December 1st UA Spell changes

[Maxperson]

So... why do you think the damage is listed as that? Do you think they compared the damage to AC?

Everything. It's just one piece of the puzzle, not a white room object like you want to make it. Neither damage, not hit points exist in isolation. This is proved by the fact that you can modify anything in the block and it doesn't shift the CR all the way to whatever you pick. If damage vs. hit points where the end all, be all you make it out to be, modifying damage in step 3 would shift CR 1 for every TWO steps. It would shift it for every step.

Yet despite your claim there is no math in the DMG... you certainly seem to know exactly how to use the system and what numbers go where.

I can drive a car, too. Can't build one. You can use the tools in the DMG, but you don't know how they were built. You don't have the math behind the tools.

Uh huh, because it is vitally important to clarify that it is a fact that theoritical abilities could exist.

No. It's a fact that other abilities do exist. They aren't theoretical. DMs all over the world come up with them, being creative and all.

Invisibility is only advantage for a single attack. It doesn't exist long enough to affect their damage output more than getting a successful stealth roll or any other reason for advantage. There is no math for this, in the terms of a formula, but the reasoning is obvious. Meanwhile, while the disadvantage to being attacked might matter, since invisibility almost always disappears when an attack is made, the defensive use only applies as long as the enemy is out of the fight, and again, usually doesn't last long enough. You keep screaming "Math!math!math!" but there is no "abilities over time" equation to write out.

Meanwhile. look at Constrict. It is an attack, so you deal damage when you use it unlike casting invisibility. It auto-restrains, and the enemy has to use their action to escape (not attacking you) meanwhile they have disadvantage to attack you. It is an AC of +1 effectively, because it only affects a single party member for an extended period of the fight, so it is only 1/4 as effective as permanent disadvantage.

And Blood Frenzy is going to almost always be in use, the only time it isn't is when the party is at completely full hp, which is incredibly rare. And while the effect varies depending on AC, dozens of articles have been written about how advantage is (on average) between a +4 and a+5.

It depends completely on the AC of the victim and PCs tend to have higher than normal ACs. It's +4 or +5 if the target AC is low.

Or we aren't out of town for longer than a few days and everyone tends to buy a month of rations and restock in town all the time, because rations are cheap. And I don't feel like a couple of silver every so often is really breaking anything.

Oof! You house ruled encumbrance away as well. 30 days of rations is 60 pounds. Makes making strength the dump stat a lot more attractive.

It doesn't literally mean all other things are equal, it means you HOLD all other things as being equal. Such as assuming that subclasses will have equal impact on the base class. Because if you assume all subclasses are about equal within the class, then assume every subclass affects the class power equally, then you can just compare the classes.

Then it's not a good assumption to make. All subclasses are not about equal. Some are decidedly better than others.

So your claim that all teams are equally balanced is false.

I never made that claim. Your Strawman here is what is false. I said that balance was a range.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Everything. It's just one piece of the puzzle, not a white room object like you want to make it. Neither damage, not hit points exist in isolation. This is proved by the fact that you can modify anything in the block and it doesn't shift the CR all the way to whatever you pick. If damage vs. hit points where the end all, be all you make it out to be, modifying damage in step 3 would shift CR 1 for every TWO steps. It would shift it for every step.

Then I'll start comparing damage to backgrounds. What CR is a 54 damage vs an Acolyte? Is it different than 93 damage vs a Former Cultist? Why don't we have this math! I demand the hidden math that tells me CR vs Librarian Scholar!!

I can drive a car, too. Can't build one. You can use the tools in the DMG, but you don't know how they were built. You don't have the math behind the tools.

Except... we basically do. May not be laid out, but since we know CR is "the level of a party of four against this monster" and we know the average Ability Scores, ASI's, Proficiency bonuses, and ect ect, we can pretty trivially see why Damage, HP, AC, Attack Bonus and Save DCs are where they are. You say that we can't possibly know, because they didn't give us a formula, but it sure seems like we can. After all, how do you imagine Kobold Press made their monsters? The system is there, you just want it laid out in a way that it cannot be laid out.

