]

So now I have to consider homebrew before I'm allowed to use logic to determine how I act? How many times have you considered the My Little Pony Homebrew when planning your actions?

Every day. I live by the My Little Pony credo.

Look, I'm stressed right this second, and not going to go trawling back through. If you feel I've missed something, let me know, I responded to what you said.

I'm sorry you're stressed man.

And so the magic would tell them about that. Again, this isn't that difficult.

Metagame magic is a bunch of hokum. The PC has no way of knowing this stuff and the magic isn't going to bypass the PC and give the information to the player.

 

[Amrûnril]

Not quite, but it is the fundamental problem with decrying metagaming.

There was a game I was in at a convention once, where the GM had created a bunch of puzzles. Each puzzle had had a symbol next to them, and the final puzzle was a code made of those symbols. We solved it on the first try. The GM was stunned, and asked how we had done it. We were confused, because the code was literally the order we had seen them in, right?

Turns out it wasn't, we had just written them down in the wrong order.... which happened to be the exact order of the code. Pure, unadulterated coincidence. But the thing is, this sort of stuff happens. I tend to be quite good at guessing plot twists that GMs out into the story. Is it because I'm metagaming? Not really, I'm just deeply immersed in fantasy tropes so I spot them. You could say that is meta-gaming, because fantasy tropes aren't part of the world, but I would literally have to change the way I think and interact to "avoid cheating"

Which would mean I would have to know what the twist is, realize I know it "for the wrong reasons" and then intentionally metagame to come to the wrong conclusion. But not only is that far too much effort, but it makes the mistake of assuming that meta-gaming is always bad. We meta-game all the time with things like "why is this group of strangers working together for another job after the first?"

People can take incomplete information and come to a conclusion, that conclusion can be correct or it can be incorrect. And if it is incorrect, then no one cares. It is only when it is correct that people start accusing them of cheating. Which, to avoid, a lot of players will INTENTIONALLY choose the incorrect guess. Which is also metagaming.

Yep, anytime players have information their characters lack, it's impossible for their decision making to be completely divorced from metagame reasoning. This dynamic can, to some degree, be limited by keeping information a mystery to the players, but it's never going to disappear completely- there are just too many possible fields of metagame knowledge (monster characteristics, spell properties, setting history, genre conventions, DM habits...). At some point, you need to rely on the players to use their metagame knowledge in a way that makes for an enjoyable game and a compelling narrative, whatever that means at your table.

 

[Mephista]

I'm sure there is an elf living in the Abyss too, but that doesn't mean that I have to account for the elf living in the Abyss.

Lolth and the drow pantheon exist in the Abyss, and it's probably a good thing to keep in mind that her dark elves petitioners as well as the souls of elf sacrifices are there

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Healing surges worked really well, but part of that was they also were significant healing. 25% of the character's max hp. I agree that they worked incredibly within their system for keeping the resource in who was being healed, which makes narrative sense

I don't think just giving more healing will cause DMs to just increase the damage, that feels counter-intuitive to me, if they were the ones increasing the healing in the first place.

The healing surge system worked (IMOand all that) because the character had enough surges that the availability of surges became a constraint on the adventuring day not the caster resources. Now that was in a system with encounter resources. I think for a healing surge mechanic to work it would have to operate at a similar scale.
As far as I remember the party could only trigger 2 or 3 healing surges per combat with the option of one surge equivalent that used caster only resources.
It was the combination of limited heals per combat with a good healing return but that healing opportunity refreshed on the next combat.
This was enabled with encounter powers but would be very hard to pull off on a daily power budget. Unless healing was removed from spell casting and put on a short rest timer.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

@Haplo781

Why are you posting a picture of the best edition of D&D? I mean, apart from to be awesome, obviously!

Re: 4E, I think we have to allow that AEDU made every class function differently lol. Honestly I literally never had anyone play a Wizard in 4E. Ritual magic + loads of awesome Controller classes which actually had a theme and style instead of "I AM GENERIC SPELL MAN!!!!" meant they weren't worth considering. Interesting how quick people ditched the hell out of that concept when it was no longer overpowered as all getout.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Maybe get rid of the emergencies part and have healing be out of combat only. It would certainly fit a lot of fiction. Add to that scaled healing based on the recipient and you've got yourself a system I would support.

Have you looked at Worlds Without Number? There's a free version. If not check out the healing system in that (which I understand differs significantly from Star Without Number), I don't want to describe the whole thing, but whilst I'd make it a little less fatal I honestly think it's very close to the direction WotC should have taken with 5E - and WWN is pretty seriously OSR (stressing the R, admittedly).