No. It's a fact that other abilities do exist. They aren't theoretical. DMs all over the world come up with them, being creative and all.

Cutting off where I clarify what is meant by calling them "theoritical abilities". So honest of you. I'm glad you don't try and warp the conversation to suit your own arguments. It would make trying to have any discussion with you as pleasant as having my teeth kicked in repeatedly.

It depends completely on the AC of the victim and PCs tend to have higher than normal ACs. It's +4 or +5 if the target AC is low.

PCs do not have higher than normal ACs. I don't even know how you could possibly justify that. And besides, Advantage is better the higher the target's AC is anyways.

Oof! You house ruled encumbrance away as well. 30 days of rations is 60 pounds. Makes making strength the dump stat a lot more attractive.

Oh noes! 60 lbs! But my poor character with their primary weapon, armor, and miscellaneous gear can only carry 240 lbs without any issue whatsoever! I mean, what would I do if I was carrying slightly more than 250 lbs of stuff on a 6-day journey that slowly reduced the amount of weight I was carrying!

I've done this song and dance hundreds of times, and it isn't even related to the discussion except for you to make further pot shots attempting to discredit my numbers by attacking ANYTHING ELSE besides my actual arguments.

Then it's not a good assumption to make. All subclasses are not about equal. Some are decidedly better than others.

Then those need to be fixed. But it would be kind of crappy for me to judge a classes performance just because a single subclass in it wasn't up to par. So, you hold the subclasses as equal when looking at the class, then balance the subclasses agaisnt each other. Not rocket science here.

I never made that claim. Your Strawman here is what is false. I said that balance was a range.

And that within this range teams are what is balanced, not individuals. You made that very clear. And then you threw a fit and demanded that I not use specific teams, because that wasn't fair. Guess your range was rather small.

Frankly Max? You have devolved to nothing but cheap shots and red herrings. I've shown you repeatedly that your assertions were wrong. You refuse to acknowledge and keep trying to squirm away from those points to attack me in every direction except the actual discussion. Are we done here? You successfully ruined any attempt to have a discussion about fixing healing. Congrats. Hopefully someone, somewhere else, was able to have a productive conversation that will move OD&D forward in a better direction for healing spells, potions and other abilities.

 

[Maxperson]

Then I'll start comparing damage to backgrounds. What CR is a 54 damage vs an Acolyte? Is it different than 93 damage vs a Former Cultist? Why don't we have this math! I demand the hidden math that tells me CR vs Librarian Scholar!!

You don't want to even try to understand it seems.

Except... we basically do. May not be laid out, but since we know CR is "the level of a party of four against this monster" and we know the average Ability Scores, ASI's, Proficiency bonuses, and ect ect, we can pretty trivially see why Damage, HP, AC, Attack Bonus and Save DCs are where they are. You say that we can't possibly know, because they didn't give us a formula, but it sure seems like we can. After all, how do you imagine Kobold Press made their monsters? The system is there, you just want it laid out in a way that it cannot be laid out.

Then show the background math and not just, "Hey, look at all these tools! So we know!"

PCs do not have higher than normal ACs. I don't even know how you could possibly justify that. And besides, Advantage is better the higher the target's AC is anyways.

Seriously? A PC can start with a 17(or higher) AC, which is what the tools in the DMG assigns to CR 10-12 creatures. I'd call that higher than normal for monsters. By the time the PCs hit 10-12th level, their ACs will be even higher.

Oh noes! 60 lbs! But my poor character with their primary weapon, armor, and miscellaneous gear can only carry 240 lbs without any issue whatsoever! I mean, what would I do if I was carrying slightly more than 250 lbs of stuff on a 6-day journey that slowly reduced the amount of weight I was carrying!

Okay. So your strong PC can carry the minimums. Now add all your extras and money and.................................you have a strong(16 strength) PC that can do it, maybe. Depends on how much money and extras you are carrying and what kind of armor. Most PCs aren't that strong and many dump strength to 8.

Then those need to be fixed. But it would be kind of crappy for me to judge a classes performance just because a single subclass in it wasn't up to par. So, you hold the subclasses as equal when looking at the class, then balance the subclasses agaisnt each other. Not rocket science here.

Again, balance is a range. The numbers don't have to be absolutely equal to be balanced.

And that within this range teams are what is balanced, not individuals. You made that very clear.

Teams are made of individuals. If you don't have individuals that fall into the range, then the teams can't be balanced.

 

[Chaosmancer]

sigh

You don't want to even try to understand it seems.

I do understand. I understand that damage isn't related to EVERYTHING.

Then show the background math and not just, "Hey, look at all these tools! So we know!"

Showed the math, you said it wasn't real math. There is no equation that says CR X = Hp+Damage+AC+To Hit value. CR X equals balanced (in theory) against four PCS of level X.

We know what four PCs of level X (on average) generally look like. They are why CR X has the values it does. Again, multi-equation values. This isn't X=A+B. This is F(X) = X+1/2 x D which relates to the function F(D) = Y/3 - G. And on and on. And some of those things don't have mathematical expressions. Sorry, there is no equation for how to weigh strong saves versus weak saves. There is no mathematical way to measure fire resistance against thunder immunity. They didn't make a massive computer program that runs everything through a perfectly balanced equation to make the game.

This "hidden math" is an illusion that you are clinging to in some desperate attempt to prevent discussion about changing the parts of the system that are broken. It doesn't exist. If it did exist, people would have found it. Instead, there is math where math works, and understanding of logic where math doesn't work.

Seriously? A PC can start with a 17(or higher) AC, which is what the tools in the DMG assigns to CR 10-12 creatures. I'd call that higher than normal for monsters. By the time the PCs hit 10-12th level, their ACs will be even higher.

A PC CAN start that high. Most don't. Also, PC AC is quite difficult to raise. From level 1 to level 12 a monster's to hit value can increase from +3 to +11. That is an 8 pt increase. Without magic items (which the game isn't balanced around) that PC with 17 AC is likely to tap out around 21, a 4 pt difference.

Also, you didn't say "higher than normal for monsters" you said "higher than normal". Additionally, you are just making claims, not showing that advantage can't be +4 on average.

Okay. So your strong PC can carry the minimums. Now add all your extras and money and.................................you have a strong(16 strength) PC that can do it, maybe. Depends on how much money and extras you are carrying and what kind of armor. Most PCs aren't that strong and many dump strength to 8.

sigh

Really? Fine. Let's take a moment and consider the only question of encumbrance that actually matters. Why are you giving the PCs rewards they cannot carry?

Because an 8 strength wizard? To carry all their necessary equipment is a dagger, a wand, a spellbook, and robes. So that is 9 lbs of gear. Even with 60 lbs of food that is 69 lbs and they can carry 120 lbs, so they still have 50lbs of extra space. Encumbrance isn't some quantum math problem of insane difficulty. The only question that actually matters is "why is the DM giving rewards the player's can't carry?" That's it. That's the only point where encumbrance matters.

Again, balance is a range. The numbers don't have to be absolutely equal to be balanced.

And yet, you refused to acknowledge an analysis of one subclass becuase it was "too weak" and demanded another that was "stronger" to prove balance. Must be a small range.

Teams are made of individuals. If you don't have individuals that fall into the range, then the teams can't be balanced.

So, balance is on the individual level, like I said originally. Good talk. Glad you finally agree with me.

Again, are we done here? I feel I have adequately proven myself a dozen times despite your repeated "nuh uh"s

 

[Maxperson]

I do understand. I understand that damage isn't related to EVERYTHING.



Showed the math, you said it wasn't real math. There is no equation that says CR X = Hp+Damage+AC+To Hit value. CR X equals balanced (in theory) against four PCS of level X.