 

[Micah Sweet]

Have you looked at Worlds Without Number? There's a free version. If not check out the healing system in that (which I understand differs significantly from Star Without Number), I don't want to describe the whole thing, but whilst I'd make it a little less fatal I honestly think it's very close to the direction WotC should have taken with 5E - and WWN is pretty seriously OSR (stressing the R, admittedly).

I have, and I agree.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I have, and I agree.

Honestly WWN makes me tempted to hack a whole bunch of its stuff into 5E. Right now I'm running Spire but if I go back to 5E/1D&D at some point, I think I'll adapt several of the rules. They had some good ideas about "stealth kills", for example, which have been a sticking point in D&D since '90s for my main group, too, making them possible without making them trivial/routine.

 

[Staffan]

As far as I remember the party could only trigger 2 or 3 healing surges per combat with the option of one surge equivalent that used caster only resources.

Pretty close. The baseline for a leader was Healing Word and Inspiring Word which were 2/encounter, or 3/encounter at level 16+, triggering a healing surge with 1d6 to 6d6 bonus healing. These abilities were minor actions (bonus actions in 5e parlance), so you could also do something "productive". In addition, each PC could use Second Wind as a standard action* 1/encounter to spend a healing surge. You could also have other abilities triggering healing surges, both from leaders and others. For example, clerics could choose the Healing Strike encounter power which would deal 2W+Str damage, mark the target, and allow you or a nearby ally to spend a healing surge.

And of course, during a short rest you could spend as many healing surges as you wanted.

It was the combination of limited heals per combat with a good healing return but that healing opportunity refreshed on the next combat.

That, and having healing surges be the main attrition mechanic, not actual hp.

* 4e levels went to 30, not 20.
** One of the dwarven racial abilities was to use Second Wind as a minor action instead of a standard action.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If WotC increases the healing though, not the DM, that's a different story.

Sure, but that's going to become a roll of the dice. Some people will just follow WoTC's guidelines. Others will figure out the math. And some will overdo it. Same as we have now.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm sorry you're stressed man.

Just work stuff

Metagame magic is a bunch of hokum. The PC has no way of knowing this stuff and the magic isn't going to bypass the PC and give the information to the player.

Why not? Magic can see the future. Magic can read signatures invisible to the eye. Magic can look inside a creature and see the microbes that cause disease. Why can't magic give information that aggregates into the information of AC?

Heck, magic can increase and create AC. How can a caster possibly even comprehend the spell "Mage Armor" since it gives the protection of AC 13 + Dex mod. That is a part of the spell that the caster can read and comprehend, however it is presented in world, they understand it. Same with Barkskin, which gives you an AC of 16, and that AC cannot be lowered. Scrolls of Barkskin exist and can be understood, so how is that spell capable of presenting the concept of AC to a caster, but magic cannot possibly present information that can aggregate into AC for the caster? That is contradictory.

 

[Charlaquin]

If you're not going to use the actual components (which I enjoy doing for wizards and clerics at least because its flavourful) why bother with the pouch? Just dump the idea entirely.

Because they attach to your belt, whereas Arcane Foci occupy a hand even when you’re not actively casting a spell.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because they attach to your belt, whereas Arcane Foci occupy a hand even when you’re not actively casting a spell.

I'm not a big fan of arcane foci either. Again, traditional components are a lot more flavorful, at least for wizards.

 

[Maxperson]

Just work stuff

I sincerely hope it gets better for you soon. We may disagree a lot here, but on a personal level I wish the best for everyone. Perhaps the weekend will provide the rest and freedom of mind that you need.

Why not? Magic can see the future. Magic can read signatures invisible to the eye. Magic can look inside a creature and see the microbes that cause disease. Why can't magic give information that aggregates into the information of AC?

Magic can tell the caster, "The creature has protection roughly equal to chain mail and it is agile as well," but it's not going to give the caster AC 18(16 from hide, 2 from dex bonus). The caster doesn't even know that chain mail is 16 and hide is 12. He only knows that chain protects significantly better than hide.

Heck, magic can increase and create AC. How can a caster possibly even comprehend the spell "Mage Armor" since it gives the protection of AC 13 + Dex mod. That is a part of the spell that the caster can read and comprehend, however it is presented in world, they understand it. Same with Barkskin, which gives you an AC of 16, and that AC cannot be lowered.

No, the caster does not read or comprehend 13+dex. He reads and understands that mage armor affords some protection and he can still move in it easily, so it's a good spell to have. The hard numbers are metagame.