We know what four PCs of level X (on average) generally look like. They are why CR X has the values it does. Again, multi-equation values. This isn't X=A+B. This is F(X) = X+1/2 x D which relates to the function F(D) = Y/3 - G. And on and on. And some of those things don't have mathematical expressions. Sorry, there is no equation for how to weigh strong saves versus weak saves. There is no mathematical way to measure fire resistance against thunder immunity. They didn't make a massive computer program that runs everything through a perfectly balanced equation to make the game.

This "hidden math" is an illusion that you are clinging to in some desperate attempt to prevent discussion about changing the parts of the system that are broken. It doesn't exist. If it did exist, people would have found it. Instead, there is math where math works, and understanding of logic where math doesn't work.

The above explanation shows that you do not understand what I am saying.

A PC CAN start that high. Most don't. Also, PC AC is quite difficult to raise. From level 1 to level 12 a monster's to hit value can increase from +3 to +11. That is an 8 pt increase. Without magic items (which the game isn't balanced around) that PC with 17 AC is likely to tap out around 21, a 4 pt difference.

Did you see the part where I said they start with above average AC. I didn't make a claim about how their ACs end.

Also, you didn't say "higher than normal for monsters" you said "higher than normal".

I didn't say it because it went without saying. Saying the PCs have higher than normal AC = monsters and NPCs usually having lower than normal ACs. Quite literally everything else besides the PCs is a monster or NPC. I didn't think I would need to explain that to you.

Additionally, you are just making claims, not showing that advantage can't be +4 on average.

It's not a +4 on anything in the upper end of the AC spectrum.

Let's take a moment and consider the only question of encumbrance that actually matters. Why are you giving the PCs rewards they cannot carry?

Because that's how treasure works. If they find 12000 gold pieces in a horde, that's 240 pounds. If they want to drag back that adamantine plate, that's 65 more pounds. It adds up.

Because an 8 strength wizard? To carry all their necessary equipment is a dagger, a wand, a spellbook, and robes. So that is 9 lbs of gear. Even with 60 lbs of food that is 69 lbs and they can carry 120 lbs, so they still have 50lbs of extra space.

You should look at wizard sheets sometime. They carry a heck of a lot more than that usually.

The only question that actually matters is "why is the DM giving rewards the player's can't carry?" That's it. That's the only point where encumbrance matters.

It's my job to set the world. It's not my job to artificially cause the world to only give them what they can carry. If they want to drag a 200 pound tapestry worth 25000 gold back to town, they can. If they decide it's too heavy, that's also a decision they can make. The tapestry isn't suddenly going to vanish or go on a diet and lose 180 pounds just so your wizard can carry it.

And yet, you refused to acknowledge an analysis of one subclass becuase it was "too weak" and demanded another that was "stronger" to prove balance. Must be a small range.

No. I just called you out for cherry picking the numbers to work out in your favor. I never said they weren't all in the balance range.

So, balance is on the individual level, like I said originally. Good talk. Glad you finally agree with me.

It's both. The game assumes a group of 4 when it works out CR. Individuals go into that group.

 

[James Gasik]

Because that's how treasure works. If they find 12000 gold pieces in a horde, that's 240 pounds. If they want to drag back that adamantine plate, that's 65 more pounds. It adds up.

Why are they bothering? It's not like the treasure does them much good.

 

[tetrasodium]

Why are they bothering? It's not like the treasure does them much good.

It doesn't add up either. strength *15 before hitting any penalty at all just means that Alice shrugs & hands something heavy to Bob Dave or Cindy & the group continues on with a sigh because the GM made them sit there to wait for Alice to calculate how much she was carrying when she wasn't bothering to track a number with an implausibly high cap before.

 

[Maxperson]

Why are they bothering? It's not like the treasure does them much good.

In my game it does. I have proactive players who come up with things to spend their money on. They build temples, buy homes in various cities they go to frequently, sometimes they will open a shop and set NPCs up to run it so they can sell the used stuff they find, and so on. Spending money is never an issue.

 

[Maxperson]

It doesn't add up either. strength *15 before hitting any penalty at all just means that Alice shrugs & hands something heavy to Bob Dave or Cindy & the group continues on with a sigh because the GM made them sit there to wait for Alice to calculate how much she was carrying when she wasn't bothering to track a number with an implausibly high cap before.

It does add up over time. It's something they track and has been an issue more than once.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The above explanation shows that you do not understand what I am saying.

It is more I really stopped caring after the fifth time you insisted on something that isn't real being the only thing that mattered.

Did you see the part where I said they start with above average AC. I didn't make a claim about how their ACs end.

And? Your original point wasn't about starting or ending AC at all. So who cares, I was pointing out how the difference between AC and to-hit bonuses.

I didn't say it because it went without saying. Saying the PCs have higher than normal AC = monsters and NPCs usually having lower than normal ACs. Quite literally everything else besides the PCs is a monster or NPC. I didn't think I would need to explain that to you.

Funny how you can have things that "go without saying" but I need to demonstrate the hidden math of 5e to be allowed to talk about healing spells and have hyper precise language. And this STILL doesn't prove that Blood Frenzy getting a +4 on average because of advantage is wrong.

It's not a +4 on anything in the upper end of the AC spectrum.

Care to support that with evidence? Or are we still playing the "Max just states things as facts" game?

Because that's how treasure works. If they find 12000 gold pieces in a horde, that's 240 pounds. If they want to drag back that adamantine plate, that's 65 more pounds. It adds up.

Okay, why not give them a single 12,000 gold piece ornamental necklace then? Then it is a pound. I have the option to do that, so why don't I?

You should look at wizard sheets sometime. They carry a heck of a lot more than that usually.

Cool, I have 50 lbs of extra space. What else am I required to carry as "necessary equipment". Because, I did specify it was only the necessary equipment, since we are playing with encumbrance.

It's my job to set the world. It's not my job to artificially cause the world to only give them what they can carry. If they want to drag a 200 pound tapestry worth 25000 gold back to town, they can. If they decide it's too heavy, that's also a decision they can make. The tapestry isn't suddenly going to vanish or go on a diet and lose 180 pounds just so your wizard can carry it.

And yet, you are the one setting that 200 lb tapestry there as a reward for them. And if it is too heavy, then they just don't take it. It doesn't matter. It is literally that simple. If they don't take it, it has zero impact on encumbrance.

I remember a DM ran us through a 2e adventure once. He was a newer DM and confused, because there was this massively heavy statue locked to the floor of this mansion with Sovereign Glue, but it had this big gold value. And he asked us what we wanted to do with it. And after confirming we had no way of interacting with it, we ignored it. It was... entirely pointless for the adventure to include. Just a way to tempt us into wasting time.

So, sure, don't have your tapestry lose weight. But also don't expect your players to care that it exists, because you by telling them it weighs more than they can carry, have declared it is useless to them.

No. I just called you out for cherry picking the numbers to work out in your favor. I never said they weren't all in the balance range.

If they were in the balance range, then it wouldn't matter whether or not I cherry picked them. They would be balanced.

It's both. The game assumes a group of 4 when it works out CR. Individuals go into that group.

Nope. It is the individuals by your own admission.

 

[tetrasodium]

In my game it does. I have proactive players who come up with things to spend their money on. They build temples, buy homes in various cities they go to frequently, sometimes they will open a shop and set NPCs up to run it so they can sell the used stuff they find, and so on. Spending money is never an issue.

That's you fixing a hole created by the encumbrance being designed to obliviate itself system with three homebrew solutions not the encumbrance system mattering enough for me to have credibility when I browbeat players into being on the ball with tracking the weight of what they are carrying. Here's a story of three other subsystems filling a similar role...

 

[Maxperson]

That's you fixing a hole created by the encumbrance being designed to obliviate itself system with three homebrew solutions not the encumbrance system mattering enough for me to have credibility when I browbeat players into being on the ball with tracking the weight of what they are carrying. Here's a story of three other subsystems filling a similar role...