 

[Yaarel]

I would love each kind of spellcasting focus to grant a different spellcasting benefit. I would need these benefits to robustly balance with each other and be equally good choices.

Delete spellcasting "components" from the game. Instead, only the focus matters. Decide which focus the character concept is using.

Examples of focuses:
• Mind (trance, mystical experience, visualization, etcetera)
• Voice (improvising expressions of intention, chant, song, poem, command, reciting formula, etcetera)
• Body (dance, Airbender, nose wiggle, hand signs, magic-infused body, drop of blood, etcetera)
• Symbol (personal, traditional, sacred, necklace, tattoo, shield, etcetera)
• Text (personal, traditional, sacred text, diary, book of poetry, written oracles, spellbook, etcetera)
• Implement (wand, staff, rod, cane, distaff, orb, sword, musical instrument, etcetera)
• Components (protoscientific properties of various objects, animal/plant parts, tarot deck, etcetera)
• Pet (familiar)

 

[Micah Sweet]

I would love each kind of spellcasting focus to grant a different spellcasting benefit. I would need these benefits to robustly balance with each other and be equally good choices.

Delete spellcasting "components" from the game. Instead, only the focus matters. Decide which focus the character concept is using.

Examples of focuses:
• Mind (trance, mystical experience, visualization, etcetera)
• Voice (improvising expressions of intention, chant, song, poem, command, reciting formula, etcetera)
• Body (dance, Airbender, nose wiggle, hand signs, magic-infused body, drop of blood, etcetera)
• Symbol (personal, traditional, sacred, necklace, tattoo, shield, etcetera)
• Text (personal, traditional, sacred text, diary, book of poetry, written oracles, spellbook, etcetera)
• Implement (wand, staff, rod, cane, distaff, orb, sword, musical instrument, etcetera)
• Components (protoscientific properties of various objects, animal/plant parts, tarot deck, etcetera)
• Pet (familiar)

There you go! Make them do something, and perhaps lean more into different spellcasters using different ones, and arcane foci could be really cool as opposed to just an excuse not to interact with the component rules.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I sincerely hope it gets better for you soon. We may disagree a lot here, but on a personal level I wish the best for everyone. Perhaps the weekend will provide the rest and freedom of mind that you need.

Doubt it will, but who knows.

Magic can tell the caster, "The creature has protection roughly equal to chain mail and it is agile as well," but it's not going to give the caster AC 18(16 from hide, 2 from dex bonus). The caster doesn't even know that chain mail is 16 and hide is 12. He only knows that chain protects significantly better than hide.

No, the caster does not read or comprehend 13+dex. He reads and understands that mage armor affords some protection and he can still move in it easily, so it's a good spell to have. The hard numbers are metagame.

If a Druid has Hide Armor, a Dex of 14, and a shield, then they know that Barkskin cannot offer them any additional protection. They have to know this, because it is true, and no druid in that situation will cast Barkskin. They may not think of it in terms of "I have an AC of 16, therefore the spell setting my AC to 16 is not helpful" but they still come to the same conclusion and have the same understanding.

Mages who can cast Mage Armor and wear normal armor are aware of how Mage Armor stacks up against their various choices. They would know for example that Mage Armor is superior to wearing a chain shirt, but inferior to them wearing plate armor (if their Dex score is less than 20)

However this is possible, it is possible, because these decisions are made. The caster has to be able to tell when a spell is and is not useful, otherwise every time that a Druid doesn't cast Barkskin because it won't change their AC, or a Hexblade uses Mage Armor because they have an 18 dexm instead of purchasing half-plate, they would be meta-gaming.

 

[SkidAce]

I would love each kind of spellcasting focus to grant a different spellcasting benefit. I would need these benefits to robustly balance with each other and be equally good choices.

Delete spellcasting "components" from the game. Instead, only the focus matters. Decide which focus the character concept is using.

Examples of focuses:
• Mind (trance, mystical experience, visualization, etcetera)
• Voice (improvising expressions of intention, chant, song, poem, command, reciting formula, etcetera)
• Body (dance, Airbender, nose wiggle, hand signs, magic-infused body, drop of blood, etcetera)
• Symbol (personal, traditional, sacred, necklace, tattoo, shield, etcetera)
• Text (personal, traditional, sacred text, diary, book of poetry, written oracles, spellbook, etcetera)
• Implement (wand, staff, rod, cane, distaff, orb, sword, musical instrument, etcetera)
• Components (protoscientific properties of various objects, animal/plant parts, tarot deck, etcetera)
• Pet (familiar)

I lean towards "sympathetic" magic, so material components always made sense to me.

Feel like it would depend on the style of the campaign.