No. That's not me at all. THEY choose things to spend money on.

 

[Maxperson]

Funny how you can have things that "go without saying" but I need to demonstrate the hidden math of 5e to be allowed to talk about healing spells and have hyper precise language. And this STILL doesn't prove that Blood Frenzy getting a +4 on average because of advantage is wrong.

False Equivalences are false. One is math(yours) and one is not(mine). I shouldn't have to explain to you what "everything but the PCs means."

Care to support that with evidence? Or are we still playing the "Max just states things as facts" game?

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

Okay, why not give them a single 12,000 gold piece ornamental necklace then? Then it is a pound. I have the option to do that, so why don't I?

Because I don't do nonsense. They'll get the jewelry and gems, but coins are and always have been part of the game. I'm not going to alter that just so that you can dump strength.

Cool, I have 50 lbs of extra space. What else am I required to carry as "necessary equipment". Because, I did specify it was only the necessary equipment, since we are playing with encumbrance.

What's not necessary? The equipment list has a lot of commonly used items.

I remember a DM ran us through a 2e adventure once. He was a newer DM and confused, because there was this massively heavy statue locked to the floor of this mansion with Sovereign Glue, but it had this big gold value. And he asked us what we wanted to do with it. And after confirming we had no way of interacting with it, we ignored it. It was... entirely pointless for the adventure to include. Just a way to tempt us into wasting time.


So, sure, don't have your tapestry lose weight. But also don't expect your players to care that it exists, because you by telling them it weighs more than they can carry, have declared it is useless to them.

Have I? They left it there until they could come back with a cart and get it. I don't tell them anything is useful or useless. I just make the world and the players can decide.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

nah, okay, no, i need to respond to this because this is a downright insulting misinterpretation of this page.

this table is referring to NATURAL DICE ROLLS. it is NOT accounting for modifiers. advantage drops below +4 if you need to roll over a natural 15. monsters are (almost always) not rolling flat d20s as their attacks. they are (almost) never going to need roll a natural 15 or higher to hit a PC with 15 AC - actually, you know what? let's look at the sahuagin, since 5e.tools lists that as an example of blood frenzy.

the sahuagin is a CR1/2 creature with a +3 to hit. that means it needs a 12 (15-3=12) to hit a creature with 15 AC. advantage to hit a natural 12 increases the odds of success by 24.8%, which we round down to 20% since as you said the game rounds down (i mean...i don't know if that applies here but we'll roll with it), which comes out to...a +4 to hit. quite interesting. verily so, i would say.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Can one mark a thread so that it does not update to unread everytime someone makes a 100lines, multiquote, competely irrelevant nitpicky post?

Edit: as a reminder: the topic of this thread was: "UA spell changes"

 

[Chaosmancer]

Can one mark a thread so that it does not update to unread everytime someone makes a 100lines, multiquote, competely irrelevant nitpicky post?

Edit: as a reminder: the topic of this thread was: "UA spell changes"

I've tried a few times to get back to talking about healing spells, which were the major changes to spells to date, but no such luck. I'd hoped to get a chance to talk about heroism vs barkskin vs aid as well

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I've tried a few times to get back to talking about healing spells, which were the major changes to spells to date, but no such luck. I'd hoped to get a chance to talk about heroism vs barkskin vs aid as well

So just stop. And talk about this. I think it is reasonably clear that the two of you won't convince the other one.

I think going to temp hp in aid is a good idea, because the increase of max hp is neat, but deviates too much from the standard and is an additional layer of bookkeeping. How do two aid spells stack anyway?

Heroism and barkskin are now redundand, bit I still think, that we need some other restriction than just concentration for personal buff spells.
Or: as long as you concentrate on barkskin, your constitution saves are always at least 10. (Treat a result of 9 or lower as 10).
And maybe explicitely state, that damage you completely absorb with thp does not force a con save.
Or maybe remove the DC at least 10 bar and just make the save DC = damage taken/2.

 

[Chaosmancer]

False Equivalences are false. One is math(yours) and one is not(mine). I shouldn't have to explain to you what "everything but the PCs means."

Well, at least I finally get you to admit that I have math. But no, I wasn't referring to my math versus you stating the value of advantage via math changing because AC is higher than normal.

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

I believe W'rkncacnter provided an excellent response to why this claim is flatly misrepresenting the situation.

Because I don't do nonsense. They'll get the jewelry and gems, but coins are and always have been part of the game. I'm not going to alter that just so that you can dump strength.

How is it nonsense? Who cares if coins have "always been part of the game"? And who said anything about dumping strength? You noted that the coins and armor were over 300 lbs. You of course realize that for any single character to carry that much without penalty, they needed to have a strength over 20. I don't see maxed strength as dumping strength, do you?

The obvious truth is that while you make the claim of not altering anything, you obviously are setting players up to not be able to get their proper rewards after a fight, that is the ONLY time encumbrance matters. Because people can carry their essential gear trivially. It is only when you start offering them rewards for winning that they then begin to have to deal with this system.

What's not necessary? The equipment list has a lot of commonly used items.

My wizard doesn't need fishing tackle, they aren't going to be fishing.
They have an 8 strength, they don't need a crowbar, they not only can't benefit from it, but they don't need it for advantage in 5e.
Don't have a crossbow or longbow, so don't need a quiver or bolt case
No need for an abacus. Not only does it not do anything, my wizard is a genius, math is easy
I can summon fire, no need for alchemist fire
No need to carry a barrel, nothing to put in it
No point in carrying a 10-ft ladder, I have adventuring companions
I'm not mining, so I don't need a miner's pick
No need for a tent. Really no need for a bedroll either. Neither improves the quality of sleep, if my character even needs sleep.
Not a strength character, so a sledgehammer is fairly useless
Don't need a grappling hook, same as not needing the ladder.
Not hunting, so I don't need the hunting trap

So... a lot of the stuff isn't necessary.

Have I? They left it there until they could come back with a cart and get it. I don't tell them anything is useful or useless. I just make the world and the players can decide.

So what practical difference was there between them getting a cart and taking it compared to them just moving 5ft every six seconds and taking it? Sounds like it literally made zero difference, so why did it matter enough to track?

And yes, you'll note 200 lbs tapestry is not in the equipment list. So you are the one who decided that is what it weighed.

Now, can we be done talking about encumbrance which has even less to do with the thread than the OTHER red herrings you keep throwing out?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think going to temp hp in aid is a good idea, because the increase of max hp is neat, but deviates too much from the standard and is an additional layer of bookkeeping. How do two aid spells stack anyway?

I never considered two aid spells. But isn't there a general rule that two effects of the same name don't stack anyways? I think that would cover double Aid.

Going to temp hp is a debuff, because it prevents it from working with all of the VAST number of other temp hp spells. But it does get to be a full party, which is really nice. The bookkeeping is a great point, and one reason I avoided the spell, needing to track changes to max hp is rough.

Heroism and barkskin are now redundand, bit I still think, that we need some other restriction than just concentration for personal buff spells.

Well... yes and no?

Barkskin is a bonus action and grants Mod+Prof. So, starts at +2 over heroism and slowly levels with you (great mechanic, wish more spells had that)

Heroism is an action, grants only mod, but also makes you immune to frightened.

Where I struggle here is that Barkskin is 2nd level and Heroism 1st. I think the bonus action for Barkskin keeps it viable, but it gets to the point where now I am looking at Heroism and wondering if it would be worth it. It was often a hard spell for us to justify anyways.

Or: as long as you concentrate on barkskin, your constitution saves are always at least 10. (Treat a result of 9 or lower as 10).

And maybe explicitely state, that damage you completely absorb with thp does not force a con save.
Or maybe remove the DC at least 10 bar and just make the save DC = damage taken/2.

Clarification on if Temp HP can cause concentration saves would be nice, but I think at this point we know it does. I like the idea of Barkskin giving a con save bonus, but I think that is a bit too much. Maybe something like "as long as this spell is active, you have proficiency in con saves"

I also think that with Barkskin now being temp hp, it is no longer as much a self-buff. This is VERY good for any frontliner, druid or no. And actually, with the scaling prof mod, I can see this being very worth it even at high levels. Bonus action for a 6th level spell to give the entire party regenerating 11 temp hp, for an hour? If it wasn't touch that would be really hard to beat even mid combat.

Edit: Oh. Just noticed, the spell grants the Temp hp, but losing concentration on the spell doesn't remove them like Heroism does. That's HUGE for making this more worthwhile.

 

[Maxperson]

Well, at least I finally get you to admit that I have math. But no, I wasn't referring to my math versus you stating the value of advantage via math changing because AC is higher than normal.

God your twisting of words is frustrating. You know damn well that I'm talking about the hidden math. I said so in the quote.

I believe Tetrasodium provided an excellent response to why this claim is flatly misrepresenting the situation.

Except he didn't. He provided a link to someone talking about the DM creating new subsystems for spending money, something that I do not do. Players coming to me with what they want to spend their money on is not me creating a subsystem.

How is it nonsense? Who cares if coins have "always been part of the game"? And who said anything about dumping strength? You noted that the coins and armor were over 300 lbs. You of course realize that for any single character to carry that much without penalty, they needed to have a strength over 20. I don't see maxed strength as dumping strength, do you?

What?! How does 60 pounds of coins + 65 pounds of armor = 300+ pounds? Or are you trying to twist things again and include the tapestry? Because if you are, simply sharing the coins around the rest of the party and going with 65 pounds of armor + 200 for the tapestry = 265.

Some things will be too large to carry. That's reasonable. If you raid a castle, there will be big and valuable things in it.

The obvious truth is that while you make the claim of not altering anything, you obviously are setting players up to not be able to get their proper rewards after a fight, that is the ONLY time encumbrance matters.

Blah blah blah all I want to do is deliberately not understand Maxperson instead of having a conversation blah.

Nothing that I said could possibly be construed(only deliberately misconstrued) as setting players up not to get proper rewards. I spoke of coins, gems, jewelry, etc. which are all easily carriable rewards. Extras like the tapestry might take some work.

Coins and items(normal and magic) are enough to cause encumbrance issues.

Because people can carry their essential gear trivially. It is only when you start offering them rewards for winning that they then begin to have to deal with this system.

Yeah, wouldn't want to include things like coins and magic items like adamantine plate mail for winning fights. Wouldn't want them to have any rewards for winning.

So what practical difference was there between them getting a cart and taking it compared to them just moving 5ft every six seconds and taking it? Sounds like it literally made zero difference, so why did it matter enough to track?

You really want to have a move 5 feet in a dangerous world? Do you really want to consume 6x as much food getting back to town? You didn't bring enough to cover that much extra time. You brought 1 month of rations. If your journey took even one week, taking six weeks to get back would cause food issues. Oh, yeah. You house ruled tracking food away. Convenient for your players.

And yes, you'll note 200 lbs tapestry is not in the equipment list. So you are the one who decided that is what it weighed.

A giant tapestry that takes up a wall isn't going to be light.

Now, can we be done talking about encumbrance which has even less to do with the thread than the OTHER red herrings you keep throwing out?

As soon as you stop twisting what I say, sure. In this post alone you've.

1) Falsely accused me of setting players up not to get their rewards. Rewards you say they shouldn't get for winning.
2) Deliberately twisted my saying your examples involve hidden math as "admitting that yours has math."
3) Deliberately twisted two different paragraphs(one explicitly only coin and items) dealing with weight issues into "Must have them carry all the gear, coins AND tapestry."

Just respond to what I say and you'll be fine. We can actually have a conversation. If I break something up and it's two different paragraphs, they aren't together and twisting them together the way you do is going to be wrong. You already know that, though, since I've told it to you at least two dozen times over the years.